UK General Election 2024

[pokemonsuper9]

I guess that depends on the individual; for those who see climate change as the biggest issue, they are likely to be still the most favoured party.

If climate change is a serious issue you don't remove Nuclear Power plants.
Renewables are too volatile to handle the base power load, nuclear is easily the best option for that.

I can't take the greens seriously in the slightest with them wanting to remove Nuclear Power.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If climate change is a serious issue you don't remove Nuclear Power plants.
Renewables are too volatile to handle the base power load, nuclear is easily the best option for that.

I can't take the greens seriously in the slightest with them wanting to remove Nuclear Power.

Exactly my point of view. I'm one of those who regards climate change and looking after our planet as the most important issue, and I'd gladly vote for, and likely even join and campaign for, a sensible Green party - so I ought to be exactly the kind of person the Greens would be targetting. But with the Greens promoting idiocies like scrapping nuclear power - not a chance!

 

[nw1]

If climate change is a serious issue you don't remove Nuclear Power plants.
Renewables are too volatile to handle the base power load, nuclear is easily the best option for that.

I can't take the greens seriously in the slightest with them wanting to remove Nuclear Power.

I'm not a Green supporter as such - for point of clarification - though I am sympathetic to some of their ideas.

I was just bringing up the point that a lot of people are particularly concerned about climate change and hence may still vote Green.

 

[AlterEgo]

If climate change is a serious issue you don't remove Nuclear Power plants.
Renewables are too volatile to handle the base power load, nuclear is easily the best option for that.

I can't take the greens seriously in the slightest with them wanting to remove Nuclear Power.

I couldn’t agree more.

 

[bspahh]

I’ve just had a look at the Getvoting website and found it quite interesting.

For Ely and East Cambridgeshire. In 2019 the constituency was called South East Cambridgeshire. Lucy Frazer (Conservative) had a majority of 11490 to the Lib Dems, with Labour a distant 3rd. Sky links to a spreadsheet that estimates that the boundary changes mean that the Conservative majority would be 13500 with the votes from 2019.

The only place I have seen that suggests voting for Labour as an alternative to the Conservatives is Ipsos They use a MRP model with their polling data.

All the other sites predict Lib Dem as the best anti-Conservative vote:

These use MRP modeling with an opinion poll: getvoting.org, YouGov and Survation

tactical.vote looks at the results from the 2019 election, and adjusts them for constituency boundary changes.

Oddschecker has the Lib Dems as favourites at 8/11, with the Conservatives at 11/8 and Labour at 20/1

Carol Vorderman's stopthetories.vote suggests voting Lib Dem based on YouGov, Ipsos and Survation polls, and the 2019 election result

 

[bahnause]

If climate change is a serious issue you don't remove Nuclear Power plants.
Renewables are too volatile to handle the base power load, nuclear is easily the best option for that.

I can't take the greens seriously in the slightest with them wanting to remove Nuclear Power.

The nuclear phase-out in Germany has proven in practice what has long been clear according to expert reports: the base load poses absolutely no problem when switching to renewable energies. The proportion of coal and gas-fired electricity is also falling rapidly in Germany.
As early as 2010, "too much inflexible base load" from coal and nuclear power plants was already clogging up the electricity grid. There was also no negative effect on the electricity price. At the same time, they are less dependent on imported raw materials such as Russian gas.

 

[HSTEd]

As early as 2010, "too much inflexible base load" from coal and nuclear power plants was already clogging up the electricity grid. There was also no negative effect on the electricity price. At the same time, they are less dependent on imported raw materials such as Russian gas.

Solar and wind plant were sometimes unable to generate into the grid, but that was because the nuclear was already providing the requisite demand!
You could, technically, reduce power from the nuclear stations if you wanted to. The issue is that it is economically pointless to do so.
The marginal cost of running a nuclear power plant you already have is essentially zero.

Reducing output is economically equivalent to turning on a bunch of fan heaters outside the station.

The curtailed electricity generation has a marginal value of zero, since they could no find anyone to sell it to. I'd suggest a far more sensible solution to this problem is to install grid controlled heating loads for hot water or industry, which would allow that surplus electricity to at least displace gas. Not order the elimination of several gigawatts of proven very low carbon generating plant.

On electricity prices, Germany has the second highest electricity price in the EU, after only Ireland. They are double what they are in France.
And, finally, as of 1AM (London Time) 23/06/2024, Germany is pulling 7.5GW of French electricity across the border, French electricity that is currently overwhelmingly nuclear.

German progress is underwritten by French, Czech and Swedish nuclear and in being able to offload piles of surplus electricity to the rest of Europe. As decarbonisation progresses this strategy will become less and less tenable because there will be increasingly no fossil plant to displace.

However, this is rather off the topic of the thread, which is not about the German electricity system!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

The nuclear phase-out in Germany has proven in practice what has long been clear according to expert reports: the base load poses absolutely no problem when switching to renewable energies. The proportion of coal and gas-fired electricity is also falling rapidly in Germany.
As early as 2010, "too much inflexible base load" from coal and nuclear power plants was already clogging up the electricity grid. There was also no negative effect on the electricity price. At the same time, they are less dependent on imported raw materials such as Russian gas.

But will this remain the case once all the remaining fossil-fueled transport is electrified, much of it with batteries out of necessity rather than the less "peaky" methods used in public transport settings?

Back vaguely on topic, I used to vote Green in the local elections... however the current UK Green Party is an unholy alliance of Trots and radical Islamists. I'm still thinking I'll vote Reform- not because I agree with everything they stand for, nor do I worship Farage as some sort of God-emperor... indeed I find him rather shifty just like the vast majority of politicians. I don't trust him any more than I trust Starmer (which isn't much, by the way), the difference is that Farage has no chance of actually forming the next government.
At this point it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that Labour will win with at least a healthy majority unless Starmer does or says something really stupid (a Kinnock '92 moment for example), and will almost certainly win in my constituency. Voting Reform is what I see as the best way of giving the outgoing incompetent and feckless bunch of fake Conservatives a bloody nose. If a good performance by Reform also keeps the more lunatic elements of the new Labour administration in check, that'll be an added bonus.

 

[bahnause]

The idea of "too much baseload" clogging up the electricity system is a broken window fallacy.

Yes, solar and wind plant were unable to generate into the grid, but that was because the nuclear was already providing the requisite demand!
You could reduce power from the nuclear stations if you wanted to, it is merely that it is economically insane to do so.
The marginal cost of running a nuclear power plant you have is essentially zero.

Reducing output is economically equivalent to turning on a bunch of fan heaters outside the station.

That renewable electricity was functionally worthless to the point they couldn't find anyone to sell it to!

This proves that nuclear power can only be operated sensibly and reasonably cheaply if other energy sources, some of which are cheaper, are artificially disadvantaged by clinging to outdated concepts. Incidentally, renewable energy sources do not only consist of solar and wind power. Having to run a system constantly because of it's inflexibility is not a sign of quality.

On electricity prices, Germany has the second highest electricity price in the EU, after only Ireland. They are double what they are in France.

Unfortunately, this has nothing to do with what I wrote. The shutdown of nuclear power plants has not led to a price increase. The high energy prices in Germany are due to dependence on Russian gas. Thanks to the increased use of renewable energies, the price of electricity is now falling.

And, finally, as of 1AM (London Time) 23/06/2024, Germany is pulling 7.5GW of French electricity across the border, French electricity that is currently overwhelmingly nuclear.

France is also an electricity importer and its nuclear power plants are not very reliable. In mid-August 2022, more than half of the 56 nuclear reactors in France were offline. This was due to safety-related damage to the safety feed-in system, heat or drought and scheduled shutdowns. As a result, France, a traditional electricity exporter, imported significantly more electricity (72.9 TWh) than it exported (56.5 TWh) in 2022. For comparison: in 2021, exports were still 44 TWh higher than imports. The main reason for this is the long-term unavailability of part of the reactor fleet. This situation is expected to ease somewhat, but the next outages are planned again from 2025. But why does Germany have to import electricity at all? Quite simply, they don't have to. In the summer, the renewable power plants in the Alps and in Denmark, Norway and Sweden generated cheap electricity, meaning that the German coal-fired power plants were unable to compete. As a result, a lot of electricity was imported into Germany, including from France. Imports and exports are partly dependent on the market and says little about the availability of domestically produced energy.

The heatwaves and droughts in France are expected getting worse, cooling might therefore be a bigger issue in the following years. Their newest project in Flamanville is not going to plan either. A third reactor at the site began construction in 2007. As of 2020 the project was more than five times over budget and years behind schedule. Introduction was planned in 2012.

Another Fun Fact to turn back "on topic": The decision in 2011 to phase out nuclear energy in Germany was not made by the Greens.

 

[jfollows]

And here you have the problem. I fear that a lot of people who want the Conservatives out will look at things and say, “Oh, well, Labour are bound to get in, so I won’t bother to vote.” The result will be that Labour fail to take a number, possibly a decisive number, of seats. If you want the Conservatives out, vote for whichever party is the most likely to get them out.

Although my heart and my recent votes go towards Green, I will be voting Labour as they have the best chance of defeating the Conservatives in my completely altered constituency. I was thinking that if Labour had no chance, I would vote Green, but as they seem to have a chance, I will vote for them.

I’ve done similar to you; my recent votes go to LibDem but this time I’ve voted Labour (by post, already) and had a useful email exchange with the Labour candidate who is in with a chance of winning whereas the LibDem probably isn’t.
But of course everyone needs to make up their own mind - do what seems best for you in the end. Personally I’d prefer someone vote Reform over not voting at all, it’s a positive statement rather than a negative one. I’d spoil my ballot if I couldn’t vote for anyone.
And I’ve said before that the latest Tory tactics make me laugh; there is no Labour majority that would be too big for me.

 

[Snow1964]

4.5 weeks since election was called, just 1.5 weeks to go.
This is what has landed on my doormat so far

2 leaflets from existing Conservative MP both highlighting various things she had done in last few years, nothing about policies, and would only know which party by reading small print at end.

1 leaflet from Lib Dem promoting their candidate, and policies and mentioning Ed Davey

Nothing from Labour, Green, or Reform

Can only assume from this, that in my part of the world, Labour don't care, Green and Reform probably don't have resources, Conservative candidate is disowning her party, LibDems are making an effort.

So because of Labours apparent we don't care about your part of the country approach, nobody I know in this area wants them. (I should point out live close to boundary of 2 other constituenciesand Labour doesn't seem to be making any effort there either based on lack of boards, comments, local news).

 

[The Ham]

They have since deleted that tweet.

An embarrassing incident for Reform. They paid a vetting company a sum of money to vet their candidates, but the company seems to have not done any vetting.

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-06-18/reform-uk-leader-nigel-farage-questioned-about-vetting-of-party-candidates

Whilst the royal seeme large, the average cost of £360 per person isn't a lot, after you've allowed for DBS checks, maybe upto 4 hours of time to review social media posts isn't a lot - it'll probably take you longer than that to read just this year's worth of posts from a lot of people.

the only reason Reform is not going to win is because people are modifying votes at polling stations, and postal votes are all fake...

I suspect that quite a few of the votes FOR reform will be postal votes, given that there's a fairly good chance that they will be from older voters, so (like voter ID) getting rid of it has actually be bad for them.

Ours just rambles about stopping the boats on local Facebook forums. Even when it was pointed out to her that we're 150 miles from Dover (and, indeed, 70 miles from the sea in any direction) and people were far more concerned about the cost of living, the NHS and so on, she simply kept on drivelling on. When she posts now most of the reactions are the "laugh" emoji.

A political post recently got a similar response locally - only it was from the Tories. I suspect Reform would get even more derision locally.

I would hope people are voting strategically, and there are many websites that will tell you (and others) who that would be. Obviously he can vote however he wants, but that's the smartest move to effect change.

Usually the risk of dividing votes is with Labour, LibDems, Greens etc, but now of course the Tories have their own threat.

I have noticed that this week, the Tories are adopting a quite clever strategy of saying 'Sure, we're not going to form a Government, but you liked your local MP didn't you? S/He's done so much. So why not vote for him/her to continue helping you locally'. Many are removing any mention of being Tory from literature or their social media posts and suggesting they're now independent.

They obviously hope people will do that up and down the country and they'll win. It's an interesting strategy, and ultimately the best they have now given I can't see anything else working.

It also goes to show just how toxic the Tories have become, although it isn't the first time candidates have played down their party association.

I'm not sure that locally saying they helped would gain them much support, the one big local issue the MP didn't want anything to do with it.

I think the Greens have shot themselves in the foot by opposing new homes and nuclear power with the left

If they sold it as an aspiration to no longer need nuclear, I suspect that they'd have more support.

Their stance on HS2 wasn't helpful, again if they had sold it on looking to reduce the environment impact of HS2 it would have alienated fewer people.

 

[nw1]

4.5 weeks since election was called, just 1.5 weeks to go.
This is what has landed on my doormat so far

2 leaflets from existing Conservative MP both highlighting various things she had done in last few years, nothing about policies, and would only know which party by reading small print at end.

1 leaflet from Lib Dem promoting their candidate, and policies and mentioning Ed Davey

Nothing from Labour, Green, or Reform

Can only assume from this, that in my part of the world, Labour don't care, Green and Reform probably don't have resources, Conservative candidate is disowning her party, LibDems are making an effort.

So because of Labours apparent we don't care about your part of the country approach, nobody I know in this area wants them. (

Or, a very sensible realisation that Labour won't win in your area, so they are focusing their resources elsewhere.

Essentially, it's an implicit instruction to Labour voters to vote Lib Dem to enable a Labour government. Very sensible, arguably - you have to "play" FPTP in order to get the outcome you want.

 

[brad465]

Firstly let me say I don’t like Nigel Farage. End of.

However I do think he’s being unfairly treated for his comments regarding Putin’s war with Ukraine. He has been criticised for suggesting the West "provoked" Russia's invasion of Ukraine by expanding the European Union and Nato military alliance eastwards. It should have been obvious to anyone with an iota of sense that Putin wouldn’t like this and ultimately would try to do something about it. Russia Putin is paranoid about its his security.

Fixed it for you.

Should it be illegal for a UK political party to stand for parliament if it's leader isn't elected by it's members? On asking that, I appreciate that you can stand as an unelected individual, such as Binface, which makes my suggestion problematic, but if Farage gets elected this is the first time and Ref have 3+ seats, to my knowledge, that a party with (say) more than there seats has an unelected leader?

Depending on quite how you’re defining that, none of Gordon Brown, Theresa May, or Rishi Sunak were elected by the wider membership of their parties.
I don’t think we should really be trying to regulate the internal workings of political parties like that. People can see what they’re being offered and can either vote for it or not.

I'd have it the other way round and ban political party members from electing leaders. One only needs to look at Corbyn, Johnson and Truss to see how the party membership is a more extreme group in comparison to their wider voter base. It should be down to the MPs of the party who should know better on the matter.

I think the Greens have shot themselves in the foot by opposing new homes and nuclear power with the left

And also acting as a magnet for the cranks disappointed with Labour's more moderate stance, which has led them to taking on candidates who it turns out have some reprehensible views (particularly on Israel-Gaza).

 

[AlterEgo]

If a good performance by Reform also keeps the more lunatic elements of the new Labour administration in check, that'll be an added bonus.

How voting for what we'll diplomatically call the populist right "keep Labour in check"? What do you think they'll think twice about with their 400+ seats, if Reform get four seats instead of one?

 

[sor]

If a good performance by Reform also keeps the more lunatic elements of the new Labour administration in check, that'll be an added bonus.

Couldn't you vote Lib Dem and achieve the same thing but without the Reform baggage? Especially if (somewhat distant) predictions of the Lib Dems obtaining enough seats to become the official opposition come to fruition

Whoever you vote for, it's worth pointing out that each vote gives them more taxpayer funding whether they win in your constituency or not. You're handing Reform a little bit of cash here should they get at least two MPs, or one MP and more than 150k votes for the party, either of which is likely.

 

[takno]

Whoever you vote for, it's worth pointing out that each vote gives them more taxpayer funding whether they win in your constituency or not. You're handing Reform a little bit of cash here should they get at least two MPs, or one MP and more than 150k votes for the party, either of which is likely.

That could prove handy. Maybe if they get enough votes Coutts will let big old man-of-the-people Nige have his platinum card back

 

[D1537]

Whoever you vote for, it's worth pointing out that each vote gives them more taxpayer funding whether they win in your constituency or not. You're handing Reform a little bit of cash here should they get at least two MPs, or one MP and more than 150k votes for the party, either of which is likely.

And Reform is a plc in which Farage holds the controlling shares, so you're effectively handing it to him.

 

[Gloster]

There is an argument that a number of voters are easily swayed by whoever they speak to or whatever comes through their letter box. There is therefore an advantage to getting your leaflets out after everybody else. A few years ago I read that a surprisingly high number of voters, somewhere in the high single figures, have either not decided or are wavering as to who to vote for when they arrive at the polling stations. Who grabs last wins.

 

[Darandio]

There is an argument that a number of voters are easily swayed by whoever they speak to or whatever comes through their letter box. There is therefore an advantage to getting your leaflets out after everybody else. A few years ago I read that a surprisingly high number of voters, somewhere in the high single figures, have either not decided or are wavering as to who to vote for when they arrive at the polling stations. Who grabs last wins.

In the days of only really seeing a bulletin at 6 & 10pm whilst having a daily paper delivered through your letterbox with yesterdays news I might agree. In a world with wall to wall coverage wherever you look I cannot see how mail shots can have anywhere near the influence they did previously.

 

[nw1]

And Reform is a plc in which Farage holds the controlling shares, so you're effectively handing it to him.

It's not actually a plc but it is a limited company.

REFORM 2025 LTD overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

REFORM 2025 LTD - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk

Just having visions of a future floated Reform UK plc mounting a hostile takeover of the Conservative Party:

"The Conservative Party Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Reform UK Group plc".

Unlikely to happen now as I think Farage has shot himself firmly in the foot with the Putin stuff. Mind you the Tories are also doing the same with the gambling shannanigans so not a lot of choice for those on the strong right wishing to vote for a "clean" party.

 

[Howardh]

There is an argument that a number of voters are easily swayed by whoever they speak to or whatever comes through their letter box. There is therefore an advantage to getting your leaflets out after everybody else. A few years ago I read that a surprisingly high number of voters, somewhere in the high single figures, have either not decided or are wavering as to who to vote for when they arrive at the polling stations. Who grabs last wins.

Does anyone, anywhere, read polling leaflets??!!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jun 2024 ==

It's not actually a plc but it is a limited company.

REFORM 2025 LTD overview - Find and update company information - GOV.UK

REFORM 2025 LTD - Free company information from Companies House including registered office address, filing history, accounts, annual return, officers, charges, business activity

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk

Just having visions of a future floated Reform UK plc mounting a hostile takeover of the Conservative Party:

"The Conservative Party Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reform UK plc".

Unlikely to happen now as I think Farage has shot himself firmly in the foot with the Putin stuff.

A VERY limited company!

Not that I even look at the Daily mail, but the front pages I've seen on Twitter show their venom is now turned to Farage. Using the excuse that he's in Putin's blood, but really probably because he, and his Brexit, have literally destroyed their (Tory) party.

So wonder how the Mail will get on when Farage wins his seat, defects to join the Tories, and he's put forward as их лидер sorry, their leader??

 

[Peter Mugridge]

A thought about Reform for those on here who know a lot about electoral law:

As they are a company, not a political party, is it even legal for them to field candidates for election to a political process...?

 

[AlterEgo]

Does anyone, anywhere, read polling leaflets??!!

For local elections I do, but for a national one generally not; I make up my mind fairly early.

 

[D1537]

A thought about Reform for those on here who know a lot about electoral law:

As they are a company, not a political party, is it even legal for them to field candidates for election to a political process...?

Yes, as long they are registered with the Electoral Commission as a political party (which they are), their internal organisation is irrelevant.

They also need to comply with the relevant parts of statute regarding political parties (which aren't onerous).

 

[JamesT]

Yes, as long they are registered with the Electoral Commission their internal organisation is irrelevant.

https://search.electoralcommission.org.uk/English/Registrations/PP7931 Is their registration with the Electoral Commission.

It seems very odd the amount of noise that’s made about Reform being structured as a company. Surely there’s enough in their policies to disagree with rather than something that’s essentially irrelevant?

I see similar nonsense coming from Scottish nationalists online as the registrations for the main parties are UK-wide, so therefore Scottish Labour/Conservative/LibDem aren’t “real parties”.

 

[AlterEgo]

It seems very odd the amount of noise that’s made about Reform being structured as a company. Surely there’s enough in their policies to disagree with rather than something that’s essentially irrelevant?

I think the suggestion is that the company structure is there to benefit Farage personally, but in any case their manifesto is offensive and calculated to make life harder for plenty of minority groups.

 

[D1537]

It seems very odd the amount of noise that’s made about Reform being structured as a company. Surely there’s enough in their policies to disagree with rather than something that’s essentially irrelevant?

I think the main objection is that they get people to pay them to "join" Reform UK, yet unlike the other political parties those "members" have no say over anything that happens in the party.

 

[JamesT]

I think the main objection is that they get people to pay them to "join" Reform UK, yet unlike the other political parties those "members" have no say over anything that happens in the party.

Other parties may give the illusion of control, but the leadership can normally get its way. If 50,000 suckers give Farage £25, isn’t that their problem?

 

[D6130]

unlike the other political parties those "members" have no say over anything that happens in the party.

Really? I thought that Liz Truss was voted-in as party leader - and therefore Prime Minister - by the members of the Tory party?

According to my wife - who is a member of the labour Party - they quite often have a say in what happens in that party too.