When Will It All Go Wrong For The Tories/ Johnson?

[takno]

English voters will take one look at a possible Labour SNP coalition and quite rightly ask how much is this going to cost us this time. It's utterly toxic to English voters and having the poisonous Nicola Sturgeon as their leader doesn't help

There's never been a Labour/SNP coalition, so I don't think they'd be likely to think anything ending in "this time".

I can't see any evidence at all that the SNP are problematic for English voters. Any concerns about Ed Milliband's coalition of chaos they had in 2015 will perhaps have been tempered by the realisation that in avoiding it we ended up with 5 years of hellish turmoil, bad government and bad opposition and 2 general elections.

Meanwhile I don't see any evidence that Scottish independence is particularly unpopular with English voters, and indeed many of them will have noticed that Brexit has resulted in the entire UK economy taking as bad a hit as Scotland would have suffered from independence. Most of England suffers far more inconvenience from the harder border with the EU than they ever would from barbed wire at the Berwick border anyway.

 

[D854_Tiger]

This is really worrying if what you're claiming is true - but what about all those people in Tiverton who have claimed they would normally vote Tory but did not due to Johnson?

I sincerely hope Johnson does not win the next election as it will suggest, to me, that much of the electorate is still convinced Brexit has saved their lives and/or is still following the personality cult of Johnson - so much so that they are prepared to overlook Johnson's arrogance, self-importance, lying and hypocrisy. The sooner people see this man for who he is, and stop the "Ooh! he's such a character!" or "Ooh! he's the messiah because he got Brexit done" nonsense, the better.

I really hope the UK is not taking a one-way road towards deeply entrenched conservatism and isolationism.

Tiverton will still vote for Johnson, they might hold their noses as they do, but, push come to shove, they will not risk a Labour government. This sort of LD by-election thing has happened before, in the case of John Major, less than four months before a GE he eventually won.

I've always suspected BREXIT will turn out to be largely economically neutral, obviously some disruption till things bed in.

The real problem for Remainers with BREXIT is not that we flourish because of it (we probably won't) but that the EU by comparison let's them down in the meantime. The eurozone is now back in deep trouble, the figures don't lie, they simply let too many nations join that never should have been allowed to, for political reasons.

Decisions around currency should always be driven by an economic narrative not an ideological one.

As for deeply entrenched conservatism and isolationism, welcome to England, we have a long history of it but then so do many nations, some of them even in the EU.

Indeed, if you want to add chauvinism to that list we could start talking about the Fren ....... sorry arm wavers who employ the Gallic shrug, most of whom just got elected into the F****h parliament.

 

[jfollows]

I've always suspected BREXIT will turn out to be largely economically neutral, obviously some disruption till things bed in.

I couldn't disagree with you more, but that's OK, this is a forum for people to express their views. I strongly believe that leaving the EU is massively deleterious for the UK economy and has massive negative impact on most of the UK population. But we are where we are, in my opinion we need to make the best of a bad job, and I don't see Brexit as being a major electoral issue in the near future. Longer term, when we rejoin the EU under significantly worse terms than those we had before we left it, it will be an electoral issue, but that's probably not going to happen in my lifetime (I'm 60).

 

[D854_Tiger]

I can't see any evidence at all that the SNP are problematic for English voters. Any concerns about Ed Milliband's coalition of chaos they had in 2015 will perhaps have been tempered by the realisation that in avoiding it we ended up with 5 years of hellish turmoil, bad government and bad opposition and 2 general elections.

Meanwhile I don't see any evidence that Scottish independence is particularly unpopular with English voters, and indeed many of them will have noticed that Brexit has resulted in the entire UK economy taking as bad a hit as Scotland would have suffered from independence. Most of England suffers far more inconvenience from the harder border with the EU than they ever would from barbed wire at the Berwick border anyway.

That's the problem an awful lot of English voters would just like the Scots to stop winging and go away.

I personally would have a serious issue with a control freak like Sturgeon having any say over my life.

Minimum price alcohol for example, I'm all grown up now, how much I drink (which isn't a lot) is my business and no one else's and certainly not Nanny Nicola's.

Some of these people seriously need to go on a Freedom and Democracy Awareness Course.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jun 2022 ==

I couldn't disagree with you more, but that's OK, this is a forum for people to express their views. I strongly believe that leaving the EU is massively deleterious for the UK economy and has massive negative impact on most of the UK population. But we are where we are, in my opinion we need to make the best of a bad job, and I don't see Brexit as being a major electoral issue in the near future. Longer term, when we rejoin the EU under significantly worse terms than those we had before we left it, it will be an electoral issue, but that's probably not going to happen in my lifetime (I'm 60).

I was actually quite sad when we left and almost felt guilty when Donald Tusk gave his farewell speech.

But I still believe it had to happen.

The question I keep asking is what could the EU have done to stop us leaving, it wouldn't have taken that much.

I actually blame the EU's intransigence for us leaving, never was so much lost for the want of so little, and suspect that kind of unrelenting (rules based system) intransigence will prove to be a very poor fit with democracies eventually.

 

[Berliner]

I always laugh when people get scared of a fictitious SNP+Labour pact/coalition. Anyone who pays the slightest bit of attention to politics will know Scottish Labour absolutely loathe the SNP and if any such event was to become a reality, would have an absolute fit at the prospect. The Labour party in Scotland actively form pacts with the Tories to keep the SNP out of councils and consistently vote along the same lines in Holyrood. Where this idea comes from that the SNP even want to run Westminster is beyond me. They want out of it! At the very very most you might see the SNP backing some major Labour policy in exchange for more, permant powers for Holyrood, especially concerning immigration or referendum holding, but that's it. Nicola Sturgeon has no desire whatsoever to run England or dictate your lives.

As for the SNP or Nicola being "poisonous"...that may be your opinion. Most of my English relatives wish they had someone like her in England and most would vote for an "ENP" if such a thing existed. A left-of-centre, civic nationalist, progressive party which puts Englan first, but not in a way which is to the detriment of the rest of the UK. England is lacking one. All the parties in England talk about "The UK" or "Britain". None focus purely on England, which is a massive glaring hole in English politics.

 

[brad465]

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

The Tories are only four points behind in the polls, that's unprecedented for a midterm government, normally you would expect the government of day to be fifteen points behind at least. Cameron certainly was 15 points behind Miliband and Thatcher was 22 points behind Kinnock at one stage.

OK Labour won Wakefield but that was unloseable, what matters is the rather small margin by which they took it no comfort there for Labour.

Forget Tiverton, most of those LD votes would return to the Tories in a GE, they always do.

Then remember all the **** is heading towards the Tories at the moment, through no fault of their own they've had a torrid time, that luck will change, so if Labour can't make any headway against Johnson now, I'm guessing they never will.

These are not normal political times though; tribalism is much more rife than it used to be, so supporters of a given party put their head in the sand when one of their own politicians is in hot water, or if a scandal is serious enough they might decide to abstain. In the US election, while Trump lost, the change in vote share in key swing states was not large, despite all of Trump's scandals/gaffes.

 

[317 forever]

The simple answer is that it was the British electorate who voted in the said referendum whose votes decided the issue. Though looking at exterior exhortations, how many times would you have seen both the "Johnson" brexiteers and the RMT union both stating their preferences for "leave".

In terms of Brexit or pro-Europeanism, politics is something of a horse-shoe. The more centre-ground you are, the more likely you are to be pro-Europe. Conversely, the further you go either left or right, the more likely you are to be ro-Brexit.

 

[windingroad]

That's the problem an awful lot of English voters would just like the Scots to stop winging and go away.

Honestly I think most (though not all, before everyone starts citing exceptions) of the people who feel that way are unlikely to vote Labour regardless, so I doubt it would have a major effect on their electability. People somewhere between the centre and the left (ie. the spectrum of possible Labour voters) are usually fairly relaxed about the SNP, unless the union is their overriding concern.

 

[317 forever]

I wonder if Errol Flynn had similar problems in his heyday? Did Robert Maxwell regard "common decency" as an attribute?

Something to cheer up all you Labour Party supporters on the thread is that the Labour Party still proudly holds the record for most by-elections lost in a single day, these being three in number on 28th May 1968, when they lost Acton, Dudley and Meriden....all to the Conservatives..

That was actually a day that went on to be momentous in Australian history. It was the day Kylie Minogue was born.

 

[The Ham]

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

The Tories are only four points behind in the polls, that's unprecedented for a midterm government, normally you would expect the government of day to be fifteen points behind at least. Cameron certainly was 15 points behind Miliband and Thatcher was 22 points behind Kinnock at one stage.

OK Labour won Wakefield but that was unloseable, what matters is the rather small margin by which they took it no comfort there for Labour.

Forget Tiverton, most of those LD votes would return to the Tories in a GE, they always do.

Then remember all the **** is heading towards the Tories at the moment, through no fault of their own they've had a torrid time, that luck will change, so if Labour can't make any headway against Johnson now, I'm guessing they never will.

The cost of living crisis is transitory, caused by Covid and the Ukraine war, we all just found out the hard way that you can lock down economies in a day but starting them up again is a different matter.

The war has had a bad effect on gas and oil prices but that's mostly market panic, there are no actual supply problems, the oil price is now dropping and a little later expect the gas price to follow. The UK is actually awash with gas at the moment it's only a matter of time before that filters through.

In 2015 in the local elections 75% of my ward voted Tory, 2022 that fell to 45% with the Lib Dems getting 40%.

That's in a seat where in 2019 there was a 20,000 majority for the Tory candidate.

As such it's unlikely to switch, however there's the possibility that several others could.

Whilst the percentage points difference in the polls may not be all that large it can cause some noticeable shifts.

For instance this poll has Labour about 6.5% ahead:

Latest UK Opinion Polls - The Result Of A General Election Today

An assessment of what the latest opinion polls would mean if a UK General Election was called today.

www.politics.co.uk

However if you look at the table of seats Labour gain 93 with the Lib Dems gaining 16 with the Tories losing 111.

Whilst it may well be that the Tories turn things around for the general election, many of the reasons for disliking the Tories are beyond policy.

There's an interesting poll here:

Electoral Pact Poll May 2022

It looks at the result is there was a Lib Dems/Labour/Greens pact it could result in the following:

Tories 101 seats
Labour 393 seats
Lib Dems 77 seats
Greens 17 seats

Tactical voting may not result in the same outcome, however I think that it could show a larger swing than traditionally would be expected with the same sort of vote share.

 

[Busaholic]

Apparently not, or at least not attributably (is that a word?) but it's a good sentiment and one I agree with.
EDIT As a person I like to have a plan, so for example for my finances and spending, and indeed for voting in the next election, but I also know that the plan will change in the light of changing circumstances. So I plan to buy a replacement car in October 2024, but maybe I won't, but probably will.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jun 2022 ==

Dr Paul Samuelson uttered the words ''when events change, I change my mind'' in a TV interview following his award of a Nobel Laureateship for Economics in 1970, a transcript of which appeared in a learned journal. He queered the pitch for himself somewhat in later years by saying the same thing and suggesting that Keynes may have said it first, which indeed he might have done in academic discourse which never got into print!

 

[Luke McDonnell]

s showed there is a significant anything but Boris vote.

Voters then vote tactically to support the most likely to win against his party, the evidence is there in share of the votes with those in third falling drastically.

If the public were to take an anything but Boris attitude into next general election, and vote tactically, Labour would gain the red wall back, and whole chunks of South and SW would go Lib

give up free NHS healthcare, join the euro (dysfunction on a stick) and, of course, risk the peace they now enjoy if hard line nutter unionists decide to play up.

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

The Tories are only four points behind in the polls, that's unprecedented for a midterm government, normally you would expect the government of day to be fifteen points behind at least. Cameron certainly was 15 points behind Miliband and Thatcher was 22 points behind Kinnock at one stage.

OK Labour won Wakefield but that was unloseable, what matters is the rather small margin by which they took it no comfort there for Labour.

Forget Tiverton, most of those LD votes would return to the Tories in a GE, they always do.

Then remember all the **** is heading towards the Tories at the moment, through no fault of their own they've had a torrid time, that luck will change, so if Labour can't make any headway against Johnson now, I'm guessing they never will.

The cost of living crisis is transitory, caused by Covid and the Ukraine war, we all just found out the hard way that you can lock down economies in a day but starting them up again is a different matter.

The war has had a bad effect on gas and oil prices but that's mostly market panic, there are no actual supply problems, the oil price is now dropping and a little later expect the gas price to follow. The UK is actually awash with gas at the moment it's only a matter of time before that filters through.

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

The Tories are only four points behind in the polls, that's unprecedented for a midterm government, normally you would expect the government of day to be fifteen points behind at least. Cameron certainly was 15 points behind Miliband and Thatcher was 22 points behind Kinnock at one stage.

OK Labour won Wakefield but that was unloseable, what matters is the rather small margin by which they took it no comfort there for Labour.

Forget Tiverton, most of those LD votes would return to the Tories in a GE, they always do.

Then remember all the **** is heading towards the Tories at the moment, through no fault of their own they've had a torrid time, that luck will change, so if Labour can't make any headway against Johnson now, I'm guessing they never will.

The cost of living crisis is transitory, caused by Covid and the Ukraine war, we all just found out the hard way that you can lock down economies in a day but starting them up again is a different matter.

The war has had a bad effect on gas and oil prices but that's mostly market panic, there are no actual supply problems, the oil price is now dropping and a little later expect the gas price to follow. The UK is actually awash with gas at the moment it's only a matter of time before that filters throug

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

The Tories are only four points behind in the polls, that's unprecedented for a midterm government, normally you would expect the government of day to be fifteen points behind at least. Cameron certainly was 15 points behind Miliband and Thatcher was 22 points behind Kinnock at one stage.

OK Labour won Wakefield but that was unloseable, what matters is the rather small margin by which they took it no comfort there for Labour.

Forget Tiverton, most of those LD votes would return to the Tories in a GE, they always do.

Then remember all the **** is heading towards the Tories at the moment, through no fault of their own they've had a torrid time, that luck will change, so if Labour can't make any headway against Johnson now, I'm guessing they never will.

The cost of living crisis is transitory, caused by Covid and the Ukraine war, we all just found out the hard way that you can lock down economies in a day but starting them up again is a different matter.

The war has had a bad effect on gas and oil prices but that's mostly market panic, there are no actual supply problems, the oil price is now dropping and a little later expect the gas price to follow. The UK is actually awash with gas at the moment it's only a matter of time before that filters through.

Hi,

Just responding to your quota claiming that Johnson/Tories could easily win the next election apparently no sitting Prime Minister has gone on to win an election after more than 10 years in government with the exception of John Major and presuming that the next general election is held on schedule in 2024 they would have been in government either in coalition or on there own for 14 years. If the Conservatives won again in 2024 and that government lasted another 5 years they would have been in power for longer than the Thatcher/Major era possibly the longest continuous period of Conservative rule since the early 19th Century before the Labour party was formed and possibly since the Great Reform Act - with all the problems and controversies surrounding Johnson and the tory party at the moment that would be pretty unprecedented - IMO the only way they would have a chance of another majority would be a more competent leader without the Partygate baggage e.g. Jeremy Hunt or Ben Wallace although Jeremy Hunt may not be acceptable to the Brexiteer wing of the party as he was a Remainer.

One of the reasons why I would not like to see another period of Tory rule is not just because of the issues with corruption and integrity etc it is also because I would not like to see our country become a de facto one party 'dominant' party system rather like Japan or Singapore - the latter has had the same party in government (PAP) since the 1950s! - surely Labour may not be perfect but we all should welcome a change and remember that even within a democratic system such a scenario were we only have a single viable ruling party would present issues e.g. it could encourage corruption/gerrymandering as if the party in power thinks it will never be defeated at the polls there will be little to deter then from engaging in corrupt practices outside say the judiciary and I believe corruption and authoritarianism has been a problem in the countries mentioned especially in Signapore which have some pretty draconian laws on corporal punishment and capital punishment etc. I don't believe we that we will see capital and judicial corporal punishment introduced in the UK (highly unlikely IMO) but I do fear that a future Tory government may attempt something like say effectively outlaw strikes in essential services like the railways especially considering the current climate where the majority of the population and more importantly Conservative voters are anti-strike. For these reasons we have to be aware of the dangers of one party being in government for too long and use of vote to ensure that these risks are mitigated.

 

[D854_Tiger]

That was actually a day that went on to be momentous in Australian history. It was the day Kylie Minogue was born.

Yes they lost three by elections in one day

In 2015 in the local elections 75% of my ward voted Tory, 2022 that fell to 45% with the Lib Dems getting 40%.

That's in a seat where in 2019 there was a 20,000 majority for the Tory candidate.

As such it's unlikely to switch, however there's the possibility that several others could.

Whilst the percentage points difference in the polls may not be all that large it can cause some noticeable shifts.

For instance this poll has Labour about 6.5% ahead:

Latest UK Opinion Polls - The Result Of A General Election Today

An assessment of what the latest opinion polls would mean if a UK General Election was called today.

www.politics.co.uk

However if you look at the table of seats Labour gain 93 with the Lib Dems gaining 16 with the Tories losing 111.

Whilst it may well be that the Tories turn things around for the general election, many of the reasons for disliking the Tories are beyond policy.

There's an interesting poll here:

Electoral Pact Poll May 2022

It looks at the result is there was a Lib Dems/Labour/Greens pact it could result in the following:

Tories 101 seats
Labour 393 seats
Lib Dems 77 seats
Greens 17 seats

Tactical voting may not result in the same outcome, however I think that it could show a larger swing than traditionally would be expected with the same sort of vote share.

I'm simply saying we have been here many times before, for the most part, reading anything into a by-election result or council election then translating that onto a GE result is no way to win at the bookies.

 

[317 forever]

There was speculation on this thread as to whether Boris would move to a safer seat. It would surely be unprecedented for a sitting Prime Minister to go on the chicken run like this.

A vacancy near London will be in Reigate & Banstead, where Crispin Blunt is standing down.

 

[dosxuk]

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

On the contrary - basically* all the polling done in 2022 shows a lead for both Labour in "if there was an election tomorrow who would you choose" and "which party do you trust to run the country most" questions, and in the "which of these [Boris / Starmer] do you see as the better leader" questions.

Most of the seat predictions done by the established polling companies predict the Tories to lose in the range of 110 seats, not enough to give Labour a majority, but enough to make them the largest party. Sure, we can just dismiss these polls as "they're just a poll, nobody asked me" but they are generally accurate, and if you look at the picture they are showing rather than the individual results they are all pointing towards Boris getting the boot.

*I can find evidence of only one recognised poll that doesn't put Labour in the lead, and that was a tie.

 

[skyhigh]

I'm simply saying we have been here many times before, for the most part, reading anything into a by-election result or council election then translating that onto a GE result is no way to win at the bookies.

I suggest you have a look at Electoral Calculus. Their previous predictions have been pretty much spot on. https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html

Current prediction (last updated 30th May, so before the by-elections) gave:
Conservative - 208
Labour - 319
Lib Dem - 16
Green - 1
SNP - 52

It's not exactly as if the Conservatives are currently in a 'good' position

 

[Kite159]

I noticed on Twitter this morning there was stories about Labour supporting a change of the voting system to Proportional Representation if they win the next election.

Is history repeating with the labour party of 1995-97 time saying the same things only to quietly ditch any plans when they won the election in 1997 as they knew with PR they wouldn't have gotten such a landslide?

 

[gabrielhj07]

I noticed on Twitter this morning there was stories about Labour supporting a change of the voting system to Proportional Representation if they win the next election.

Is history repeating with the labour party of 1995-97 time saying the same things only to quietly ditch any plans when they won the election in 1997 as they knew with PR they wouldn't have gotten such a landslide?

Presumably. No sane government will meddle with the system that put it in power.

 

[bspahh]

I suggest you have a look at Electoral Calculus. Their previous predictions have been pretty much spot on. https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html

Current prediction (last updated 30th May, so before the by-elections) gave:
Conservative - 208
Labour - 319
Lib Dem - 16
Green - 1
SNP - 52

It's not exactly as if the Conservatives are currently in a 'good' position

Prediction is hard, especially of the future. To predict the results of an election, you also have to predict whether Johnson will still be in power.

The betting markets are summarised at https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics At the moment, the Conservatives are slight favourites to have the most seats in the next election (10/11) over Labour (19/17).

The odds there are a balance between people with different views. They have the advantage, that if you really do know better than the market, and can see where the quoted odds are too generous, you can place a bet and make some money from your knowledge.

 

[edwin_m]

Presumably. No sane government will meddle with the system that put it in power.

They might if they realise that the next time it will put them out of power...

 

[gabrielhj07]

They might if they realise that the next time it will put them out of power...

I think they would ask the question, "How would the adoption of PR affect our chances of staying in power?" PR would almost certainly result in minority governments, and would therefore be a difficult sell to any government.

 

[brad465]

I noticed on Twitter this morning there was stories about Labour supporting a change of the voting system to Proportional Representation if they win the next election.

Is history repeating with the labour party of 1995-97 time saying the same things only to quietly ditch any plans when they won the election in 1997 as they knew with PR they wouldn't have gotten such a landslide?

If Labour managed to get a comfortable majority again then I can see them quietly ditching the plans. However if they needed support from other parties, particularly the Lib Dems (which I think is a more likely scenario), then they won't be dropping that proposal, as it's implementation will be a condition of Lib Dem/other party support for other policies.

I think it's also possible that Labour would be the lead partner in coalitions under PR far more often than the Tories, under current party alignment, as at the moment the Tories don't really have any friends (i.e. other parties who can support them in a coalition), but whether Labour are prepared to accept being in coalitions rather than going for majorities remains to be seen.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'm simply saying we have been here many times before, for the most part, reading anything into a by-election result or council election then translating that onto a GE result is no way to win at the bookies.

In certain wards in local elections, the Ratepayers always win the seat (Heald Green in Stockport being a notable example), but you would never see the Ratepayers as the next party of Government nationally....

 

[Busaholic]

There was speculation on this thread as to whether Boris would move to a safer seat. It would surely be unprecedented for a sitting Prime Minister to go on the chicken run like this.

A vacancy near London will be in Reigate & Banstead, where Crispin Blunt is standing down.

Labour MP Patrick Gordon Walker lost his seat at the 1964 General Election, which brought Labour back to power. Despite the loss of his seat, Harold Wilson bizarrely appointed him as Foreign Secretary,but this unusual situation was supposedly going to end when he was 'chosen' as candidate for the safe Labour seat at Leyton in a January 1965 by-election. The electorate, however, took umbrage at being taken for granted and refused in droves to vote for him, so he lost badly.. Wilson, not a reckless fool like Johnson, got the message and sacked him, and he had to wait until the 1966 General Election to get back as an MP.

So I'm trying to suggest that even True Blues in Surrey might baulk at automatically voting for Johnson, even if the Constituency Association hadn't imploded at being forced to have him as candidate.

 

[edwin_m]

I think they would ask the question, "How would the adoption of PR affect our chances of staying in power?" PR would almost certainly result in minority governments, and would therefore be a difficult sell to any government.

The penny needs to drop that it might reduce their chances of sole power, but it would increase their chances of having some share in power, and of keeping the Tories out. Under our current system we have a different sort of minority government - that's only supported by a minority of voters.

 

[nw1]

There's never been a Labour/SNP coalition, so I don't think they'd be likely to think anything ending in "this time".

I can't see any evidence at all that the SNP are problematic for English voters. Any concerns about Ed Milliband's coalition of chaos they had in 2015 will perhaps have been tempered by the realisation that in avoiding it we ended up with 5 years of hellish turmoil, bad government and bad opposition and 2 general elections.

Meanwhile I don't see any evidence that Scottish independence is particularly unpopular with English voters, and indeed many of them will have noticed that Brexit has resulted in the entire UK economy taking as bad a hit as Scotland would have suffered from independence. Most of England suffers far more inconvenience from the harder border with the EU than they ever would from barbed wire at the Berwick border anyway.

... and there will not be barbed wire at the Berwick border anyway. Neither the population of Scotland nor that of England would sanction a hard border if independence were to happen, and any government who tried to implement one would be out of power for a generation.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jun 2022 ==

The penny needs to drop that it might reduce their chances of sole power, but it would increase their chances of having some share in power, and of keeping the Tories out. Under our current system we have a different sort of minority government - that's only supported by a minority of voters.

Quite; essentially (to me, at least) the main division in British politics is between conservatism and progressivism.

Both Labour and the Lib Dems show (some) progressive tendencies while the current Conservatives show very little.

An alternative voting system would see the Lib Dems and Labour in coalition a lot of the time, and the Conservatives would have to adapt and return to the days of Major or (for all his faults) Cameron to be in with a chance of being in power frequently - as the other parties will not touch them with a bargepole unless they revert to how they were previously.

If there were two mainstream conservative parties (i.e not Farage and other extremist nonsense) in the same way that there are two progressive(ish) parties, we might have fairer results under FPTP as it would be more difficult for one of the conservative parties to achieve a majority. FPTP only (kind of) works in systems where the number of progressive parties equals the number of conservative parties. Ironically, the two party system in the USA tends to produce fairer results in some ways: Trump got considerably more US support in 2020 than Johnson did UK support in 2019, yet Trump was not re-elected in 2020.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jun 2022 ==

Hi,

Just responding to your quota claiming that Johnson/Tories could easily win the next election apparently no sitting Prime Minister has gone on to win an election after more than 10 years in government with the exception of John Major and presuming that the next general election is held on schedule in 2024 they would have been in government either in coalition or on there own for 14 years. If the Conservatives won again in 2024 and that government lasted another 5 years they would have been in power for longer than the Thatcher/Major era possibly the longest continuous period of Conservative rule since the early 19th Century before the Labour party was formed and possibly since the Great Reform Act - with all the problems and controversies surrounding Johnson and the tory party at the moment that would be pretty unprecedented - IMO the only way they would have a chance of another majority would be a more competent leader without the Partygate baggage e.g. Jeremy Hunt or Ben Wallace although Jeremy Hunt may not be acceptable to the Brexiteer wing of the party as he was a Remainer.

One of the reasons why I would not like to see another period of Tory rule is not just because of the issues with corruption and integrity etc it is also because I would not like to see our country become a de facto one party 'dominant' party system rather like Japan or Singapore - the latter has had the same party in government (PAP) since the 1950s! - surely Labour may not be perfect but we all should welcome a change and remember that even within a democratic system such a scenario were we only have a single viable ruling party would present issues e.g. it could encourage corruption/gerrymandering as if the party in power thinks it will never be defeated at the polls there will be little to deter then from engaging in corrupt practices outside say the judiciary and I believe corruption and authoritarianism has been a problem in the countries mentioned especially in Signapore which have some pretty draconian laws on corporal punishment and capital punishment etc. I don't believe we that we will see capital and judicial corporal punishment introduced in the UK (highly unlikely IMO) but I do fear that a future Tory government may attempt something like say effectively outlaw strikes in essential services like the railways especially considering the current climate where the majority of the population and more importantly Conservative voters are anti-strike. For these reasons we have to be aware of the dangers of one party being in government for too long and use of vote to ensure that these risks are mitigated.

A very good point. Any party continuously in power for 19 years is way too long and means that opponents of that party have had no say in how the country is run for almost two decades.

It is a byproduct of having a FPTP system with one mainstream conservative party and two mainstream progressive parties, which means the progressive vote is split whereas the conservative (small-c) vote is not.

If the Tories split into the Modern Tories (economically conservative but wishing to repair relations with the EU, socially relatively liberal) and the Hardline Tories (anti-EU, socially conservative, pro-capital-punishment) then we might have fairer results even under FPTP.

Thus, unless such a Tory split occurs I do agree that Labour should move towards an alternative voting system.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If Johnson had taken the consensus of opinion and had resigned after those two by-elections, you could well imagine the tabloids having a field-day with banner headline comments like "No Gumption", "We told you he had no backbone" etc etc etc

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Jun 2022 ==

A very good point. Any party continuously in power for 19 years is way too long and means that opponents of that party have had no say in how the country is run for almost two decades.

The Whig Party were continuously in power from September 1714 to May 1762, making that referred-to 19 years seem like "a short break".

I think that Sir Robert Walpole held the Head of State office continously for 20 years and 314 days.

So these days, matters have improved somewhat.

 

[Cloud Strife]

... and there will not be barbed wire at the Berwick border anyway. Neither the population of Scotland nor that of England would sanction a hard border if independence were to happen, and any government who tried to implement one would be out of power for a generation.

Actually, this is not by any means certain. The Scottish border is not as porous as the Irish one, and there are only around 20 road border crossings between the two. Most of them are very small and minor, so by my count, there would only be five major international border crossings. They would be on the M6, A7, A68, A697 and A1. The other ones would probably be EU + rUK only, and possibly only open from 5/6:00 until 22/23:00.

The major issue are the rail crossings, but the ECML at least could have border controls in Waverley, and the WCML in Glasgow, with Newcastle and Carlisle as the first/last stops accordingly.

So, I don't think a hard border is necessarily unrealistic in the long run. The question is whether there are benefits to Schengen that the current CTA doesn't provide, and whether or not the rUK would tolerate EU ID card holders having free access to Scotland in the same way that they have free access to the UK from Ireland.

 

[AM9]

So, I don't think a hard border is necessarily unrealistic in the long run. The question is whether there are benefits to Schengen that the current CTA doesn't provide, and whether or not the rUK would tolerate EU ID card holders having free access to Scotland in the same way that they have free access to the UK from Ireland.

I doubt the rUK 'tolerating' (or not) ID card holders would be an issue. There might be a lot of huffing and puffing, but given the current Government's commitment to border agreements it made less than 3 years ago, unless a Farage like uprising was staged, would it come to anything more than a lot of noise?.

 

[jfollows]

From Pippa Crerar of the Mirror via Twitter (https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/sta...s-johnson-tories-g7-government-latest-updates):

A Tory rebel MP says: "Boris treats the party likes he treats his women. He'll never leave us. But he'll lie to us and cheat on us until we eventually have to boot him out".