UK Election 2015

LuckyLloyd

jank wrote: »

I think it shows the job Labour has in order to ever win a majority again. Apart from London, the Welsh valleys and areas of post northern Industrial England, they have nothing else going for them.

You see commentary like this after every election tbh. 1997 and 2002 aren't that long ago and neither were the Tatcher elections before them.

The public will fatigue of the Conservatives and ebb back to Labour. Labour are now where the Conservative Party was in the early naughties. It will be in power again in ~10 years time.

BOHtox

Sky are reporting 330 Conservative seats and BBC reporting 331. I think it's 331 myself but it's driving me insane where the mistake lies.

jank

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The EU needs the UK's money though. I don't think the level of contribution from the UK to EU can be ignored.

The UK is also an important link to the US and many parts of the world due to the Commonwealth (Australia/India/Canada etc..). The UK has the largest influence in the world out of all the EU countries. The EU will not want to give that up.

partyguinness

jank wrote: »

Somewhat agreed. I was listening to BBC4 for ages and one of the Senior Labour MP's was talking about the failure of Labour to connect with the electorate. He said one of the biggest issue he found on the door step was the subject of immigration. Yet Labour would rather dismiss this topic, stick its head in the sand rather then confront it. There is a reason why UKIP got over 3.5 million votes. Get half of them and it could have been a very different story.

Anyway, Labour has been at war with it self for years. Some wish to return to more idealogical safe grounds of the far left, which will leave them out of power for eternity. Some want to be practical and move Labour to the Centre ala Blair and win power.

Finally, what Cameron has done has not been done in years. Not even Thatcher managed it. I wonder will this change peoples opinion of him now, pulling this out of the bag?

I actually like Cameron (ducks for cover and yes he is still a true blue blood Tory). I believe that the electorate of all hues (of which I was one) were simply not interested in changing horses at this time. Very much a 'steady as she goes' and no appetite for dramatic changes.

The result is of no surprise to me but personally speaking I believe that the immigration card is being over played and used by certain sections of the electorate to mask problems which really are not Johnny Foreigners fault.

For example, the fact that young, white working class men lose out to foreigners is usually because the foreigner will actually turn up for the interview and score better. The education system here has numerous ceilings and hurdles to overcome- if you are white and 'working-class' chances are you left school at 16 and barely able to read, write and subtract.

I know I will be seen as making sweeping generalisations but that is my observations from living and working in England 5 years.

Johnny Foreigner is simple more determined, educated and will get the job- blaming Johnny Foreigner is a convenient (and lazy) excuse for more deep rooted inequalities in the UK.

Quin_Dub

partyguinness wrote: »

I have been living in England for past 5 years and even had a vote- not entirely sure how mind you...:o

I believe that a EU referendum will backfire on the Tories- despite all the anti-EU rhetoric I genuinely do not believe it would pass. The vast majority of the anti-EU rubbish is just a red herring which is shown to be utter rubbish when faced by a well informed commentator.

Unfortunately, in the UK media, its not about what you know- it's about how loud you can shout no matter what rubbish comes out. The usual ant-EU rant is aimed at middle aged, little Englanders who are perceived to have jumped from working class to lower middle class- the obsession with 'class' in this country is quite frankly immature.

Yeah, UKIP are just a party act enjoying its 15 minutes of fame- they are irrelevant.

Don't think Cameron wants to leave Europe , nor do most of the party..

The referendum was a reaction to the possibility of UKIP doing well and to calm down the nuttier elements in the party..

Cameron will spend the next the next 12-18 months working on the EU and his own party from what is now something of a position of strength and when he has a "deal" that he can sell he'll have the referendum and they'll stay in the EU..

jank

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You see commentary like this after every election tbh. 1997 and 2002 aren't that long ago and neither were the Tatcher elections before them.

The public will fatigue of the Conservatives and ebb back to Labour. Labour are now where the Conservative Party was in the early naughties. It will be in power again in ~10 years time.

2002 was 13 years ago, which is a lifetime in politics.

So we are looking at another 10 years of Conservative rule, great! Labour were out of power for 17 years which seemed like an age. It seems we are in the end of the beginning stage now in the Labour recovery. A hard slog to come and if they cannot win Scotland then I cannot see how the numbers will add up for them to get an overall majority. At the moment they are 99 seats behind the Tory. The Lib Dems, the Greens and UKIP will be around next time snapping at the heels as well.

partyguinness

who the fug wrote: »

Seeing as you are fresh off the boat I will go easy.

The Tory party are not anti Europe and want to stay in Europe, unfortunatly the looney fringe of the party as you quiet rightly point out make allot of noise which sells papers

The obsession with class is one that the left have and doesn't pan out

The following are all the PM since 1964.

Wilson
Heath
Wilson
Callaghan
Thatcher
Major
Blair
Browne

Cameroon is the odd one out

I agree although I should have made it clearer- it is the looney Club 1922 crowd that want out. It is clear as day that Cameron wants to stay in Europe as do any sensible Tory. Yes the class obsession is tired and so 20th century without it some of the left have nothing. That is what Blair and 'New Labour' recognised when shifting to the centre.

Phil Mitchell

BOHtox wrote: »

Sky are reporting 330 Conservative seats and BBC reporting 331. I think it's 331 myself but it's driving me insane where the mistake lies.

The speaker of the house maybe?


They were also saying on Sky News last night that other channels were reporting seats won earlier than they were being announced.

partyguinness

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

IMO the Tories don't want the anti-EU referendum to pass. They want (i) to use it as a populist tool to get re-elected (CHECK) (ii) to use it as a stick in negotiations with the EU and (iii) to use it (when the UK votes to stay in) to hold their hands up the next time someone blames them for an EU problem and say "well the public voted to stay in".

Political masterclass IMHO.

Yeah everyone is a winner- I get the impression that Cameron is somewhat embarrassed by the idea of a referendum and would love to tell the back benchers to 'F*** Right Off'.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Lemming wrote: »

I don't think the Tories will be in any hurry to organise an in/out EU referendum now that the original precusor to Cameron agreeing to such a referendum was looking over his shoulder (foolishly) at UKIP, who have been shown up for what they always have been; an irrelevancy that was built around a cult of personality that the media fed off.

UKIP still however received more votes than the Liberals and SNP combined.

Peter Anthony

Lemming wrote: »

I don't think the Tories will be in any hurry to organise an in/out EU referendum now that the original precusor to Cameron agreeing to such a referendum was looking over his shoulder (foolishly) at UKIP, who have been shown up for what they always have been; an irrelevancy that was built around a cult of personality that the media fed off.

Well they received 4 million votes so he'll be ignoring that plus going against everything he said so far and promised his own voters, so you are wrong in that the EU referedum will be 2017.

An Ciarraioch

Labour seem to be in the horns of an existential dilemma - they were viewed as too right-wing in Scotland, but regarded as tacking too far to the left in England and Wales. Perhaps the only way to square the circle involves the EU referendum, by making the case for staying, but also advocating socio-economic and political reform of the Brussels model, albeit less stridently than Podemos or Syriza. Whether anyone in the Labour hierarchy wants to make that argument is another matter, but it could be a pointer for our own version vis-a-vis SF.

Clearlier

jank wrote: »

The UK is also an important link to the US and many parts of the world due to the Commonwealth (Australia/India/Canada etc..). The UK has the largest influence in the world out of all the EU countries. The EU will not want to give that up.

Of course they won't want to give it up. The EU is happier with the UK in rather than out. The discussion is about who comes to the table with a stronger hand, the UK or the EU. I don't think that the EU wanting to keep the UK in is nearly as strong a hand as the OP seemed to be suggesting. I don't think that the UK will negotiate many changes that have a negative impact on the rest of the EU. Changes that are proposed will have to be proposed as a positive for the EU in order to gain any traction.

BTW - While I don't see the UK leaving the EU I definitely see a referendum happening. I just hope that it's not a divisive one.

LuckyLloyd

jank wrote: »

2002 was 13 years ago, which is a lifetime in politics.

So we are looking at another 10 years of Conservative rule, great! Labour were out of power for 17 years which seemed like an age. It seems we are in the end of the beginning stage now in the Labour recovery. A hard slog to come and if they cannot win Scotland then I cannot see how the numbers will add up for them to get an overall majority. At the moment they are 99 seats behind the Tory. The Lib Dems, the Greens and UKIP will be around next time snapping at the heels as well.

It's always hard to see at times like this. Leaving aside whether reasons are valid or not history tells us that power stagnates and people find reasons to vote for change eventually. It will be no different here.

bnt

The BBC has a interesting piece, 20 things you may have missed from the election. For example, I'd completely forgotten about the BNP: they've gone from over 1/2 million votes in 2010 to well under 2,000 votes, nationwide. :cool:

Quin_Dub

bnt wrote: »

The BBC has a interesting piece, 20 things you may have missed from the election. For example, I'd completely forgotten about the BNP: they've gone from over 1/2 million votes in 2010 to well under 2,000 votes, nationwide. :cool:

All now voting for UKIP...

Aidric

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The public will fatigue of the Conservatives and ebb back to Labour. Labour are now where the Conservative Party was in the early naughties. It will be in power again in ~10 years time.

It has a depressing predictability about it, same situation in Ireland. It goes in cycles because of the lack of a credible alternative.

If Fianna Fail get rid of the old guard they'll come back in to power in the election after next. The electorate in Ireland and the UK are inherently conservative.

BoJack Horseman

Counting is ongoing across 279 English local councils.

Another good day for the Tories.
So far they are up 15 councils & 148 councillors.

The Lib Dems have so far lost about 1/3 of their councillors.

efb

BOHtox wrote: »

Sky are reporting 330 Conservative seats and BBC reporting 331. I think it's 331 myself but it's driving me insane where the mistake lies.

Are they counting seatz won in election v seats in parliament - John Berclow auto returned as speaker

A Dub in Glasgo

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Counting is ongoing across 279 English local councils.

Another good day for the Tories.
So far they are up 15 councils & 148 councillors.

The Lib Dems have so far lost about 1/3 of their councillors.

Only a third? They deserve the kind of annihilation that Labour in Scotland got :pac:

Thargor

George Galloway wiped out today aswell.

marmurr1916

efb wrote: »

Are they counting seatz won in election v seats in parliament - John Berclow auto returned as speaker

Bercow, as far as I can tell, is shown by the BBC as an 'independent'.

I was watching the results display on screen showing 'independent - 1' and wondering who the hell the independent MP could have been

I don't know why they couldn't have just displayed it as 'speaker - 1'.

As the Speaker he doesn't normally vote unless there's a tied vote.

By convention, the Speaker then votes with the government.

Alexis Sanchez

bnt wrote: »

The BBC has a interesting piece, 20 things you may have missed from the election. For example, I'd completely forgotten about the BNP: they've gone from over 1/2 million votes in 2010 to well under 2,000 votes, nationwide. :cool:

I was wondering what happened to the BNP when I was looking at the opinion polls over the last few months. I thought they might have disbanded or skipped this election.

londonbus

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Disappointing day. First, the Tories win and then Nick and Ed step down. Really hope Labour don't do a U-turn and return to Blair/Brownism as a result of this.

Labour lost because they did not offer a better future to the Tories.

Labour selected a leader who had no credibility, looked like Mr Bean and followed left-wing policies.

Labour forgot that UK elections are won from the central - not the left or the right. The Tories forgot this between 1992 and 2015 and look what happened to them.

The English and Welsh are conservative. They don't like ideology and they like a party who will support their aspirations.

Labour offered only chucking money at the NHS, rent and price controls and the prospect of further taxation. Couple this with a leader who looked and sounded odd - and what do you expect?

And no - I voted Lib Dem. And saw a corrupt MP who claimed for two houses 6 miles apart elected.

You might sneer at New Labour but it won three elections in a row. As did the Tories under Mrs T.

londonbus

marmurr1916 wrote: »

Bercow, as far as I can tell, is shown by the BBC as an 'independent'.

I was watching the results display on screen showing 'independent - 1' and wondering who the hell the independent MP could have been

I don't know why they couldn't have just displayed it as 'speaker - 1'.

As the Speaker he doesn't normally vote unless there's a tied vote.

By convention, the Speaker then votes with the government.

Bercow will run as "Speaker"; the big parties don't oppose him. He only votes for tie-breakers. He will vote in a manner which doesn't close the matter down.

Frito

londonbus wrote: »

Labour lost because they did not offer a better future to the Tories.

Labour selected a leader who had no credibility, looked like Mr Bean and followed left-wing policies.

Labour forgot that UK elections are won from the central - not the left or the right. The Tories forgot this between 1992 and 2015 and look what happened to them.

The English and Welsh are conservative. They don't like ideology and they like a party who will support their aspirations.

Labour offered only chucking money at the NHS, rent and price controls and the prospect of further taxation. Couple this with a leader who looked and sounded odd - and what do you expect?

And no - I voted Lib Dem. And saw a corrupt MP who claimed for two houses 6 miles apart elected.

You might sneer at New Labour but it won three elections in a row. As did the Tories under Mrs T.

I always thought he had a look of Aardman animations about him, like he could step into a Wallace and Gromit film and no one would notice he wasn't made of modelling clay.

BoJack Horseman

Frito wrote: »

I always thought he had a look of Aardman animations about him, like he could step into a Wallace and Gromit film and no one would notice he wasn't made of modelling clay.

The people will decide!

A Dub in Glasgo

Who said politics is so high brow?

ancapailldorcha

londonbus wrote: »

You might sneer at New Labour but it won three elections in a row. As did the Tories under Mrs T.

Where have you got sneering from here? I know New Labour won elections, doesn't mean it was a good thing.

Sierra Oscar

You have to wonder how long the Conservative majority will last if Cameron decides to not bring on board anyone else. I guess they will try and work out an arrangement on a case by case basis if things start to get too tight, will be interesting to see who they work with.

History shows us that a majority of 15 or so seats does not necessarily last all that long. It will be even more difficult considering the Conservative party will be ripping itself apart over Europe within a few months.