General Election 2017: The Results and Aftermath

[SS4]

It's amazing what you can get away with when you have buddies controlling the flow of a vast amount of information.

Media regulation and PR now!

 

[me123]

It's also worth remembering that even this tally of 32 SNP seats was almost unthinkable ten years ago. The SNP have won in Scotland and have secured their second-best ever result at a General Election.

Make that three years ago. It was only 2015 when the SNP made any significant gains in Westminster, and that was on the back of an independence referendum and was clearly always going to be a bit of a fluke result that was unrepeatable. Obviously they'd have hoped for much better, but losses were inevitable. Ultimately, they are still potentially electable in every single Scottish seat, so they are certainly still strong, albeit nowhere near as powerful as before. A lot of the margins are very narrow, so an early election could see some of the blue returned to yellow. Stirling could easily flip back if the Tories lose confidence and I think some of the North East seats, albeit taken with reasonably comfortable majorities, could do likewise.

Reflecting on Mrs May's speech - she said very little about our new government (or anything else for that matter). That's pretty concerning. We don't really know the nature of the deal with the DUP. We don't really know what's going to happen. Political transparency at its finest.

 

[Domh245]

Let me put some of the current Labour Party euphoria into perspective, now that their leader Jeremy Corbyn has stated that his party were the winners of the 2017 General Election despite gaining a few seats more than they did in the 2010 General Election (I will be kindly ignoring their disastrous 2015 General Election performance).

In the 1997 General Election, when the Labour Party fought to gain power from their then existing seats total of 271, they actually gained 147 seats to reach a total of 418 seats.

So, how does the current Labour seat total of 262 (including the Kensington seat) that falls well short of the required 326 seat total even remotely compare with the excellent 1997 General Election result which saw the Labour Party come into power?

Your defense of Mrs May is admirable, but the fact that she lost seats in an election she called when she had a double digit lead in the polls, in an attempt to increase the number of seats she had, cannot be seen as a win in any shape or form. She may well have won the most seats but she has categorically lost the battle she was fighting.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well, I'm sure they'll answer yours if you answer theirs.

I asked the original question, which both chose NOT to answer.

Is this a Corbynesque ploy?

 

[backontrack]

Let me put some of the current Labour Party euphoria into perspective, now that their leader Jeremy Corbyn has stated that his party were the winners of the 2017 General Election despite gaining a few seats more than they did in the 2010 General Election (I will be kindly ignoring their disastrous 2015 General Election performance).

In the 1997 General Election, when the Labour Party fought to gain power from their then existing seats total of 271, they actually gained 147 seats to reach a total of 418 seats.

So, how does the current Labour seat total of 262 (including the Kensington seat) that falls well short of the required 326 seat total even remotely compare with the excellent 1997 General Election result which saw the Labour Party come into power?

Am I trying to compare this result to 1997?

No. I am trying to compare this result to the Tories' result. There is no point in saying that Labour lost purely because they haven't matched their outstanding result in 1997.

Your attempt at putting Labour down has actually sunk to the point where your reference point is a Labour election landslide. Surely it's time to give up the game?

Or, if we are comparing past results, than Labour's share of the vote - which I believe was the thing I was talking about in the first place - has now risen to a level higher than those at the 2001 and 2005 elections.

Labour has not got a 418 seat landslide. But guess what? Neither has the Conservatives, who now need to be propped up by DUP climate change sceptics. So I think it's untruthful to write this off as a Labour loss.

 

[backontrack]

I asked the original question, which both chose NOT to answer.

Is this a Corbynesque ploy?

Corbynesque ploy? This gets better and better.

You know why Corbyn did well in this election?

It's because he answered questions. Theresa May's answer every time was 'strong and stable, strong and stable, coalition of chaos'. She didn't answer anything. That's why so many seats recorded a swing from the Conservatives to Labour.

Watching you try to pursue your rabid love of Conservatism is getting hysterical. I actually responded to your opening question...could you talk to us about the DUP, please?

Your defense of Mrs May is admirable, but the fact that she lost seats in an election she called when she had a double digit lead in the polls, in an attempt to increase the number of seats she had, cannot be seen as a win in any shape or form. She may well have won the most seats but she has categorically lost the battle she was fighting.

Agreed. You can't just throw away a majority. Weak and wobbly leadership.

 

[backontrack]

Make that three years ago. It was only 2015 when the SNP made any significant gains in Westminster, and that was on the back of an independence referendum and was clearly always going to be a bit of a fluke result that was unrepeatable. Obviously they'd have hoped for much better, but losses were inevitable. Ultimately, they are still potentially electable in every single Scottish seat, so they are certainly still strong, albeit nowhere near as powerful as before. A lot of the margins are very narrow, so an early election could see some of the blue returned to yellow. Stirling could easily flip back if the Tories lose confidence and I think some of the North East seats, albeit taken with reasonably comfortable majorities, could do likewise.

Reflecting on Mrs May's speech - she said very little about our new government (or anything else for that matter). That's pretty concerning. We don't really know the nature of the deal with the DUP. We don't really know what's going to happen. Political transparency at its finest.

Brussels will be keen to make the Brexit negotiations absolutely transparent. There will be nowhere for Theresa May to hide.

*slightly off-topic klaxon honks, pointing out that there's another thread for the EU negotiations*

 

[Tetchytyke]

I asked the original question, which both chose NOT to answer.

Try again.

Knowing what you know now about the DUP, are you going to criticise Theresa May for being propped up by terrorists and terrorist sympathisers?

I invite these good people to explain why the Conservative Party still managed to secure 44 per cent of the total vote.

Take your pick from FPTP and the fact the country is polarised, etc etc.

PS It's actually 42.3%, and there are barely 800,000 votes between the Tories and Labour. I'd recommend you don't play the popular vote game, given that the popular vote for Labour+SNP is more than the popular vote for the Tories. And add in the 2,300,000 votes for the Lib Dems...

 

[DarloRich]

Neither increased Labour shares of the vote in both these constituencies were enough to gain them the seats.

not quite but impressive nonetheless. They are now in the potentially winnable category when the next election comes, perhaps in a few months.

Let me put some of the current Labour Party euphoria into perspective, now that their leader Jeremy Corbyn has stated that his party were the winners of the 2017 General Election despite gaining a few seats more than they did in the 2010 General Election (I will be kindly ignoring their disastrous 2015 General Election performance).

In the 1997 General Election, when the Labour Party fought to gain power from their then existing seats total of 271, they actually gained 147 seats to reach a total of 418 seats.

So, how does the current Labour seat total of 262 (including the Kensington seat) that falls well short of the required 326 seat total even remotely compare with the excellent 1997 General Election result which saw the Labour Party come into power?

it doesn't - but the performance of Corbyn led Labour in this election has been impressive. Even I, a staunch critic of Corbyn, will admit he has surprised me and has delivered a very good performance and delivered more seats and a higher share of the vote than I ever felt possible. I was wrong about him. Very wrong.

May was terrible out on the campaign trail and looked out of her depth. She ran a campaign of self harm rather than the procession she should have enjoyed. The dementia tax was the turning point. Who at Tory HQ signed that off?

 

[Polarbear]

Let me put some of the current Labour Party euphoria into perspective, now that their leader Jeremy Corbyn has stated that his party were the winners of the 2017 General Election despite gaining a few seats more than they did in the 2010 General Election (I will be kindly ignoring their disastrous 2015 General Election performance).

In the 1997 General Election, when the Labour Party fought to gain power from their then existing seats total of 271, they actually gained 147 seats to reach a total of 418 seats.

So, how does the current Labour seat total of 262 (including the Kensington seat) that falls well short of the required 326 seat total even remotely compare with the excellent 1997 General Election result which saw the Labour Party come into power?

I think the fairest answer is - it doesn't compare terribly well. They certainly haven't won the election, though I suspect many Labour supports will see a moral victory having been gained.

Labour have, however, done a lot better in this election than anyone (including myself) expected them to at the start of the campaign.

I think DarloRich has summed it up a little more eloquently that I have.

 

[SS4]

When you consider that the only reason May called this election was to increase her own majority one has to consider it a defeat for her.

 

[Darandio]

Looking at some of the postings that seem to be dismissive of all things Conservative in this General Election, I invite these good people to explain why the Conservative Party still managed to secure 44 per cent of the total vote.

Because in March this was expected to be at least 48% and rising, with absolutely huge majorities being talked about, they were going to set Labour back decades apparently.

She then turned into an absolute buffoon, becoming increasingly arrogant and has made constant u-turns and told lies. Now we are left with a government propped up by a party actively backed by terrorists.

Please tell me how any of this can be spun into a positive thing for the Tories?

 

[AlterEgo]

I asked the original question, which both chose NOT to answer.

Is this a Corbynesque ploy?

Perhaps now you'll understand how daft it was when people kept asking Corbyn non sequiturs about the IRA (which was a Long Time Ago, not Today).

Your usual tactic of avoid and deflect isn't faring too well this time. You'd have been better off keeping as quiet as you did during the campaign.

 

[Dave1987]

Your defense of Mrs May is admirable, but the fact that she lost seats in an election she called when she had a double digit lead in the polls, in an attempt to increase the number of seats she had, cannot be seen as a win in any shape or form. She may well have won the most seats but she has categorically lost the battle she was fighting.

Very much so! Its interesting seeing those who supported May so devotedly before trying to spin this. She had a small working majority before the election and had no reason to call the election what so ever. She eyed a chance and took a massive gamble to increase her majority. It's backfired big time! She now doesn't have a majority and will rely on DUP. Many of her own MPs look deeply uncomfortable at the prospect of being in a defacto coalition with the DUP. It's her fault plain and simple. Her only possible saving grace is that the EU give her a very good deal in the Brexit negotiations. But judging by her language before the election that is highly unlikely. May gambled and lost.

 

[Darandio]

Wonder what the odds are of Farage being UKIP leader in a few weeks? :roll:

Nailed on surely?

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

- but the performance of Corbyn led Labour in this election has been impressive. Even I, a staunch critic of Corbyn, will admit he has surprised me and has delivered a very good performance and delivered more seats and a higher share of the vote than I ever felt possible. I was wrong about him. Very wrong.

I've almost got a tear in my eye reading that from you! Chwarae Teg/Fair Play!Yes, of course,he has put in an excellent performance, and one of the many interesting outcomes from this election will be how all those Labour MP's whose marginal seats he saved from a supposed meltdown will treat him in Parliament.

 

[DarloRich]

Wonder what the odds are of Farage being UKIP leader in a few weeks? :roll:

hasn't that ship sailed? They have been destroyed as a party but have delivered their key aim: Brexit.

 

[Darandio]

hasn't that ship sailed? They have been destroyed as a party but have delivered their key aim: Brexit.

I suppose it depends on what you read into what he said this morning.

 

[DarloRich]

I've almost got a tear in my eye reading that from you! Chwarae Teg/Fair Play!Yes, of course,he has put in an excellent performance, and one of the many interesting outcomes from this election will be how all those Labour MP's whose marginal seats he saved from a supposed meltdown will treat him in Parliament.

no idea although he is secure in his position as a result of this performance. Corbyn also needs to extend the olive branch, include centrists in a serious shadow cabinet and try to make sure some of the rifts stay sealed shut. Everyone needs to do this now.

 

[DarloRich]

I suppose it depends on what you read into what he said this morning.

they have no MP's and their share of the vote is now tiny. They even lost their safe Question Time south seat. They are pointless.

Farage should stick to his fake TV demagogy

 

[AlterEgo]

no idea although he is secure in his position as a result of this performance. Corbyn also needs to extend the olive branch, include centrists in a serious shadow cabinet and try to make sure some of the rifts stay sealed shut. Everyone needs to do this now.

If Corbyn appoints a moderate shadow cabinet and gets a little further away than Momentum and other shady bodies then he can certainly have my vote next time around.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Knowing of the RMT espousement of the "Leave" scenario at the time of the referendum and their commitment to the TUSC political party, how many candidates did TUSC field in the 2017 General Election and what was the average TUSC candidate percentage of vote in those constituencies?

As a result of this election, how does the matter of rail nationalisation now seem to stand.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

no idea although he is secure in his position as a result of this performance. Corbyn also needs to extend the olive branch, include centrists in a serious shadow cabinet and try to make sure some of the rifts stay sealed shut. Everyone needs to do this now.

My memory may be faulty but my understanding was that the olive branch was there but the vast number of Labour MP's refused to accept it. It is gratifying to see some of his strongest critics in the party changing their tone. But yes, there has to be some give and take, but also the briefings against him from Central Party organisation needs to stop. The party did seem to unite around a very good manifesto and that must continue.

 

[backontrack]

Kensington

Labour gain

Absolutely extraordinary.

That concludes the 650 Westminster seats.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If Corbyn appoints a moderate shadow cabinet and gets a little further away than Momentum and other shady bodies then he can certainly have my vote next time around.

Do you honestly feel that Momentum will allow this particular aspiration to see the light of day, as Momentum will now see total justification for their "party within a party" scenario,

 

[GusB]

Kensington

Labour gain

Absolutely extraordinary.

That concludes the 650 Westminster seats, although we don't know about the Isle of Man yet and how that area voted.

The Isle of Man is not part of the UK!

 

[backontrack]

Knowing of the RMT espousement of the "Leave" scenario at the time of the referendum and their commitment to the TUSC political party, how many candidates did TUSC field in the 2017 General Election and what was the average TUSC candidate percentage of vote in those constituencies?

As a result of this election, how does the matter of rail nationalisation now seem to stand.

Polls indicate that a majority of each political party's supporters want our railways renationalised, though only Labour and the Green Party offer this in their manifestos.

Around 75% of UKIP supporters want to renationalise the railways, despite the leadership being very opposed to this.

 

[backontrack]

Do you honestly feel that Momentum will allow this particular aspiration to see the light of day, as Momentum will now see total justification for their "party within a party" scenario,

What do you think about Theresa May getting the backing of climate change sceptics and dangerous loyalists?

 

[Tetchytyke]

The Isle of Man is not part of the UK!

Though it's a shame, as the Tynwald members (even though abortion is still illegal on the island) seem more sane than the Tories...

 

[northwichcat]

Knowing of the RMT espousement of the "Leave" scenario at the time of the referendum and their commitment to the TUSC political party, how many candidates did TUSC field in the 2017 General Election and what was the average TUSC candidate percentage of vote in those constituencies?

As a result of this election, how does the matter of rail nationalisation now seem to stand.

I thought the TUSC decided not to field candidates against Labour whilst Corbyn is in charge under normal circumstances. Given the TUSC didn't even try to field a candidate against 'Red Tory' John Woodcock did they even field any candidates?