Rishi Sunak - Prime Minister
Discussion
Mr Penguin said:
S600BSB said:
England only. Assumes the position in Scotland and Wales is unchanged from the 2019 election. Scotland? No chance.
It says Labour 294, Con 242, LD 38,Others 66, leading to a hung parliament That's UK, not just England.
My prediction is that there will be a hung parliament with the Conservatives the largest party and another election in 2025, the second election being catastrophic for the Conservatives.
Mr Penguin said:
S600BSB said:
England only. Assumes the position in Scotland and Wales is unchanged from the 2019 election. Scotland? No chance.
It says Labour 294, Con 242, LD 38,Others 66, leading to a hung parliament That's UK, not just England.
My prediction is that there will be a hung parliament with the Conservatives the largest party and another election in 2025, the second election being catastrophic for the Conservatives.
“ This figure assumes also that votes for the nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales, places where no local elections took place, are unchanged from the previous election. The same condition applies to the 18 seats in Northern Ireland.”
carlo996 said:
Randy Winkman said:
Do you think there are any good reasons to not vote Tory?
Lots, but voting Labour just seems worse. I cannot stand Sunak, didn't vote for the lying POS Johnson, unlike vociferous stewie....who has memory loss?The turn out for these elections has been stated at <20% in some places, 20% FFS. It just shows the total apathy and absolute s
te we have to chose from. It's like a box of Quality Street and there's a lemon cream or a toffee left. I doubt the general election will be the same, they never are, and the Conservatives are done, but Labour will have a battle with the other loons in many areas. We require two, better three credible parties to vote for, but there is not one. That remains the issue.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Interesting projection from Sky.
Sky News projection: Labour on course to be largest party - but short of overall majority
That can't be right. PHers who are neither tribal nor in any way leaning towards Labour have spoken: Sky News projection: Labour on course to be largest party - but short of overall majority
"Labour will get a landslide victory"'
"Tories will be wiped out"
"electoral wipe out coming up"
"Labour have already won the next election"
Those are direct quotes. There's not much more to be said at this point as the future is unknown and punditry can be mistaken.
S600BSB said:
Mr Penguin said:
S600BSB said:
England only. Assumes the position in Scotland and Wales is unchanged from the 2019 election. Scotland? No chance.
It says Labour 294, Con 242, LD 38,Others 66, leading to a hung parliament That's UK, not just England.
My prediction is that there will be a hung parliament with the Conservatives the largest party and another election in 2025, the second election being catastrophic for the Conservatives.
“ This figure assumes also that votes for the nationalist parties in Scotland and Wales, places where no local elections took place, are unchanged from the previous election. The same condition applies to the 18 seats in Northern Ireland.”
carlo996 said:
p1stonhead said:
No one really gives a toss about local elections compared to the general.
State of multiple threads say otherwise The local nursery toddler group turned up a their usual spot (the village hall) on Thursday morning only to find it was a polling station.
This is a Tory own goal in the making for quite some years.
My concern is not a change to Labour. I am concerned by the lack of clarity, policies, etc. the truth is that no one really knows what Labour will do. They are being grey and evasive about it.
I don’t think they know either. I probably would vote Tory, even though they have been very poor for many years. Too many unknowns with Labour at the moment.
As for proportional representation? It’s the best way to ensure stagnation. What we have is better as it allows who ever is in power to actually apply some of their policies if the party is united. PR will result in forever coalition governments, weak and held ransom of fringe parties.
Anyway it is what it is. Labour is set to win, let’s hope for the best.
My concern is not a change to Labour. I am concerned by the lack of clarity, policies, etc. the truth is that no one really knows what Labour will do. They are being grey and evasive about it.
I don’t think they know either. I probably would vote Tory, even though they have been very poor for many years. Too many unknowns with Labour at the moment.
As for proportional representation? It’s the best way to ensure stagnation. What we have is better as it allows who ever is in power to actually apply some of their policies if the party is united. PR will result in forever coalition governments, weak and held ransom of fringe parties.
Anyway it is what it is. Labour is set to win, let’s hope for the best.
768 said:
The projection is for the UK, but it's based off the English local elections, there were none in Scotland, so it doesn't take into account changes there.
Well let's see. I would put this quite close to my upper bound for Labour with the only exception being if the Conservatives get rid of Rishi.For Labour to get a majority, they need 326.
If you assume that they get all 14 of the Conservative Welsh seats, they can get to 308.
There are 57 seats available in Scotland, they would need to gain 18 of them to sneak a majority. If they swept the board they would get 364 seats (majority of 80, similar to 2019 and 2005).
Obviously remove the speaker and Sinn Fein from that.
The last MRP poll (excluding don't knows but before Humza resigned) had Labour gaining 8 seats from the Welsh Tories and 27 from the SNP, so giving them 329 if you take the gains in Scotland and Wales as given.
I don't think it really matters if they do win a majority or not because the Lib Dems and SNP don't have a lot of choice but to give them a confidence and supply arrangement, so what is more important is how many the anti-Tory coalition get as a collective group.
CrgT16 said:
As for proportional representation? It’s the best way to ensure stagnation. What we have is better as it allows who ever is in power to actually apply some of their policies if the party is united. PR will result in forever coalition governments, weak and held ransom of fringe parties.
Better than being held to ransom than the loony fringes of their own parties ..smn159 said:
You'll be telling us that the loss of 500 odd councillors and a 25% share of the vote is a great victory next 
The assertion that tactical voters are less inclined in a GE is one of take issue with. Anyone motivated enough to bother voting at all in a local, let alone vote tactically is surely more inclined to turn up and go the same in a GE? I get the protest vote angle, but based on the turnout numbers I don’t think it stacks up. Anyway, though a good result for Labour they can’t take anything for granted, I’m certain the polls will tighten, not enough to see the Tories returned though.
Sway said:
Whoa there poppet.
I asked a genuine question - and you're creating strawmen all over the place. One thing I certainly didn't say is 'it's all above board'. I said the investigation didn't find any evidence of corruption.
I don't read the Eye, all I see is their social media, so asked for the info. As said, there was an investigation - why would they disregard evidence (and what was the evidence?)?
You've already been a bit of a fool on the post count thing - there's nothing different in my posting levels compared to yours overall, don't double down.
Poppet and strawman! I think the only fool with regard to post count is the busy one who actually bothered to conduct an audit. I simply said you’d been active on the Rayner thread, how you manage to accuse me of doubling down on a point that is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion is rather odd. Anyway, Angela bad I guess, bloke who enabled his mates to make a quick £50m no issue because I read the Daily Mail but not The Eye! Poppet. I asked a genuine question - and you're creating strawmen all over the place. One thing I certainly didn't say is 'it's all above board'. I said the investigation didn't find any evidence of corruption.
I don't read the Eye, all I see is their social media, so asked for the info. As said, there was an investigation - why would they disregard evidence (and what was the evidence?)?
You've already been a bit of a fool on the post count thing - there's nothing different in my posting levels compared to yours overall, don't double down.
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Interesting projection from Sky.
Sky News projection: Labour on course to be largest party - but short of overall majority
Im sure the news channels just make stuff up on the fly these days. Very little editorial control…Sky News projection: Labour on course to be largest party - but short of overall majority
Sky are also saying that Labour “lost votes” due to its policy on Gaza!
Jist explain to me how they lost votes when every single party was aligned on supporting Israel rather than Hamas in the wake of the attack.
So how did labour loose votes?
Would pro-hamas voters have voted elsewhere - if so for who and why?
Would they not have lost at least as many votes (maybe even more) as they gained by supporting Hamas’s actions?
Im not trying to give any opinion right or wrong on the conflict, simply questioing the statement by sky news that labout lost votes over their stance on gaza. I simply dont see how they could rationally conclude that labour actially lost votes….
Oh and the bbc are every bit as bad. Newsnoght last night grilled a tory MP over the expected rebellion if the Torys did badly. Today, after the bad results, it seems the revellion has backed down. They just make it up for sensationalist news and no thought to pause for the consequences of their dramatic reporting style.
Edited by AdamV12V on Friday 3rd May 21:50
Blue62 said:
Sway said:
Whoa there poppet.
I asked a genuine question - and you're creating strawmen all over the place. One thing I certainly didn't say is 'it's all above board'. I said the investigation didn't find any evidence of corruption.
I don't read the Eye, all I see is their social media, so asked for the info. As said, there was an investigation - why would they disregard evidence (and what was the evidence?)?
You've already been a bit of a fool on the post count thing - there's nothing different in my posting levels compared to yours overall, don't double down.
Poppet and strawman! I think the only fool with regard to post count is the busy one who actually bothered to conduct an audit. I simply said you’d been active on the Rayner thread, how you manage to accuse me of doubling down on a point that is pretty much irrelevant to the discussion is rather odd. Anyway, Angela bad I guess, bloke who enabled his mates to make a quick £50m no issue because I read the Daily Mail but not The Eye! Poppet. I asked a genuine question - and you're creating strawmen all over the place. One thing I certainly didn't say is 'it's all above board'. I said the investigation didn't find any evidence of corruption.
I don't read the Eye, all I see is their social media, so asked for the info. As said, there was an investigation - why would they disregard evidence (and what was the evidence?)?
You've already been a bit of a fool on the post count thing - there's nothing different in my posting levels compared to yours overall, don't double down.
I didn't realise the Eye was a court.
Why exactly is it that you're so unwilling to actually answer what are very reasonable questions into this?
Why didn't the independent investigation find anything? What does the Eye have that the investigation disregarded that's such a smoking gun?
I'm willing to be absolutely apoplectic if the freeport model has been hijacked for corruption - as it'll kill faith in the entire concept - but as it stands, you're writing a lot whilst just repeating a Labour MP's assertions.
Just to be clear, haven't read anything from the Mail that hasn't been linked from here in about 20 years.
Edited by Sway on Friday 3rd May 22:37
Sway said:
You kept repeating stuff about post counts on threads. It's the work of seconds to 'audit'...
I didn't realise the Eye was a court.
Why exactly is it that you're so unwilling to actually answer what are very reasonable questions into this?
Why didn't the independent investigation find anything? What does the Eye have that the investigation disregarded that's such a smoking gun?
I'm willing to be absolutely apoplectic if the freeport model has been hijacked for corruption - as it'll kill faith in the entire concept - but as it stands, you're writing a lot whilst just repeating a Labour MP's assertions.
Just to be clear, haven't read anything from the Mail that hasn't been linked from here in about 20 years.
Why don’t you just accept you’ve been active on the Rayner thread?I didn't realise the Eye was a court.
Why exactly is it that you're so unwilling to actually answer what are very reasonable questions into this?
Why didn't the independent investigation find anything? What does the Eye have that the investigation disregarded that's such a smoking gun?
I'm willing to be absolutely apoplectic if the freeport model has been hijacked for corruption - as it'll kill faith in the entire concept - but as it stands, you're writing a lot whilst just repeating a Labour MP's assertions.
Just to be clear, haven't read anything from the Mail that hasn't been linked from here in about 20 years.
Edited by Sway on Friday 3rd May 22:37
Why did you call me Poppet?
Why don’t you apply the same degree of critical thinking to Angela?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff