General Election 2015 - Thoughts/Predictions/Results

[Johnuk123]

"The lefties bible"

Oh to be a right-winger, where everything is simple, easy to understand and can be pigeonholed.

John, please stop. You're embarrassing yourself.

Pot/Kettle.

Instead of abusing me why not support your hero and tell us why Ed's tombstone is a good idea.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Pot/Kettle.

So I've been praised for a nuanced and well-rounded account on this thread, whilst you haven't In fact, the whole point of the left is to look at the bigger picture, rather than simplifying things down to easy-to-digest oversimplified solutions like "immigrants are bad" or "Europe is bad". On the other hand, the right attack the left for being "bleeding hearts", as though having an understanding of someone other than your own self is a bad thing. It's pretty funny when you think about it. You don't get to cry hypocrisy when your entire contribution to this thread has been attacks against leaders and making yourself out to be a poor victim whilst providing almost no actual policy discussion.

Instead of abusing me why not support your hero and tell us why Ed's tombstone is a good idea.

"Abusing you" - see above. You are not a victim, as much as certain sections of the right constantly whines about being so.

And it says it all that you assume that I actually like Miliband, really. Not everything is a dichotomy. I just find it hilarious that you're simplifying everything down to these ultra-simplistic situations when frankly we all know that Miliband's stone is a stupid idea - it was the fact that you think the Guardian is a "leftie bible" that I really picked up on. I've yet to hear anything other than insults from you, honestly - they just usually happen to be directed at politicians rather than posters. Go on - tell us why you think it's bad.

 

[Johnuk123]

So I've been praised for a nuanced and well-rounded account on this thread, whilst you haven't

You don't get to cry hypocrisy when your entire contribution to this thread has been attacks against leaders and making yourself out to be a poor victim whilst providing almost no actual policy discussion.

So seriously, John, just stop. We're not 10

Come on tell me why you think the tombstone is a good idea.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Come on tell me why you think the tombstone is a good idea.

It isn't. Learn to read. I don't even like Labour, but the fact that you seem to think everyone on the left is exactly the same really does say a lot about you.

 

[47802]

Of course it's fatuous, and a big mistake, but nothing like as fatuous as Cameron seeking to enact legislation to stop increases in income tax and VAT. Like admitting you can't trust a word the Tories say, so I'm going to pass a bill to prevent me doing what I really want and intend to do. You couldn't make it up.

Through my door this morning, by post, the umpteenth election communication from the Tories - been one every single weekday for the last fortnight. Wonder how much the Tories will be claiming on election expenses in my constituency: my wife and I can't be the only people receiving them. I'm keeping them all, not just to stoke a bonfire, but to compare with their election expenses here when published, particularly if they should win.

By contrast despite the constituency I live in despite being a Labour/Tory marginal the number of Tory leaflets I have received has been very small, while on the Labour side I'm getting a leaflet every day, not that it will do them much good as for the first time ever I'm voting Tory.

Had the Labour Party elected David Miliband well actually they did but thanks to the lefty trade unions we ended up with Dead Ed Miliband instead I would probably have voted for them and I suspect they would have won the election outright.

 

[me123]

New photos emerge of George Osborne in training for his new job starting Friday.
https://twitter.com/BBCMarkDenten/status/595589119855763456

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

 

[pemma]

New photos emerge of George Osborne in training for his new job starting Friday.
https://twitter.com/BBCMarkDenten/status/595589119855763456

(Sorry, couldn't resist!)

That wouldn't be fair. Make him wait 2 years, then give him a trainee role.

 

[me123]

I've just had a very arrogant piece of election propaganda through the post from the Scottish Labour party (I'm with my family at the moment, in the Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill constituency). Also, a very familiar one, as we had it posted through five years ago.

It's basically a variant of this poster:

Although bizarrely in my copy the blue horse is ahead (interesting tactic on a Labour leaflet, make it look like you're losing).
The tagline reads: "A Labour or a Tory Government - it's a two horse race, only a vote for LABOUR WILL STOP THE TORIES and deliver the change we need".
(Formatted the same way the leaflet is).

And, I'm sorry, but it frankly stinks. It's tone is threatening (it's us or them, so you'd better vote for us). It's arrogant - asides from Labour and the Tories, there are three other candidates in this constituency, and it completely dismisses them. It's insulting to our intelligence, because we know fine well that it's no longer a two party system, and that no one party is likely to get an overall majority. And they wonder why people are turning their backs on them? Aside from the fact that they've had five years and can't be bothered to produce a new campaign poster, their arrogance is astounding.

I'm just disappointed that whoever pushed it through my door didn't knock, because I'd sure be ready to tear them to shreds if they'd handed me that personally.

However, one thing that's interesting is that we're actually getting propaganda for a change. In the days gone by, this seat was the safest Labour seat in the country. So safe, in fact, that no-one bothered to campaign here. We usually had one leaflet from each party (presumably the free leaflet that they all get) and that was it. This year, there's plenty coming through, and Labour in particular seem to be getting very nervous.

 

[ainsworth74]

Well any chance the Labour candidate had of getting my vote have pretty much gone out the window at this point as they've completely ignored two letters I've sent to them. The first hoping to get some clarity on some of their political views the second chasing the first up.

If they can't be bothered to reply whilst they're supposedly courting my vote why would they listen once they're my representative in parliament? Very disappointing.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Of course it's fatuous, and a big mistake, but nothing like as fatuous as Cameron seeking to enact legislation to stop increases in income tax and VAT. Like admitting you can't trust a word the Tories say, so I'm going to pass a bill to prevent me doing what I really want and intend to do. You couldn't make it up.

I somewhat agree. Comparing Labour's carved pledges with the Tories' proposed income tax law... In the end, the carved pledges were a marketing stunt that clearly didn't go down as well as whoever thought it up hoped. Loads of organizations, both political and commercial, make marketing faux pas and get ridiculed for them, and when you do something different and imaginative (and the carved pledges idea was certainly imaginative, if nothing else!), the risk of it going bottoms up is much higher. It has no bearing on any proposed Labour policy, so should be basically irrelevant as far as who you choose to vote for is concerned.

On the other hand the Tories' proposed income tax law is an actual proposed Government policy. It's clearly silly, because it would waste Parliamentary time, and therefore some money, with no actual benefit, since it just sets into law exactly what a Conservative Government would do anyway. But worse than that, it looks to me like an abuse of the law: The law is there basically to make sure our society functions and that people can't hurt others. Government policy is a matter for elections and Parliamentary discussion etc., I would suggest that idea of the Government trying to pass laws to restrict what policies it can make in the future on matters like this should seriously worry anyone who believes in Parliamentary democracy, and ought in my view to give considerable pause for thought to anyone who believes in democracy and is thinking of voting Conservative.

 

[Butts]

I've just had a very arrogant piece of election propaganda through the post from the Scottish Labour party (I'm with my family at the moment, in the Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill constituency). Also, a very familiar one, as we had it posted through five years ago.

It's basically a variant of this poster:

Although bizarrely in my copy the blue horse is ahead (interesting tactic on a Labour leaflet, make it look like you're losing).
The tagline reads: "A Labour or a Tory Government - it's a two horse race, only a vote for LABOUR WILL STOP THE TORIES and deliver the change we need".
(Formatted the same way the leaflet is).

And, I'm sorry, but it frankly stinks. It's tone is threatening (it's us or them, so you'd better vote for us). It's arrogant - asides from Labour and the Tories, there are three other candidates in this constituency, and it completely dismisses them. It's insulting to our intelligence, because we know fine well that it's no longer a two party system, and that no one party is likely to get an overall majority. And they wonder why people are turning their backs on them? Aside from the fact that they've had five years and can't be bothered to produce a new campaign poster, their arrogance is astounding.

I'm just disappointed that whoever pushed it through my door didn't knock, because I'd sure be ready to tear them to shreds if they'd handed me that personally.

However, one thing that's interesting is that we're actually getting propaganda for a change. In the days gone by, this seat was the safest Labour seat in the country. So safe, in fact, that no-one bothered to campaign here. We usually had one leaflet from each party (presumably the free leaflet that they all get) and that was it. This year, there's plenty coming through, and Labour in particular seem to be getting very nervous.

I've had one of these through my door this afternoon as well, with the Blue Horse ahead

 

[table38]

I would suggest that idea of the Government trying to pass laws to restrict what policies it can make in the future on matters like this should seriously worry anyone who believes in Parliamentary democracy, and ought in my view to give considerable pause for thought to anyone who believes in democracy and is thinking of voting Conservative.

It's an over simplification to say that governments cannot bind their successors, but anyone pausing and thinking would realise that there is nothing to stop a future government repealing it. So not such a big deal for democracy as the scare-mongers would lead you to believe I'm afraid.

 

[Busaholic]

It's an over simplification to say that governments cannot bind their successors, but anyone pausing and thinking would realise that there is nothing to stop a future government repealing it. So not such a big deal for democracy as the scare-mongers would lead you to believe I'm afraid.

But only after repealing the Fixed Term Parliaments Act which has indirectly led to this election having been fought (if that's not too strong a word) for the last six months, during which time our elected representatives have been swanning around clocking up expenses in the absence of any real work to do.

 

[TheKnightWho]

But only after repealing the Fixed Term Parliaments Act which has indirectly led to this election having been fought (if that's not too strong a word) for the last six months, during which time our elected representatives have been swanning around clocking up expenses in the absence of any real work to do.

The repeal of the Fixed Term Parliament Act would mean the return to a 2 party system. No thank you. The 2010 election went on for just as long - I see absolutely no reason why this is to blame other than that it's meant everyone has had to work harder, which is no bad thing.

On the previous point, it's important to remember that repealing laws can be made difficult through 2/3 majorities or whatever, when implementing them may have been relatively simple.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Surely they're enacted, and repealed, by the passing of an Act of Parliament - the requirements for which are the same each time?

The matter does cast doubt on whether an unwritten constitution is really sufficient for the UK, IMV. An act like the hypothetical one spoken of above would be of as much use as the Fixed Term Parliaments Act is.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I've just had a very arrogant piece of election propaganda through the post from the Scottish Labour party (I'm with my family at the moment, in the Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill constituency). Also, a very familiar one, as we had it posted through five years ago.

It's basically a variant of this poster:

Although bizarrely in my copy the blue horse is ahead (interesting tactic on a Labour leaflet, make it look like you're losing).
The tagline reads: "A Labour or a Tory Government - it's a two horse race, only a vote for LABOUR WILL STOP THE TORIES and deliver the change we need".
(Formatted the same way the leaflet is).

And, I'm sorry, but it frankly stinks. It's tone is threatening (it's us or them, so you'd better vote for us). It's arrogant - asides from Labour and the Tories, there are three other candidates in this constituency, and it completely dismisses them. It's insulting to our intelligence, because we know fine well that it's no longer a two party system, and that no one party is likely to get an overall majority. And they wonder why people are turning their backs on them? Aside from the fact that they've had five years and can't be bothered to produce a new campaign poster, their arrogance is astounding.

I'm just disappointed that whoever pushed it through my door didn't knock, because I'd sure be ready to tear them to shreds if they'd handed me that personally.

However, one thing that's interesting is that we're actually getting propaganda for a change. In the days gone by, this seat was the safest Labour seat in the country. So safe, in fact, that no-one bothered to campaign here. We usually had one leaflet from each party (presumably the free leaflet that they all get) and that was it. This year, there's plenty coming through, and Labour in particular seem to be getting very nervous.

The Lib Dem ones I have seen are even worse. Bar graphs showing that one of the big two parties can't win in that area so if you don't like the bigger of the two then you should vote Lib Dem. Except the graphs are grossly inaccurate and do are no where near to scale, showing the gap between parties much much bigger than what the reality is.

 

[me123]

I'm sure I saw that one when I was trying to get the image above.

I wonder if it's something like this one (and sadly this poor effort comes from the party I support, the SNP, although to be fair it was back in 2010).

Maybe not as arrogant as the Labour one, but equally non-sensical. A pointless graph that doesn't really represent anything because there's no y-axis. Patronising two other parties. Really not a good effort. I prefer their parody of the pathetic Labour one I got today (which is now exactly where it deserves to be - in my recycling bin). Again, this was from the 2010 campaign.

In the interests of including as many parties as possible in the shaming of poor election leaflets, here's a remarkably similar one from UKIP, that tries to do the same as the ones above

Which only makes sense on a local level.

Whoever illustrated those remarkably similar silhouettes of horses that all the parties seem to be using must be pretty well off now.

 

[Gathursty]

I clearly live in a strong Labour constituency but I'm drawn to UKIP because I'm a bit shocked at how people I would class as educated and reasoned shout the word 'bigot' and 'racist' so casually when Gordon Brown, who I thought was brilliant, used the very same word and plunged us all into 5 years of this coalition.

Whilst I can see how many people can get the idea that UKIP are racist, their policies are in line with American and Australian immigration policies and yet we would never call those nations racist (I'll overlook the US Cops and blacks issue here). Indeed, many people from Britain go through such immigration controls to go to America and Australia and don't complain about the process.

There are bad eggs in all political parties. Jeffrey Archer, Lord Taylor, Margaret Moran, Cyril Smith etc... so if you say one councillor in UKIP is racist, why can't you say all Lib Dems are child molesters?

Many people may think my points come from a naïve outlook but it is for those who claim to know better and be condescending without reasoned thought that irk me (Eddie Izzard). I have no issue with people debating and calling out other parties but to just smear UKIP with 'racist' so carelessly makes me think that those parties might also be careless with other words such as those contained in their manifestos.

The best thing the main parties could have done to stifle UKIP is just state the key figures regarding migration and areas of work they go in to and leave it to the general public to make up our mind but I have seen no such figures come from either party nor even any broadcasters who tend to fact check everything else. Instead they use the same spear against Farage that he is now bored of deflecting.

I am a bit concerned at where Labour is and which direction it is going in. Whilst I'm not dreaming of a Michael Foot/Alexei Sayle rebrand, I would like to move towards Alan Johnson and Andy Burnham as for me, they are what I class as decent, honest Labour types. I'd also have preferred George Galloway before he went full tilt into Respect.

In regards to Plaid and the SNP. Please tell me why in 2015, they require more money per person than us in England via the Barnett Formula. I'd much rather give more money to those in outlying islands and the North West areas of Scotland but not the whole country and given through a fund too, not a taken for granted formula. I imagine in both mainland Wales, Scotland and England, there are pockets of deprivation in urban and rural settings so I can only think that the Barnett Formula does a disservice to those deprived in England to the benefit of the Scots and Welsh who seem to do very well out of European funds unlike England.

My rant over. :P

 

[Bishopstone]

As I've posted before, I think the Lib Dems will do better than expectations, and the SNP worse - although still the largest party in Scotland.

My forecast for England, Scotland and Wales:

Lab 293
Con 268
LD 36
SNP 27
PC 3
UKIP 2 (Carswell, plus Thurrock - NOT Farage)
Green 1
George Galloway 1
Speaker 1

Biggest shock of the night: Alex Salmond fails to win Gordon, as the 38% who voted Labour or Tory in 2010 move to the LDs tactically, in quite large numbers.

All the above is my prediction, rather than my preference, which would be for a rather different outcome.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think that's a brave prediction giving the Lib Dems more seats than the SNP. I could see those numbers reversed (meaning the SNP don't do quite as well as expected) but I can't see them Lib Dems beating them out and retaining the title of third largest party.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I have to say I'm expecting an SNP wipeout. Perhaps not every seat, but I would bet money on at least 45. That's certainly what the polls are showing.

 

[Manchester77]

Bearing in mind the last Ashcroft poll for Gordon was January (so the SNP will have increased their lead) it's nit looking likely the SNP will not gain Gordon.

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Gordon.png

Tactical voting can only really hinder the SNP in East Renfrewshire and save Jim Murphy (oh no ) as the last set of Ashcroft polls showed Tory voters there more eager to vote tactically to keep the SNP out than labour voters in the Tories defending constituency were.

I'm now going for:
Tory 276
Labour 272
SNP 56
Liberal 27
UKIP 3
Green 2

 

[TheKnightWho]

Bearing in mind the last Ashcroft poll for Gordon was January (so the SNP will have increased their lead) it's nit looking likely the SNP will not gain Gordon.

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Gordon.png

Tactical voting can only really hinder the SNP in East Renfrewshire and save Jim Murphy (oh no ) as the last set of Ashcroft polls showed Tory voters there more eager to vote tactically to keep the SNP out than labour voters in the Tories defending constituency were.

I'm now going for:
Tory 276
Labour 272
SNP 56
Liberal 27
UKIP 3
Green 2

Which is the second Green seat?

 

[Manchester77]

Bristol West I'm confident they can get a very narrow majority there private polling conducted in that seat showed they're only 6% behind labour. I know it's wishful thinking but the greens have a lot of activists and with there being a lot of students too it might just happenM

 

[dcsprior]

I am a bit concerned at where Labour is and which direction it is going in. Whilst I'm not dreaming of a Michael Foot/Alexei Sayle rebrand, I would like to move towards Alan Johnson and Andy Burnham as for me, they are what I class as decent, honest Labour types. I'd also have preferred George Galloway before he went full tilt into Respect.

As am I. I wish there was an alternative left-of-centre part for you to vote for (I can vote SNP ) even if just to force The Labour Party back towards actually being The Labour Party

In regards to Plaid and the SNP. Please tell me why in 2015, they require more money per person than us in England via the Barnett Formula.

I think if you're looking for people to defend the Barnett Formula you're choosing the wrong people in asking the SNP. The SNP's policy of full fiscal autonomy would see it cease to exist (the black hole left as a result is something which Scottish Labour have tried to make some capital out of)

I'd much rather give more money to those in outlying islands and the North West areas of Scotland but not the whole country and given through a fund too, not a taken for granted formula.

So you'd want the UK government to tell Scotland how to spend the money? That doesn't sound to me like devolution

I imagine in both mainland Wales, Scotland and England, there are pockets of deprivation in urban and rural settings so I can only think that the Barnett Formula does a disservice to those deprived in England to the benefit of the Scots and Welsh

The Barnett formula was intended as a stop-gap; it has never been politically easy to revisit it, maybe a parliament with a lot of SNP representatives may actually be a good time to do it - a sort of "Nixon in China" moment

who seem to do very well out of European funds unlike England.

I do not believe the Barnett formula relates to European funds

 

[DownSouth]

On the previous point, it's important to remember that repealing laws can be made difficult through 2/3 majorities or whatever, when implementing them may have been relatively simple.

You would need a Constitution for that.

And in any case, why repeal when you can amend?

 

[TheKnightWho]

You would need a Constitution for that.

And in any case, why repeal when you can amend?

The British constitution is immensely complex, but it most certainly does exist It's just not codified in a single document.

Dave's old tutor Bogdanor is an expert on this - he's written some pretty interesting material on it.

 

[St Rollox]

If the SNP wanted to cause trouble, they would in the event of winning the majority of seats in Scotland, call a unilateral declaration of independence and secede from the UK.
Sadly they won't.

 

[Butts]

If the SNP wanted to cause trouble, they would in the event of winning the majority of seats in Scotland, call a unilateral declaration of independence and secede from the UK.
Sadly they won't.

Do you think your in Rhodesia in the 60's or something

Talk about "flogging a dead horse" I hear David Cameron will be in Scotland again today

 

[Senex]

Well, in 24 hours the booths will be open, after what has surely been just about the longest campaign ever. But in the whole of that time no-one has canvassed me, even though here we are voting for both an MP and the local council. Each of the parties has sent out a couple of leaflets, and that is the extent of the information. But then this is regarded as a safe seat, so my views and my vote don't really count for anything. If this were a one-off, it might just be one of those things. But in the whole of my 50-year "voting life" I have never been canvassed, probably because I have always lived in safe seats (where the result of the elections has meant that I have never felt myself represented).

Whatever we wake up to on Friday morning, will this election mark the point where there is enough public pressure to ensure that we really do have to move to an electoral system where every vote counts rather than just those in marginal seats and perhaps of multi-member constituencies, so that many more of us might be able to feel that we do have a representative in the nation's parliament (whatever the nation may turn out to be in the not-too-distant future)?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If the SNP wanted to cause trouble, they would in the event of winning the majority of seats in Scotland, call a unilateral declaration of independence and secede from the UK.
Sadly they won't.

No-one would dispute that Scotland is a country in its own right, a nation. If an overwhelming majority (say the classic two thirds) of voters voted SNP, could anyone deny the SNP the right to make a unilateral declaration to turn that clearly-defined nation into a nation-state? They won't because they'd lose too much English money!