You must log in or register to comment.
It blows my mind that Tory candidates get even a single vote. Who’s voting for them?!
And reform, its bloody terrifing seeing them get so much support
Yup. They’ve been coming second in most results so far. Not sure how much of it is a protest vote against the big two or people like their policies.
Only one opposed to the trend. So long while before we can be sure.
But if it continures. Lab holds having huge reform vote. But Tory loss them being 3rd. It would support most Tories, only voting reform when they know Tories won’t win. But hesitating when a reform win is possible. (edit: possible to prevent what they see as a more sane party)
Be interesting to see if that continues.
So looking forward to the next five years…
Looking at how Reform and Lib Dems made significant gains in vote share you have to wonder if its still worth Labour chasing after the right wing vote that Reform achieved. I just do not see the where the voters who voted Reform actually believe Starmer on the key issues that Reform campaigned on, immigration, anti “woke”, and Brexit. I cannot see Labour ever gaining the lead on those issues over someone like Farage who will always position himself to the right of whatever Labour or the Tories campaign on. I cant even see Labour being trusted at the voting booth on these right wing issues over a rebuilt Tory party. Its a fools errand to try.
The Lib Dem vote share, as with Reform, boosted by previous Tory voters but Lib Dems campaigned on almost the opposite of Reform (with some tactical, local, NIMBYism) and achieved way more seats on a lower overall percentage vote than Reform. If you are going to pick a direction to go in, wouldn’t it make more sense to move towards the Lib Dems position to shore up in time for the next election?
Labour did worse total percentage of the vote than 2017, its more that the Tories collapsed losing about 20% of their vote that caused this swing in seats. The Tories will rally next time around and a lot of the seats look winnable for them with only a small local swing. The current stance of Labour simply isn’t popular enough to be a vote winner against a rebuilt Tory party.
As an Australian, I have to once again apologise on behalf of my nation for the turd in a tuxedo that is Rupert Murdoch.
Thank you. But we don’t blame regular Aussies. You’re good with us.
Yes, but I think you’re overstating how right wing Labour pitched it. There were no claims to be anti woke. I think it was a pretty firmly centrist pitch. It’s the Conservatives who are going to panic and try to out-nutcase Farage. Labour are going to try and be responsible and fix the broken ship. It’s just whether they can do it fast enough for people to notice a big improvement in the cost of living vs wages problem.
Are you forgetting Starmers statements around women only spaces as it seems like it.
Farages entire point of existence is to drag the overton window to the right, which he succeed yet again, particularly around Brexit.
The other big concession Starmer made, this time because of the Tories, was not to raise taxes, which was also incredibly dumb. As was honouring triple lock.
My biggest issue with Starmer making claims like these is that he will stick to them. Someone like Boris is too lazy and an out and out liar so has no problem dropping things. Starmers big pitch to be different is that he will stick with what he says.
By sticking to what he said around terfs issues, Brexit, taxes, he really fucks his options in these areas, and for what? As you and I have both said, toil not out crazy Farage or be trusted by people who these are important issues for, so it’s a massively stupid thing to do.
You make very good points.
The entire C4 panel laughed at Nadine when she just couldn’t stop talking about Boris Johnson
Anyone got that link that recalculates the results of the GE by different voting systems? For example if we had a form of PR how would this election turned out? I swear it was posted here a few days ago.
Given, many systems require more than just marking one box. While, even those that do not, would drastically change how people choose their vote.
I am unsure any such site can give a realistic result from available data?
Edit:
If we just assume proportional based on % of vote yesterday.
Tor 22.9% Lab 35.2% LDe 11.3% Ref 14.5% SNP 2.5% Oth 13.6%
It is bloody hard to see how either party could form a viable 50% Lab LD SNP and a few independents would take it over 50. But honestly, it is hard to imagine that working with the politicians voted yesterday. Tory Ref would need all independents. So less likely to work.
But as I said. Voters would go to the polls with very different ideas about how to vote.
Tory Ref would need all independents
“Other” is not all independents. 6.8% of the vote share was Green, and 0.8% is between Workers Party and Social Democratic Party who, based purely on the names, I cannot possibly imagine would ever back the Conservatives. Unless LibDems were to support that coalition (which, after the 2010 Government I cannot imagine they’d be super keen on), there is no path to a Tory Government from these results under a proportional system. Labour can form a Government with just LibDem, SNP, and Green parties.
Exactly, total up left(ish) votes and you get about 54% ✊️
An independent (SNP) and unionist (Labour) party would be hard-pressed to form a government.
But again the whole idea of the votes being identicle under a vastyyly different system
Honestly the big question would be how government is formed. With seat numbers matching % of vote. under our current system. Labour could run a weak gov by depending on greens snp and others never supporting a tor ref vonc.
But with centre right lab, it is likely only ld and lab would be garmented to support most policy votes. Others, often refusing because it’s not left enough and not right enough at the same time.
Unfortunately, while the right has clasped over this election. The right has a long history of unity to fight the left.
the left much the opposite in fighting the right.
An independent (SNP) and unionist (Labour) party would be hard-pressed to form a government.
Would they? Outside of the question of independence, the two parties agree on more than not, don’t they? If they alternative is no functioning government, couldn’t you see Labour giving some minor concession to the SNP (like maybe allowing Holyrood to have power over one or two of the things that was recently denied by the Supreme Court) in exchange for the SNP’s support in Confidence?
the big question would be how government is formed
I’m not really sure what you mean. (It doesn’t help that the rest of that paragraph is ridden by typos to the point of being unintelligible. Sorry.) Government would be formed the same way they do it in Germany or New Zealand or any of the many other countries with proportional systems. They would find a way to reach a majority by agreeing on whatever compromises are palatable to both sides. In a hypothetical where the SNP had way more seats, Labour might have to agree to a second independence referendum. If they really needed Green support they might agree to pass strong climate legislation. They might have to give the LibDems a couple of significant cabinet positions. Proportional systems force politicians to actually do politics and pass legislation that is supported by a majority of people, instead of giving a single party a majority of seats based on a minority of people supporting them.
Would they?
SNPs manifesto included it as a key point. So actual coalition government. Well look at how lib dems got hit over student fees. SNP voters would feel the same having voted for an independence party.
Hence why labour have faced the question at all past elections where a win os less probable amd denied they would form such a coalition.
But as said. A confodence amd supply agreement where snp agree to non confidence votes. Is probable on such situs.
Your final sentence is painfully true.
Direct proportional representation is easy enough. Just look at the number of votes each party got, and assign that percentage to their overall parliamentary representation. That roughly gives you the answer.
IRV is more interesting, but more complicated. It relies on some assumptions (e.g. Green, SNP, LibDem, Labour all preference each other 100%, Conservatives & Reform preference each other 100%) and takes a lot of effort to do on a seat-by-seat basis. And of course it all assumes ceteris paribus, when in actuality people would vote differently if the voting system were different.
As one example, here’s the seat of Tatton:
Under IRV, with the above assumptions, Labour’s Ryan Jude would have won with 26,005 votes to Conservative Esther McVey’s 25,904. But tweak those assumptions just slightly (give 90% of LibDem votes to Labour, 10% to Conservatives) and it could go the other way (26,365 CON to 25,544 LAB). There are dozens or scores of seats where these sorts of interesting hypotheticals can be asked and analysed. IRV is actually, in my opinion, the next-worst voting system after FPTP (if you exclude weird and rarely-used ones like approval voting, range voting, etc.), but it’s one of the most interesting to do analysis with.
STV is an utterly impossible comparison to make, because it relies on multi-seat electorates, which would probably be done by merging existing electorates into groups of 3–8. STV is a more generalised case of IRV so if you decided on how to do those merges, then you can get even more interesting analysis. As one example, if we imagine a merged electorate involving West Ham, East Ham, Ilford North, Ilford South, Leyton & Wanstead, and Stratford & Bow. Some assumptions are necessary to make this work, my assumption is that anyone whose party name says “workers” or “socialist” preferences Green and then Labour, while those mentioning religion preference Conservative, and if I don’t know, I’m giving them to LibDems then Labour. I’m also assuming all voters for a named party vote as a block, preferencing the same candidate 1st, 2nd, etc., while independents get the votes as they were actually given. This is somewhat realistic because ballot paper design can be set up to encourage this in an STV context (see how Australia does it with “above the line” voting in the Senate, for an example). I’ve merged the minor parties named “workers” or “socialist” into a single party.
A detailed explanation of my calculation is contained here.
In our merged hypothetical under STV, they win 3.03 quotas on first preference, Conservative wins 0.88, Reform 0.41, LibDem 0.28, Green 0.78. So Labour immediately win 3 seats, before 0.03 quotas are distributed lower down in their party. After numerous more rounds (my attached spreadsheet simplifies multiple rounds that by eye would obviously not result in a new quota being reached being merged down into 1), the LibDems win a quota. I’ve decided to distribute their excess 50/50 to Green and Conservative, since Labour has already been eliminated. To be frank, after that I’m not sure what to do. LibDems having been eliminated, the 3 remaining independents can’t go to them as was my initial plan (the basic thinking being independents are probably more centrist, but LibDems and Labour being eliminated already. I’ve decided to give them 50/50 to Conservative and Green, but the reality could be so, so much more complex. After one of those is eliminated, Conservatives get a quota. One final independent distributed to Conservatives/Green and the Greens win the last quota.
This is Labour heartland and in FPTP Labour won all 6 of these seats. My calculation ends up with 3 Labour, 1 LibDem, 1 Conservative, and 1 Green.
MMP ends up with basically the same overall result as direct proportional, but can be interesting in terms of independents & very minor parties and resulting overhang seats.
3 seats to go!
2 now
Feels quicker than previous years
Just seen Count Binface arrive for the count, shit just got real.
It’s a Tory wipeout in Wales!
CON: 0 (-12)
Love to see it.
Toot-toot, moog got the boot!
Starting the day and seeing Rees snob, grant schnapps and penny mordor are out.
Feels like a good start to the day
Oh and Liz snubbed
Ree Smog is out! I repeat, Ree Smog is out!
Yes, despite many leftists decrying Labour’s centreward shift, I think this is a good result. This result was helped by that shift in no small part.
Starmer is very well spoken and his morning after speech does well to inspire confidence.
Countdown to Smog reappearing as a Reform candidate?
Top hat wanker! Truss lost too, this is amazing.
Oh good, so now Truss can now piss off too the US and moan about the apparent conspiracy that was against her all she likes, and it won’t inconvenience her constituents anymore.
And of course no one in the US will really care, because will have no idea who the hell she is.
Is she that head of lettuce who killed the queen?
Yeah. She has convinced herself that her complete failure is a result of a grand conspiracy. This conspiracy requires some of the most uncharitable and profit driven people in the world, to be bleeding heart liberals, which is why no one believes it.
Apparently a bunch of venture capitalists, economists and fellow politicians decided that, rather than making vast sums of money under her “brilliant” scheme, it was instead better to crash the economy just despite her.
This is clearly a great result, but I think that given the popular vote, that it’s important to accept that this election was anti-tory, not pro-labour.
Labour have five years to make a substantial tangible change in people’s lives or we may very well find ourselves back where we left off or even worse.
Quick question - does anyone have the link to that “Tories being voted out” bingo card website? It was posted a few days ago, but I can’t find it.
[EDIT] Found it - Feddit thread - I’ve probably not formatted the link properly
Torygeddon Bingo WebsiteNot a website, but here’s a (low res, sorry) bingo card:
Worth reading just for the “comments” column :)
It wasn’t this one I was thinking of, but this will do just fine, thank you :)
I’m in maidstone, as blue as it gets. i’ll be watching everyone else turn red with envy
Sorry mate, still blue by about 1500 odd votes.
tbf Helen Grants majority has been significantly reduced. i can take solace in that at least
I’m not too far away and I’m hoping the area has some common sense, it’s always blue here as well. Although my wife said many votes have been lost as some people didn’t know about voter ID. Bloody Tories, it hasnt helped here though has it!
NW Cambridgeshire here, it’s never been anything but Blue since it’s formation, I still doubt it would change.
Edit: It went Labour by 40 votes. Damn never felt my vote mattered more than now. And thank you Reform for splitting it so close.
That really is a razer thin win. congrats
I don’t want to see Reform get any seats really when it’s filled with people like this.
They’re just a live action version of the Daily Mail. They only believe immigrants and trans people are a problem because Farage and his crew tell them so. Otherwise I bet those groups of people have barely any impact on their daily lives whatsoever.
The fuck happened in Leicester East that it’s the sole Con gain in the country?
Their last two Labour MPs not only were kicked out in scandal, but also ran in this election splitting the vote. It looks like the Lib Dems also got a significant vote share which has helped the Tories.
Makes sense. Thanks
Reform didn’t gain many seats but came 3rd in total votes
about 1/7th of the total, or about 1/5th of Labour, Tory, and LDs combined.
Did the areas with a high Reform vote, have a higher vote turnout?
