General Election 2017: The Results and Aftermath

[Xenophon PCDGS]

No energy price cap in the Queen's Speech.

Was there anything else about energy mentioned, as I missed the programme.

 

[AlterEgo]

Was there anything else about energy mentioned, as I missed the programme.

The only bit about energy was:

“(This Government pledges to) bring forward measures to help tackle unfair practices in the energy market to help reduce energy bills”

No mention of any cap and no mention of any legislation to enable the same. Prepare for some energy politics football later on today....

 

[Dave1987]

May's Government is about as "strong and stable" as cheesestring. She is struggling to get a deal done with the DUP. The EU are set to make Brexit negotiations very very difficult. And reports from the US is that they are hardly very enthusiastic about a trade deal with the UK post Brexit. The US knows that May's Government will be absolutely desperate for a trade deal with the US and they will undoubtedly use that to their advantage. Hammond already backtracking saying he wants a transitional time period as he knows a post March 2019 the economy will be in serious trouble the way things are going. May must be wondering why she opted her big mouth when she called the election

Her demise comes ever nearer and hopefully with it the Tories will come back to the centre ground.

 

[northwichcat]

I'm not so certain the Tories under Cameron were as centrist as people seem to think. Socially yeah (I'll give him that, I can't have seen many other Tory PM's getting same sex marriage passed the commons for example), but economically? Using the global crash as an excuse for ideologically based austerity doesn't sound very centre ground to me. But as others have said there has also certainly been a lurch to the right in social policy since the referendum too.

Don't forget Cameron had no intention of doing things like raising the personal allowance, allowing gay marriage etc. until he knew the 2010 General Election results. At that point he realised he could be PM if he worked with the Lib Dems so suddenly was willing to accept centralist policies when the Lib Dems turned up for coalition talks even though he was rubbishing the same policies prior to the 2010 election.

 

[northwichcat]

Her demise comes ever nearer and hopefully with it the Tories will come back to the centre ground.

Unless Ken Clarke or Anna Soubry become leader I can't see that happening. With the Conservatives losing a lot of marginals to Labour at the recent election, they also lost a number of their more centralist MPs.

 

[Dave1987]

Unless Ken Clarke or Anna Soubry become leader I can't see that happening. With the Conservatives losing a lot of marginals to Labour at the recent election, they also lost a number of their more centralist MPs.

I can. Tories took a big swing to the right under May and got a battering for it. Many people who were traditional Labour supporters voted Tory simply because they believe in hard Brexit (even though they are likely to be worst affected by the repercussions of Brexit). Without that Brexit vote share from Labour the Tories would have been have probably lost being the biggest party. If they fail to come back towards the centre ground I can foresee a pretty big loss come 2022. We probably won't have another election before Brexit actually happens so the Tories can kiss goodbye to the traditional Labour vote they captured via Brexit stance. The Tories either come back to the centre ground or face an even bigger battering come 2022.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I can. Tories took a big swing to the right under May and got a battering for it. Many people who were traditional Labour supporters voted Tory simply because they believe in hard Brexit (even though they are likely to be worst affected by the repercussions of Brexit). Without that Brexit vote share from Labour the Tories would have been have probably lost being the biggest party. If they fail to come back towards the centre ground I can foresee a pretty big loss come 2022. We probably won't have another election before Brexit actually happens so the Tories can kiss goodbye to the traditional Labour vote they captured via Brexit stance. The Tories either come back to the centre ground or face an even bigger battering come 2022.

2022 is a very long time in the future politics-wise and much can happen in the interim period till then. You only need to see how Labour were perceived after the 2015 General Election which was a low point for the party and compare it to their current high ratings as an example for that.

 

[Dave1987]

2022 is a very long time in the future politics-wise and much can happen in the interim period till then. You only need to see how Labour were perceived after the 2015 General Election which was a low point for the party and compare it to their current high ratings as an example for that.

Like I said Paul hopefully your beloved May is ditched, and then the Tory party dragged back towards the centre ground. In the interim we shall watch this Government go from one disaster to another.....

 

[HSTEd]

The last 20 years has taught us one lesson: the centre ground is always death in the end.

The party might pick up some floating voters but it's base starts to crumble.
The majority of voters are not in the centre ground, its just you can pick up a tiny handful of the other major party's voters and retain most of your base.

Especially since the "centre ground" now appears to be laissez-faire capitalism where the state is evil and the meerkat must be worshipped.

 

[Senex]

The majority of voters are not in the centre ground, its just you can pick up a tiny handful of the other major party's voters and retain most of your base.

So why are we so different from so much of the rest of Europe?

Why is it that our politics has to be defined by two groups sitting just far enough apart not to be able to harm those opposite with their swords?

(I'm always reminded of the spoiling of the nice new rattle.)

 

[radamfi]

Why is it that our politics has to be defined by two groups sitting just far enough apart not to be able to harm those opposite with their swords?

Because of the voting system.

 

[backontrack]

The link goes to a video. It's really rather excellent.

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/n.../brexit-shorts-just-a-tshirt-meera-syal-video

 

[Dave1987]

The last 20 years has taught us one lesson: the centre ground is always death in the end.

The party might pick up some floating voters but it's base starts to crumble.
The majority of voters are not in the centre ground, its just you can pick up a tiny handful of the other major party's voters and retain most of your base.

Especially since the "centre ground" now appears to be laissez-faire capitalism where the state is evil and the meerkat must be worshipped.

The party faithful will always be the party faithful. Brexit was a anomaly which had politicians from either side of the political divide happy to share platforms with each other on either the Leave or Remain side. That is why you really need to ignore the Brexit effect. Labour won a landslide in 1997 and remained in power for over a decade based on being just left of centre. Cameron won the 2010 election and made a coalition based on being just right of centre. May had a small majority before the election off the back of Cameron's 2015 election. She swung the Tories to the right and even by purposefully targeting the anomaly that is the Brexit vote she lost her majority arguably by taking the Tories to the extreme right. The centre ground is where all politics should be.

 

[HSTEd]

I am not so sure.

The whole idea of party loyalty seems to have collapsed.

We have unprecedent numbers of floating voters.

 

[AM9]

I am not so sure.

The whole idea of party loyalty seems to have collapsed.

We have unprecedent numbers of floating voters.

And at last it seems that the penny has dropped with younger voters that they have some influence. It looks like support where it matters for 'hard brexit' may crumble and become a historical irrelevance.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Especially since the "centre ground" now appears to be laissez-faire capitalism where the state is evil and the meerkat must be worshipped.

I don't think I'd regard that as the centre ground. It is always a bit vague what centre means, but I think to me, the centre ground implies: Being committed to help the entire country, not just some groups of people, and Government decisions being evidence-based and based on what is likely to work best, rather than being based on any ideology. At the present time, it seems neither of the main parties would fare particularly well on that measure.

 

[najaB]

DUP-Tory deal prospect 'very good' - Sir Jeffrey Donaldson

There is a "very good" chance the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Conservatives will agree a parliamentary deal by next week, a DUP MP has said.
Sir Jeffrey Donaldson said that it was a case of "the sooner, the better".
Theresa May is seeking the support of the DUP's 10 MPs after losing her majority in the general election.
Both sides have been talking, but have not confirmed a deal to support a Conservative minority government.
Sir Jeffrey said that the prime minister had been "moving this process forward" and was "engaged".
He added: "I'll say this about Ulster men and Ulster women, we're no pushover."

So, here we are - the day after the Queen's speech and Mrs. May still doesn't actually have a confidence and supply deal in place.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The last 20 years has taught us one lesson: the centre ground is always death in the end.

I completely disagree. I think it teaches us the importance of the centre ground.

It was only FPTP that kept Labour from being destroyed in 1983, the SDP came to within 750,000 votes of Labour but that 750,000 vote difference translated into almost 180 seats. They gradually moved back towards the centre in 87 and 92, and with it came closer to being elected.

Meanwhile the Tories lurched to the right 92-97 because the centrist John Major couldn't control his whackjob back benchers, and were almost wiped out in 97. Not learning their lesson, they repeated the same mistake in 2001 and, to a lesser extent, in 2005.

The Tories only got closer to power when they moved towards the centre, and even then couldn't win a majority in 2010 and only just scraped a majority in 2015 on the back of a LibDem collapse and fearmongering about the SNP.

FPTP means you have to appeal to a narrow demographic in a small band of seats to win an election. If you swing too far in either direction then you won't appeal to this narrow demographic.

 

[bramling]

I completely disagree. I think it teaches us the importance of the centre ground.

It was only FPTP that kept Labour from being destroyed in 1983, the SDP came to within 750,000 votes of Labour but that 750,000 vote difference translated into almost 180 seats. They gradually moved back towards the centre in 87 and 92, and with it came closer to being elected.

Meanwhile the Tories lurched to the right 92-97 because the centrist John Major couldn't control his whackjob back benchers, and were almost wiped out in 97. Not learning their lesson, they repeated the same mistake in 2001 and, to a lesser extent, in 2005.

The Tories only got closer to power when they moved towards the centre, and even then couldn't win a majority in 2010 and only just scraped a majority in 2015 on the back of a LibDem collapse and fearmongering about the SNP.

FPTP means you have to appeal to a narrow demographic in a small band of seats to win an election. If you swing too far in either direction then you won't appeal to this narrow demographic.

This is all spot-on IMO, although it is rather disturbing to see the extent Corbyn and his bunch of extremists are appealing to some people.

I can understand people voting Labour because they aren't the Conservatives, but what I really can't understand is anyone having sheer enthusiasm for Corbyn and his bunch. To me he comes over as a not-particularly-bright smug self-righteous schoolteacher type who is not living in the real world.

 

[northwichcat]

It was only FPTP that kept Labour from being destroyed in 1983, the SDP came to within 750,000 votes of Labour but that 750,000 vote difference translated into almost 180 seats. They gradually moved back towards the centre in 87 and 92, and with it came closer to being elected.

Not technically correct. An alliance between the SDP and the Liberal Party got 7,780,949 votes but in 3 consistences Liberal candidates were not seen as part of the alliance and SDP candidates stood against them.

 

[Barn]

I can understand people voting Labour because they aren't the Conservatives, but what I really can't understand is anyone having sheer enthusiasm for Corbyn and his bunch. To me he comes over as a not-particularly-bright smug self-righteous schoolteacher type who is not living in the real world.

There clearly is some enthusiasm for him. What I think we're still not sure about is to what extent people felt able to 'support' him because he was not going to win. After all, the clear message was that Theresa May was going to get a landslide. It's not clear what will happen to Corbyn's vote now that he is seen as in with a genuine chance.

Will it galvanize the remaining left-leaning population to get out and vote to push him across the line? Will it scare away centrists who felt able to lend him a vote? Will it encourage older generations to vote who perhaps uncharacteristically didn't this time because of the 'dementia tax'? Who knows.

 

[najaB]

According to the BBC (can't quote it at the moment), if 50 people had voted differently, the Tories would have an effective majority.

 

[AlterEgo]

According to the BBC (can't quote it at the moment), if 50 people had voted differently, the Tories would have an effective majority.

See my post here which claimed it was the heady total of 75 people:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=148281

 

[ainsworth74]

So, here we are - the day after the Queen's speech and Mrs. May still doesn't actually have a confidence and supply deal in place.

When the vote due on the Queens Speech?

 

[Busaholic]

When the vote due on the Queens Speech?

Next week - someone may know the actual day.

 

[najaB]

Next week - someone may know the actual day.

I had read that they expected five days of debate, so if that's working days then next Wednesday.

 

[HSTEd]

I completely disagree. I think it teaches us the importance of the centre ground.

It was only FPTP that kept Labour from being destroyed in 1983, the SDP came to within 750,000 votes of Labour but that 750,000 vote difference translated into almost 180 seats. They gradually moved back towards the centre in 87 and 92, and with it came closer to being elected.

But not because they moved close to the centre, but because they moved loser to the views of their base.
The Labour 1983 Manifesto looked like something written by the Bolsheviks and thus failed miserably.

However as Labour moved closer and closer to the "centre" in 2005 and 2010 the party base started to crumble.

Meanwhile the Tories lurched to the right 92-97 because the centrist John Major couldn't control his whackjob back benchers, and were almost wiped out in 97. Not learning their lesson, they repeated the same mistake in 2001 and, to a lesser extent, in 2005.

And then they went full-on liberal in 2010 and failed to achieve a majority. Before shifting right again in 2015 and obtaining that majority.

The Tories only got closer to power when they moved towards the centre, and even then couldn't win a majority in 2010 and only just scraped a majority in 2015 on the back of a LibDem collapse and fearmongering about the SNP.

I would argue they moved away from centre in 2015 and won as a result.
People don't vote for the party in the centre, they vote for the party they agree with.

Voters are not evenly distributed across the spectrum - the distribution is "lumpy".

 

[Tetchytyke]

But not because they moved close to the centre, but because they moved loser to the views of their base.

The 1983 manifesto was written by party activists, and that's why it bombed. The same applied to the Tory manifesto in 2001.

You don't win elections by appealing to your core voters. You win elections by appealing to the swing voters in marginal constituencies. And you don't appeal to those people with radical ideas. This has been proven countless times.

 

[HSTEd]

The 1983 manifesto was written by party activists, and that's why it bombed. The same applied to the Tory manifesto in 2001.

Party Activists and Party Voters are not and I don't think have ever been the same thing.

You don't win elections by appealing to your core voters. You win elections by appealing to the swing voters in marginal constituencies. And you don't appeal to those people with radical ideas. This has been proven countless times.

This is the traditional view, but I am not sure it actually holds any more.
The only reason the Conservative Party is anywhere close to a majority is because something that would have been unthinkable in 2015 happened.... they hammered Scotland.

And the reason that Labour made gains in England was primarily because it took seats that noone ever imagined it could.
Canterbury is not a marginal constituency by any means, and yet dozens more marginal seats did not change hands on either side.

The old certanties are dead thanks to the collosal realignment in politics.

 

[northwichcat]

The Conservative Party has denied claims it broke electoral law by using a Neath call centre to canvass voters during the general election campaign.

An investigation by Channel 4 claimed the UK Tories contracted Blue Telecoms to conduct marketing campaigns ahead of the vote on 8 June.

The Information Commissioners Officer confirmed it would be asking the Tories about the calls.

A Conservative spokesman said all the calls were compliant with the law.
Blue Telecoms has been contacted for a comment.

An undercover investigation by C4 News, broadcast on Thursday, claimed the workers may have been carrying out paid canvassing, banned under electoral law, as they promoted key Conservative messages to undecided voters in the weeks before the election.

The investigation claimed that calls were made to voters in key marginal seats, including Bridgend, Gower, Clwyd South and Wrexham.

At the start of the election campaign, the information commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, contacted all parties to remind them of the law around direct marketing.

A Conservative party spokesman denied the allegations, saying: "Political parties of all colours pay for market research and direct marketing calls.

"All the scripts supplied by the party for these calls are compliant with data protection and information law".

A spokesman for the Information Commissioner's Office said it would take action against any party which had not "followed the law".

"We will be asking the Conservative Party about the marketing campaigns conducted from this call centre," he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-40378185

Will the Conservatives call another election before the investigation is completed (like they did with the last investigation)?