RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Talking of facing two ways at once alongside the idea the Lib Dems could do some damage in the south west amuses when the Lib Dems in the south west are so often a very different party to the one you'd find in Richmond

Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.

Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:
Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.

Given an election right now, they're a single-issue party, just the same as the B(N)P. That 24% vote share has nothing to do with policies or personalities, but simply because they are the Remain party.

A friend of mine noted on seeing this poll that this kind of thing has a tendency to snowball with FPtP - if the Lib Dems are seen as credible, they'll rise higher in the polls, and thus become more likely challengers in more constituencies, which then makes them more credible and more likely to get votes. They could peel away a lot of the Labour vote if people think they could win in their constituency.

It could be a bloody mess if they end up with 100+ MPs, all facing different directions.

Puja

Maybe they're single issue, but if you're wondering where the 20% or so of Lib Dems who'd vote for Brexit are to be found you'd probably start looking in Cornwall. The good news is the more they rise in profile the more they'll get scrutinised

Mellsblue wrote:

Digby wrote:

Mellsblue wrote: Is this not true of all parties once you get above a certain % of the electorate? It’s why the Cons have been so enduring and why Blair was so successful, being everything to just enough people. Brexit, as divisive as it is, now makes that impossible.

Blair and the Tories do that with one message. The Lib Dems, and I say this as a long time member and supporter, as a consequence of being a much smaller party, being far less scrutinised, and despite their name not always worrying about democracy have run essentially entirely different campaigns/manifestos at times.

Can’t say I agree. It’s not possible to get enough of the electorate by giving one message. You need to be a broad church and need a broad range of policies, well targeted, to achieve this.
Using your examples. Blair had relaxed with extreme wealth as long as they pay their (not particularly high) taxes mixed with a larger state, amongst other stuff. Cameron had austerity mixed with min wage (rebadged) and liberal stuff (hug a hoody, legalise gay marriage).

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:cough...no idea what this means, can Which and Mells get together and agree please
https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

I don't know that your link has worked properly. Are you referencing this?



In which case, may I suggest this analysis as proof of what a shitty system FPtP is:



Farage might like to arrantly threaten violence in the streets, but I think there very much might be if Brexit gets 22% of the vote for 4 seats, especially with Lib Dems getting 70-odd for 24%.

Puja

Digby wrote:I remain unconcerned they've failed. if nobody was even trying that would worry me more, and I don't want nobody else to try. One merely hopes the next bunch, which might include some of the same people, do a better job of it.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:cough...no idea what this means, can Which and Mells get together and agree please
https://britainelects.com/polling/westminster/

I don't know that your link has worked properly. Are you referencing this?



In which case, may I suggest this analysis as proof of what a shitty system FPtP is:



Farage might like to arrantly threaten violence in the streets, but I think there very much might be if Brexit gets 22% of the vote for 4 seats, especially with Lib Dems getting 70-odd for 24%.

Puja

A shitty system indeed, and the one which has given us Brexit. Not completely convinced about those numbers though. Although I'm sure fptp will give the Tories and Labour a grotesquely disproportionate number of MPs, Brexit would do quite a bit better than 4. That website produces numbers from a swingometer but that's difficult to do if the party didn't exist last time.

Puja wrote:Change UK are now back down to 5 MPs, as Heidi Allen, Chukka Umunna, Sarah Wollaston, Angela Smith, Luciana Berger, and Gavin Shuker have quit the party. No news on where they're going, but I would imagine to be independents as I doubt their previous homes would have them back.

Great job changing British politics for the better! Well done!

Puja

Stom wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote:

Puja wrote:
I don't know that your link has worked properly. Are you referencing this?

In which case, may I suggest this analysis as proof of what a shitty system FPtP is:

Farage might like to arrantly threaten violence in the streets, but I think there very much might be if Brexit gets 22% of the vote for 4 seats, especially with Lib Dems getting 70-odd for 24%.

Puja

A shitty system indeed, and the one which has given us Brexit. Not completely convinced about those numbers though. Although I'm sure fptp will give the Tories and Labour a grotesquely disproportionate number of MPs, Brexit would do quite a bit better than 4. That website produces numbers from a swingometer but that's difficult to do if the party didn't exist last time.

Not sure, they don't seem to have localised support like the main parties do, instead it's a bit of a countrywide spread, which won't give results in the constituent based fptp we use.

If it weren't for the gerrymandering, Hungary's system would be quite good, I think.

Puja wrote:Change UK are now back down to 5 MPs, as Heidi Allen, Chukka Umunna, Sarah Wollaston, Angela Smith, Luciana Berger, and Gavin Shuker have quit the party. No news on where they're going, but I would imagine to be independents as I doubt their previous homes would have them back.

Great job changing British politics for the better! Well done!

Puja

Digby wrote:Boris is loud but with nothing to actually say, Raab is more Brexity than Brexit, and Gove is a coke fiend. Anyone surprised?

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:Boris is loud but with nothing to actually say, Raab is more Brexity than Brexit, and Gove is a coke fiend. Anyone surprised?

Boris is just a showman. Sadly that will probably be enough to win him the election as the membership (and MPs) will believe that he has enough personality to blitz Corbyn.

I like Rory Stewart, but its feel a bit early for him.

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:Boris is loud but with nothing to actually say, Raab is more Brexity than Brexit, and Gove is a coke fiend. Anyone surprised?

Boris is just a showman. Sadly that will probably be enough to win him the election as the membership (and MPs) will believe that he has enough personality to blitz Corbyn.

I like Rory Stewart, but its feel a bit early for him.

I quite like Stewart too, but he was conveniently moved from the job at Prisons before he'd have had to resign for failing, and he's hardly proving gaffe proof now. Still, Boris is Trumpesque on the gaffe front and a well know consumer of drugs into the bargain, and he's doing sadly all too well

Boris vs Jeremy, it's enough to turn one to drink had I not already started for the day

Digby wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Digby wrote:Boris is loud but with nothing to actually say, Raab is more Brexity than Brexit, and Gove is a coke fiend. Anyone surprised?

Boris is just a showman. Sadly that will probably be enough to win him the election as the membership (and MPs) will believe that he has enough personality to blitz Corbyn.

I like Rory Stewart, but its feel a bit early for him.

I quite like Stewart too, but he was conveniently moved from the job at Prisons before he'd have had to resign for failing, and he's hardly proving gaffe proof now. Still, Boris is Trumpesque on the gaffe front and a well know consumer of drugs into the bargain, and he's doing sadly all too well

Boris vs Jeremy, it's enough to turn one to drink had I not already started for the day

Puja wrote:Boris has doubled down on his plan of a tax break for high earners by saying it would be funded with an increase in NI contributions. Literally taking from the poor to give to the rich - one can only stand up and applaud the bald honesty of the position.

Puja

Puja wrote:Boris has doubled down on his plan of a tax break for high earners by saying it would be funded with an increase in NI contributions. Literally taking from the poor to give to the rich - one can only stand up and applaud the bald honesty of the position.

Puja

Labour will mount a fresh bid to seize control of the Commons agenda to prevent the next Tory prime minister forcing through a no-deal Brexit.

The cross-party bid, led by Jeremy Corbyn, would see opposition MPs hijack the parliamentary timetable on 25 June, allowing them to introduce legislation to prevent the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal.

It comes amid mounting fears a new Tory leader could try to force through a no-deal Brexit on 31 October, with several contenders vowing to leave on that date, with or without a deal.

Dominic Raab, the ex-Brexit secretary, provoked outrage when he mooted suspending parliament to prevent MPs from blocking Brexit.

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:Boris has doubled down on his plan of a tax break for high earners by saying it would be funded with an increase in NI contributions. Literally taking from the poor to give to the rich - one can only stand up and applaud the bald honesty of the position.

Puja

and also fcks over Scotland (who can set own tax rates but not NI). I've never seen a party so utterly out of touch and sense.

Puja wrote:

Banquo wrote:

Puja wrote:Boris has doubled down on his plan of a tax break for high earners by saying it would be funded with an increase in NI contributions. Literally taking from the poor to give to the rich - one can only stand up and applaud the bald honesty of the position.

Puja

and also fcks over Scotland (who can set own tax rates but not NI). I've never seen a party so utterly out of touch and sense.

It's classic Boris though, isn't it? It's a beautiful promise to the Tory membership (many of whom will be on large pensions and thus will benefit from the tax cut without having to pay NI), but once he's won, he'll put it off as a job for after Brexit and it'll be quietly forgotten about (or put to a vote which it won't win and he'll say he tried his best). Come an election, he'll be peddling whatever truth he needs to win that selection of voters, with previous promises all left in the past.

Puja