The 2019 General Election Result and Aftermath

[hooverboy]

You have a good point. I hear Labour lost lots of safe seats, especially in the midlands.

midlands, north east and also wales. All of these were prime manufacturing/production territories 20-30 years ago,and they were promised alternative jobs(remember education,education,education and gordon's knowledge economy?), as those industries were outsourced/fled/went into decline...and they were told de-industrialisation was good for the country/planet.

The only jobs increase they really saw was those responsible for handing out dole payments/council work and box-tickers, it wasn't a fair swap for something tangible or valuable that contributes to the country.

Their patience finally ran out.

Not saying the tories are blameless here either, but the mood of the country has changed, and the mood of the world has also changed.
Give the instability of some bits of the globe right now,I think there is a VERY strong case for having a good deal more of core resources like fuel/food/water being controlled and sourced locally...a point corbyn was trying to make in fairness

so for starters we need an electricity producing tidal barrage along the east coast.
a) increases energy security
b)provides jobs
c)secures/defends against coastal erosion,and fenland(our breadbasket) flooding risks

 

[Jordan Adam]

I cannot believe that you have made the assumption that you did, as the reason why I expressed my opinion was not what you say it was. It was the posting to which I responded that stated those young people would be influenced by social media in a way that more experienced adult minds would not be.

It wasn't really an assumption, what you said couldn't have been clearer (if intended or not). I also don't agree with your point in this reply. Not to be stuck up or ageist but it tends to be "experienced people" (those in the in the 50+ age range) that fall for click bait titles etc on social media, even when it comes to non-political and/or transport related stuff. You'll probably find that on the whole younger people are far more sceptical of what they read online.

It’s already been proven that the Labour claim that the Conservatives intend to sell off the NHS is bogus and is a fictional lie thought up by the hard left.

Not quite, it's an odd one actually. There is truth to it in that the NHS would outsource to private companies, but it's nowhere near in the proportion the left are claiming. Certainly the NHS isn't for sale as some people are trying to claim.

I'm surprised the Liberal Democrats did as badly as they did.
It was pretty obvious that labour had gone too far left,and that style of politics is a massive turn-off for the electorate.
However, with the tories almost just as equally being split into leave/remain factions,I think it's not entirely accurate to say they won because of brexit.

With the LD's being more centrist than labour, and were very clear on their "remain" stance, they should have picked up a lot of votes from labour, but didn't.

The main fault of the LD's was that their campaign was too focused on Jo Swinson and her as a personality (proclaiming she "will" be your next PM etc) rather than on policy. Their very extreme stance on Brexit didn't do them any favours when it came to south of the border either. In Scotland SNP were seen as the key remain party (Scotland voted remain, so it's only logical the SNP - a party who "represent Scotland" would support remain as that's representing the view of Scotland), all the seats the Lib Dems held on to with the exception of Fife North have been long standing safe seats. Orkney & Shetland have been with LD/Liberals continuously since 1950 and to be quite honest i can't see that changing anytime soon as it seems voters there have got in to a habit of naturally voting LD.

I'm not surprised about the Tory gains in England, they've probably taken some of the remain demographic too as people (in England) just want to "get Brexit done". In Scotland despite managing to retain 6 seats it wasn't the best night for the Tories really, in pretty much all their remaining seats the Tories lost some of their majority while the SNP made gains - had there been a higher turn out i wouldn't have been surprised if the Tories were ousted. As for Scottish Labour... Well they're about as influential at this point as the Monster Raving Loony Party!

Not saying the tories are blameless here either, but the mood of the country has changed, and the mood of the world has also changed.

I hate to sound like Ian Blackford at a Westminster tea party but the "mood of the country" hasn't changed, the mood of England has. Scotland's view/position remains mostly as it did before !

 

[hooverboy]

It wasn't really an assumption, what you said couldn't have been clearer (if intended or not). I also don't agree with your point in this reply. Not to be stuck up or ageist but it tends to be "experienced people" (those in the in the 50+ age range) that fall for click bait titles etc on social media, even when it comes to non-political and/or transport related stuff. You'll probably find that on the whole younger people are far more sceptical of what they read online.

!

I think most people of senior vintage also have had experience of the 1970's,and labours direction had crystallised their belief that if labour won it would end up the same way.
That's something that the millenials never had to deal with.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

so for starters we need an electricity producing tidal barrage along the east coast.
a) increases energy security
b)provides jobs
c)secures/defends against coastal erosion,and fenland(our breadbasket) flooding risks

Indeed and as this is a railway discussion board - a few nuke stations too - they require skilled workers to run and build. Export energy - don't import from France etc.
Electrify the railways and transport so we do not need to import oil/refined products but run on electricity.
Give train build etc contracts where a substantial portion of the build is UK based.
Build HS2 - and yes in time Crossrail 2.

 

[telstarbox]

Labour had to pick a Brexit horse and ride it. Corbyn and his chums prioritised london labour seats over others.

Gareth Snell said the same in interviews last night.

And even in the London seats where they campaigned heavily (Chipping Barnet, Chingford & Woodford Green) it wasn't enough.

 

[Jordan Adam]

Indeed and as this is a railway discussion board - a few nuke stations too - they require skilled workers to run and build. Export energy - don't import from France etc.
Electrify the railways and transport so we do not need to import oil/refined products but run on electricity.
Give train build etc contracts where a substantial portion of the build is UK based.
Build HS2 - and yes in time Crossrail 2.

To add to that electricity where possible should come from renewable sources, Scotland is already well ahead of the rest of the UK when it comes to this with around 75% of it's electricity consumption coming from renewables. There's no point investing in electrifying railways when the energy is coming from heavily polluting sources, all you're doing is taking one issue and moving it elsewhere.

 

[hooverboy]

Indeed and as this is a railway discussion board - a few nuke stations too - they require skilled workers to run and build. Export energy - don't import from France etc.
Electrify the railways and transport so we do not need to import oil/refined products but run on electricity.
Give train build etc contracts where a substantial portion of the build is UK based.
Build HS2 - and yes in time Crossrail 2.

wouldn't disagree with any of that

as for plastics use, they are necessary,but can be reduced.
instead of taxing them, get some boffins to create/genetically modify enzymes to eat them and turn them into usable fuel

it needs r+d(some of it already successful),and also a scaling up in production/fermentation type facilities, which is a nice techy boost to the economy to make it workable on a large enough scale to make an impact

This is what I mean by innovation,not legislation

 

[cactustwirly]

Labour had to pick a Brexit horse and ride it. Corbyn and his chums prioritised london labour seats over others.

Gareth Snell said the same in interviews last night.

They definitely picked the wrong horse, if they had picked up leave, then they could have retained a lot of Northern seats.
Allowing the lib Dems to take London

 

[Tetchytyke]

Don't characterise any generation or group of people as all the same and not worth consideration. If you knew a bit more about Thatcher you would realise that "MEMEME" is a product of Thatcherism, not its cause.

It's chicken-and-egg. Thatcherism spoke to greed and, as the boomer generation hit voting maturity, she achieved record majorities. I think she was giving the people what they wanted.

Thatcherism was also a response to trade union greed in the 70s, which was just a different manifestation of MEMEME.

I certainly don't think all people of one generation are the same, but the 50 years of right-wing dominance neatly fits into the 50 years of baby boomer voting.

 

[TrafficEng]

<snip>
Same with the 2016 Referendum. Was convinced that Remain was a shoe in to win...

Perhaps those of a more Leave disposition are less disposed to engaging in debate and seeking justification or evidence for their views...

If it helps, some people of a Leave disposition are a bit fed up with being treated as idiots/racists/xenophobes/fools/educationally subnormal (*Delete as applicable) and have just got bored of going round and round in circles having the same discussion that ends with one of the above insults being directed toward them. The concept of the 'Shy Tory' is well understood, and also applies to Leave supporters.

Also, to echo the point DarloRich made, the participants in a discussion on a forum like this represent a very small sample of the population as a whole, and are self-selecting around common interest in a specific subject.

I'd draw a comparison with walking into a football pub and discovering it full of fans of the other team. Many people would turn on their heel and find another pub. Some would buy their pint and sit very quietly in a corner. The fact they chose not to loudly voice their club loyalty and expectations for the outcome of the match should not be interpreted as diminishing the level of support and belief they have in their chosen team.

Some of the other subject interest forums I visit have differing levels of party support. One which is financially related is very pro-Leave. The consensus view from Remain supporters in that forum is the bias is due to it attracting too many pensioners with time on their hands.

Leavers tend to be older and educated to a lower level and, by extension, are less likely to be active internet users. So online they won't have the same presence.

It would be interesting to see some evidence to support the extension part. Certainly it is likely that older people may be less likely to use twitter and similar social media, but I'm not sure that extends to being less likely to be active internet users as a whole. Older people are also less likely to be looking after children, and are possibly retired, so may have more time to chew the fat on the interweb.

Also, the demographic age-range where majority Remain views turn to majority Leave is somewhere around 40 to 50 years old. So there is a big tranche of Leave supporters who would conventionally be thought of as 'middle aged' rather than 'older'. And likewise many of those older people will have spent a good part of their working and home life using computers and are quite comfortable doing so to actively use the internet.

But if the point relates to presence on twitter and the like (as opposed to forums like this) then I do think you have a valid point.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Labour had to pick a Brexit horse and ride it.

I'm not sure what difference it would have made, unless they'd gone all-out Leave and abandoned London to the LibDems.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It would be interesting to see some evidence to support the extension part. Certainly it is likely that older people may be less likely to use twitter and similar social media, but I'm not sure that extends to being less likely to be active internet users as a whole.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopula...s/internetaccesshouseholdsandindividuals/2019

While almost all adults aged 16 to 44 years used the internet daily or almost every day (99%), the older age groups used it less frequently. This reduced across the older age groups, as 61% of adults aged 65 years and over used the internet daily, while 24% had not used the internet in the last three months (Figure 2).

 

[AM9]

Labour have just over 4 years and 4 months to turn things around. As others have said, they cannot hang around.



The Labour vote fell from 13,137 in 2017 to just 5000 this time. That accounts for a big part of the swing. Not all of the St Albans constituency is wealthy.

Also, the LibDems threw vast amounts of resources into winning the seat. Possibly at the cost of winning others elsewhere. Perhaps a pyrrhic win in the final analysis.

Not really. Anne Main was not that popular in St Albans, but until now, much of the Conservative succession was through habitual voting. There has really been a move to less cynical electoral behaviour.

 

[507021]

The field of candidates for Leader from this part of the party is astonishingly thin though. Not a single name jumps out.

Keir Starmer all the way for me.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Interestingly the LibDems gained 5% of the vote, but lost a seat. The Tories gained 1% and gained a landslide win.

Anti-Brexit parties got more votes (47.6%) than pro-Brexit parties (45.6%) yet there's now no way of stopping Brexit.

If this doesn't highlight a fundamentally broken electoral system, I don't know what does.

Nowt will change though.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Keir Starmer all the way for me.

I'm not sure. Very very capable, very knowledgable, but I'm not sure how relatable.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

To add to that electricity where possible should come from renewable sources, Scotland is already well ahead of the rest of the UK when it comes to this with around 75% of it's electricity consumption coming from renewables. There's no point investing in electrifying railways when the energy is coming from heavily polluting sources, all you're doing is taking one issue and moving it elsewhere.

Absolutely - burning gas still produces CO2. Wind, solar, tidal, nuclear are the best.

 

[507021]

I'm not sure. Very very capable, very knowledgable, but I'm not sure how relatable.

I'm honestly not sure who else at this point. We're not exactly spoiled for choice.

Unless David Miliband came back, but I think there's more chance of me driving a Ferrari to work tomorrow.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It's chicken-and-egg. Thatcherism spoke to greed and, as the boomer generation hit voting maturity, she achieved record majorities. I think she was giving the people what they wanted.

Thatcherism was also a response to trade union greed in the 70s, which was just a different manifestation of MEMEME.

I certainly don't think all people of one generation are the same, but the 50 years of right-wing dominance neatly fits into the 50 years of baby boomer voting.

Fairly good analysis. Had not thought of it that way.

 

[TrafficEng]

Not really. Anne Main was not that popular in St Albans, but until now, much of the Conservative succession was through habitual voting. There has really been a move to less cynical electoral behaviour.

2015 Anne Main 25,392 votes
2017 Anne Main 24,571 votes
2019 Anne Main 22,574 votes

Whilst undeniably a move has occurred, it is hardly on a scale which might explain a 12,000 vote swing.

The disappearance of 8000+ Labour votes on the other hand is more suggestive of a switch between Labour and LibDem on tactical lines. In 2017 the LibDems were second, 5000 votes ahead of Labour, so would be the obvious tactical choice in this case.

And then whether you regard tactical voting as cycnical electoral behaviour often depends on which side you sit.

 

[TrafficEng]

I'm not sure. Very very capable, very knowledgable, but I'm not sure how relatable.

I agree. Another London-centric MP whose lifestyle is far removed from that of the voters Labour needs to win back.

Also he is possibly a man of the moment - being seen as the person with the right approach to Brexit (as far as the Remain side are concerned) with the legal knowledge and presentation style that suggests he has the answer and would do a good job.

But remove the issue of Brexit from the equation (thinking forward four years) and will he have the same appeal? Brexit may still be an issue then but if so, the issue(s) will be of a different nature to the one today.

And he isn't a woman. If Labour pick another leader from London then they have to be female, otherwise even the London Labour voters will start to feel a bit uncomfortable with their party's choice.

 

[ainsworth74]

I wonder how the Momentum types will explain this one away:

Source

[Image shows result of Opinium poll showing reasons voters did not vote labour amongst Labour defectors 37% due to leadership, 21% due stance of Brexit and 6% due to economic policies. For all that did not vote labour percentages are 43% leadership, 17% Brexit and 12% economic policies]

So yeah Brexit played a role in why people didn't vote for Labour but it was by no means the main reason...

 

[AlterEgo]

I wonder how the Momentum types will explain this one away:

Source

[Image shows result of Opinium poll showing reasons voters did not vote labour amongst Labour defectors 37% due to leadership, 21% due stance of Brexit and 6% due to economic policies. For all that did not vote labour percentages are 43% leadership, 17% Brexit and 12% economic policies]

So yeah Brexit played a role in why people didn't vote for Labour but it was by no means the main reason...

Many of their economic policies were popular and made good sense.

 

[DarloRich]

I'm not sure what difference it would have made, unless they'd gone all-out Leave and abandoned London to the LibDems.

They would have lost fewer seats imo. I am against Brexit but the country isnt, especially not in places in the north east for instance

 

[ainsworth74]

Many of their economic policies were popular and made good sense.

Which is reflected in the numbers! People didn't have a problem with the economics in the main. They did however have a problem with the leadership. Corbyn was toxic on the doorstep as far as I can be seen. And yet I'm certain Momentum and their acolytes will refuse to accept any suggestion of this being the case despite the vast amount of evidence to the contrary.

 

[Cowley]

Which is reflected in the numbers! People didn't have a problem with the economics in the main. They did however have a problem with the leadership. Corbyn was toxic on the doorstep as far as I can be seen. And yet I'm certain Momentum and their acolytes will refuse to accept any suggestion of this being the case despite the vast amount of evidence to the contrary.

Listening to the BBC today I’d say that’s already happening.

 

[yorksrob]

I wonder how the Momentum types will explain this one away:

Source

[Image shows result of Opinium poll showing reasons voters did not vote labour amongst Labour defectors 37% due to leadership, 21% due stance of Brexit and 6% due to economic policies. For all that did not vote labour percentages are 43% leadership, 17% Brexit and 12% economic policies]

So yeah Brexit played a role in why people didn't vote for Labour but it was by no means the main reason...

But curiously, their economic policy seemed to play even less of a role than Brexit !

 

[yorksrob]

Which is reflected in the numbers! People didn't have a problem with the economics in the main. They did however have a problem with the leadership. Corbyn was toxic on the doorstep as far as I can be seen. And yet I'm certain Momentum and their acolytes will refuse to accept any suggestion of this being the case despite the vast amount of evidence to the contrary.

I'm not sure that's true.

As someone who's fairly left wing, when Labour announced that they were planning so many nationalisations in one term I thought "eek, I wouldn't try all of those in one go", and I had the impression of Momentum as being hard left economically, rather than pro-Corbyn.

I would have expected Momentum (not that I agree with them) to be cheered by such a pole.

 

[TrafficEng]

Which is reflected in the numbers! People didn't have a problem with the economics in the main. They did however have a problem with the leadership. Corbyn was toxic on the doorstep as far as I can be seen. And yet I'm certain Momentum and their acolytes will refuse to accept any suggestion of this being the case despite the vast amount of evidence to the contrary.

I'm not so sure about this. I'd want to look at the survey methodology and numbers in more detail.

For example, were people asked for only the main reason, or could they give multiple reasons?

It is noticeable that the numbers for each chart don't add up to 100 and therefore other reasons were given but not shown. E.g. For Lab defectors to LibDem the total is only 49%. 51% of that group defected to LibDem for some other reason.

If the respondents were only asked to give one main reason then extra care has to be taken with drawing conclusions. Refusing to vote for a party because you think the leader is terrible is not mutually exclusive to not voting for the party because their economic policies are bad. Replacing the leader with a more palatable version might simply have had the effect of moving the other reasons up the list.

To answer your original question in #442 I suspect it will involve some permutation of the words "Conspiracy", "MSM", "Billionaires", "Lies", "Gullible", "Trump" and "America".

 

[Howardh]

Hmph. The Tory win means I'm £11,250 better off than I was this time last night - my shares in a construction firm jumped over 10%. Trouble is the cloud's bigger than the silver lining.