View Full Version : UK Election
culloty82
07/04/2010, 7:42 AM
Now that the UK election has been called, the result is still too close to call. All that seems certain is that the Tories look favourites to form a government, either on their own or with the Lib Dems (Con 40%, Lab 32, Lib Dems 17%). Things will tighten asthe weeks go by, with the Scots and Welsh nationalists and even the DUP possibly in the numbers mix.
dahamsta
07/04/2010, 9:37 AM
I hate the phrase "too close to call". Another invention of the modern media.
A coalition in the UK would be very unusual, their electoral system doesn't lend itself to coalitions. I'd be saddened to see the Lib Dems go into goverment with the Tories, although I wouldn't be all that surprised given the way those dolts Campbell and Clegg have taken the party.
shakermaker1982
07/04/2010, 10:55 AM
if the Tories get in I'd consider moving on.
The marginals appear to be going Tory from commentators I've heard. With first past the post, obviously the overall figures are less important.
I wouldn't say there's an expectation of real change either way in the UK, as was the expectation when Labour won in '97, so nothing that interesting to me to be honest. I actually wouldn't be surprised to see Brown pull it out of the fire a la Major in 1992 though.
saint dog
07/04/2010, 5:15 PM
were the uk due to have an election or was it just called on because the way things are ............leading to can we not do the same ???
This election was due yeah.
Am hoping the Lib Dems get into power, Labout have lost the plot and the Tories are evil mental cases.
were the uk due to have an election or was it just called on because the way things are ............leading to can we not do the same ???
Nah, they were due to. Only thing that had to be decided was the date. For one to be called here the it'd need either the greens to pull out, or FFail to call one. Not going to happen
I'd take a hung parliament.
None of the main parties are even remotely trustworthy at present, and all of them have policies in certain areas that I'd prefer they didn't implement. So, a nice fractious House of Commons will suit me fine.
The most likely result is a narrow Conservative win. Cameron appears to be inoffensive enough to enough people to win despite most people still not really being sure about the Tories in general. However, Labour are widely disliked after the last few years, Brown is variously viewed as ineffectual and uninspiring, and the Lib Dems will always suffer from third-party syndrome - "Nick who?". So a Tory win by a handful of seats is likely, but not necessarily my favoured outcome.
We had to have an election by May 6 at the latest. There was speculation that Brown would call one in 2007 when Labour were doing well in the polls, but he decided against it after the Tory Conference that year led to a significant bounce for them.
Also, yes, as dahamsta said, a hung parliament is quite unlikely usually, but is a realistic possibility this time. The Tories have a slight lead in the polls - just the circumstances which would force a hung parliament under our system.
dahamsta
07/04/2010, 9:37 PM
I would've loved to see the Lib Dems get in when Charlie was in charge, but not under the current idiot. Or the idiot before him.
culloty82
08/04/2010, 7:12 AM
Hopefully Brown will be able to hang on to power, but between Iraq and expenses, about the only guarantee of major change to the British system at this stage will be if he's forced to cut a deal with Clegg, even if like dahamsta says, they try to stand for everything and nothing. One of the bizarre stats of first-past-the-post means that if Labour lose the overall vote by +- 4%, they'll remain the largest party in terms of seats, which pretty much sums up the advantages of PR.
One of the bizarre stats of first-past-the-post means that if Labour lose the overall vote by +- 4%, they'll remain the largest party in terms of seats, which pretty much sums up the advantages of PR.
We've had a number of Governments where the power has essentially rested with small parties and independents - PR isn't the perfect system either.
dahamsta
08/04/2010, 12:26 PM
It can certainly be improved upon, but it's the best system available today.
Probably worth pointing out that Brown has been working on bringing PR to the UK.
It can certainly be improved upon, but it's the best system available today.
Probably. Of course we also have the effective gerrymander of our system by the two main parties with the preponderance of 3 and 4 seaters*.
*I realise that is contradictory to a certain extent on the point I was making about smaller parties holding power, but if we're going to have our system, we should at least try and get it as proportional as possible.
ArdeeBhoy
08/04/2010, 1:10 PM
I would've loved to see the Lib Dems get in when Charlie was in charge, but not under the current idiot. Or the idiot before him.
Ditto. But he wasn't overly popular with the voters.
To be honest though, it's not the leader who's important, but the policies. Theirs are the best of a bad bunch. Hopefully they can get a hung parliament if enough people vote against the Tories, so they can finally get PR.
Cymro
09/04/2010, 12:02 PM
Probably worth pointing out that Brown has been working on bringing PR to the UK.
I wasn't aware of that. What specifically has he done to effect reform? :confused:
dahamsta
09/04/2010, 12:09 PM
Nothing of substance as yet as far as I'm aware, but he has been talking about it positively, which I reckon is substantive coming from the leader of Labour and the PM>
culloty82
09/04/2010, 3:03 PM
No major developments expected in England until the debates, but the Northern parties are in full election mode. Fermanagh-South Tyrone is expected to go Unionist after the DUP and UUP agreed a joint candidate, South Antrim will be between UUP leader Reg Empey and veteran Bible-thumper Willie McCrea, while Paisley Jnr faces a battle in North Antrim from die-hard Jim Allister. The only real drama in nationalist areas will be in South Down, where the new SDLP leader Margaret Ritchie is expected to edge out Sinn Fein's Catriona Ruane.
shantykelly
09/04/2010, 3:17 PM
john hume was shouting at mark durkan on the banks of the foyle today during a photo op. apparently the local mp for the area was spending too long on the phone.
Gather round
11/04/2010, 3:59 PM
Things will tighten asthe weeks go by, with the Scots and Welsh nationalists and even the DUP possibly in the numbers mix
If the largest party (probably Conservatives) fail to get 325 seats for an overall majority, most likely they'd look to do a deal as you suggest. Both the NI unionst and Scotland/Wales nationalist blocs are likely to get 11 or 12 seats, of course Sinn Fein will abstain as ever and I'd expect the SDLP to stay neutral on this issue. The LibDems usually lose support when Conservatives revive, so Clegg & co may lose 25 of their 60 odd seats. I reckon Cameron would prefer to deal with the unionists, although given their limited numbers his working majority might still be very small.
One of the bizarre stats of first-past-the-post means that if Labour lose the overall vote by +- 4%, they'll remain the largest party in terms of seats, which pretty much sums up the advantages of PR
One of the main reasons for this is that the electorate tends to be smaller in Labour areas (inner cities, old industrial towns) than in Conservative (suburban and countryside), so it takes fewer voters to elect each Labour MP. In turn the discrepancy is largely caused by people in poorer urban areas being more transient and less likely to register.
the Northern parties are in full election mode. Fermanagh-South Tyrone is expected to go Unionist after the DUP and UUP agreed a joint candidate...the only real drama in nationalist areas will be in South Down, where the new SDLP leader Margaret Ritchie is expected to edge out Sinn Fein's Catriona Ruane
Of the 18 NI constituencies, 17 currently have an MP reflecting the relative local strength of unionists and nationalists. The exception is South Belfast, which will probably also revert to unionist. So it could be 12-6 overall. The breakdown in F/ST is about 53-47 in nationlists' favor.
Also, yes, as dahamsta said, a hung parliament is quite unlikely usually, but is a realistic possibility this time. The Tories have a slight lead in the polls - just the circumstances which would force a hung parliament under our system
William Hill are saying a 13/8 chance (ie about 35%).
I would've loved to see the Lib Dems get in when Charlie was in charge, but not under the current idiot. Or the idiot before him
Why do you think Clegg and Campbell are particularly idiotic compared with Kennedy?
It can certainly be improved upon, but it's the best system available today...Probably worth pointing out that Brown has been working on bringing PR to the UK
The STV system works well for you (and locally for us in NI), I'd much prefer we used it across Britain. Brown's only real suggested change to the system until the last month or so has been for an alternative vote system. This at least means any winning candidate has to get 50% of the vote, but it isn't proportional.
if we're going to have our system, we should at least try and get it as proportional as possible
If we ever adopt STV nationwide, the constituencies should all be roughly the same size (in population, not geographical area). Ideally five seaters, with each constituency replacing six or seven of the current ones, to give us 500 MPs. A quota of 17% would mean the 'big three' parties should have an MP in pretty much all the English constituencies. Nationalists and unionists would remain localised as now while smaller parties (UKIP, BNP, Greens etc.) would, by concentrating on their strong areas, be able to get a bit more than they do now.
To give even more proprtionality, I'd have a wholly directly elected upper house, so unlike both our Lords and your senate. With a single constituency and open lists, so if the Green Party (say) got 3% of the vote nationally, they'd get 3% of its members. There might be an advantage in not tying these members (senators?) to geographical seats.
Poor Student
11/04/2010, 5:53 PM
I still think Gildernew might scrape Fermanagh South Tyrone. The move to put forward a Unionist unity candidate might galvanise the nationalist vote around Sinn Fein. The SDLP have ran Tommy Gallagher every time since 1992 until now and McKinney might not be able to retain the support base from his work over the last couple of decades. The Alliance are also running for the first time since 1997 although it's hard to guess how many votes they'll take off both sides. Connor will be the favourite but I don't think it's a dead cert.
culloty82
11/04/2010, 6:26 PM
Much thanks to Gather round for his post - covered everything fairly comprehensively. Lots of sites around that turn polls into predictions, when you put today's figures (40, 32, 18) into a swingometer, you get the following:
Tories 314
Labour 266
Lib Dems 39
Others (including NI) 31
Cameron would probably rather avoid the regional parties, but if this was the final result, they'd be his easier route to becoming PM.
Lads, one local dynamic. I work in the IFSC which employs 9,000 people directly and thousands more in indirect employment. Forget the stereotype - this is a huge employment sector for normal people.
The EU have introduced a proposed Directive, the AIFM (Alternative Investment Fund Managers), which is, quite frankly, idiotic. It would make it immeasurably more difficult for US fund managers to do business in Europe - good old fashioned protectionism.
Anyway, the Tories are talking up opposition to this thing while the current Labour government is weak. There is now a serious rump of IFSC types praying for a Tory government
Oooh fund managers think about a party with a liberal attitude to financial regulation. Controversial....
Angus
12/04/2010, 11:03 AM
Oooh fund managers think about a party with a liberal attitude to financial regulation. Controversial....
Yes, good point - but if those fund managers, admittedly with a conflict of interest, decide to not do business in Ireland, then we can wave bye bye to 5 or 6 thousand jobs
OneRedArmy
12/04/2010, 11:20 AM
Lads, one local dynamic. I work in the IFSC which employs 9,000 people directly and thousands more in indirect employment. Forget the stereotype - this is a huge employment sector for normal people.
The EU have introduced a proposed Directive, the AIFM (Alternative Investment Fund Managers), which is, quite frankly, idiotic. It would make it immeasurably more difficult for US fund managers to do business in Europe - good old fashioned protectionism.
Anyway, the Tories are talking up opposition to this thing while the current Labour government is weak. There is now a serious rump of IFSC types praying for a Tory governmentWhilst the Directive isn't perfect the status quo isn't acceptable. I would imagine you would struggle to argue hedge funds have on balance been a force for good in the last 5 years?
Personally, if I was running a fund administrator in the IFSC I'd be welcoming legislation to try to improve Ireland's reputation as a financial Wild West.
Anyway, I digress... Getting back to the political angle, Tories being close to big finance, who'd have thunk it?
Angus
12/04/2010, 12:56 PM
Whilst the Directive isn't perfect the status quo isn't acceptable. I would imagine you would struggle to argue hedge funds have on balance been a force for good in the last 5 years?
Personally, if I was running a fund administrator in the IFSC I'd be welcoming legislation to try to improve Ireland's reputation as a financial Wild West.
Anyway, I digress... Getting back to the political angle, Tories being close to big finance, who'd have thunk it?
In fact, yes I would argue that they are broadly positive. The one exception, and it is an exception, being the excessive manipulation of short sellers. Acknowledging that there are market abuses on the way up as well as the way down, on the way down, they are particularly exacerbated.
The flip argument being that short sellers actually keep companies honest. But we digress - I would argue that there is nothing wrong with the status quo. Investors into hedge funds are by and large, large institutions or professional investors, who are supposed to be able to run due diligence.
The small private investors is generally restricted from investing. And for years, those professional investors have had the option of a "regulated" fund, in ireland or Luxembourg, and have voted with their feet to the Caribbean.
Of the many many many things broken in the financial world, this is not one of them
ps - you are right on the last point. More regulation in our financial world generally is a good thing, as the environment is crazy - but in this space, where the people we are protecting do not want it, and are specifically supposed to be professionals and have minimum investments of $10m +, I am struggling to worry about them. However, I am clearly in favour of protecting folks who are, for example, desperate to get their first home and need protection from aggressive lenders etc
culloty82
13/04/2010, 7:38 AM
Scotland could well play a key role after the election, Labour as always will finish miles ahead of the others, but the SNP have been running the Scottish Parliament for three years and have set a target of 20 MPs. In the likely event of a hung parliament, their main demand will be a referendum on Scottish independence, and while only a third of people would be likely to say Yes, the Scots are entitled to decide on the issue for themselves.
Gather round
13/04/2010, 9:52 AM
Much thanks to Gather round for his post - covered everything fairly comprehensively
Thanks- you're far too kind :)
Cameron would probably rather avoid the regional parties, but if this was the final result, they'd be his easier route to becoming PMI wouldn't call them 'regional' parties down Edinburgh or Cardiff way, the locals might be upset. The (10 or 11) Ulster unionists would do Cameron if he was just short. Unlike SNP and PC, they're all broadly conservative, and unlike the LibDems they wouldn't insist on influence over wider policy.
the SNP have been running the Scottish Parliament for three years and have set a target of 20 MPs
They're likely to win only 9-12.
In the likely event of a hung parliamentIt isn't that likely- the bookies say only a 35% chance.
Den Perry
15/04/2010, 1:59 PM
Are the BNP still gaining in popularity?
culloty82
15/04/2010, 2:53 PM
With the FPTP system, they're unlikely to win a seat. Nick Griffin, their leader, was on BBC News running for a seat in Yorkshire, but like with UKIP, the far-right voters tend to drift back to the Tories for general elections. Will be interesting tomorrow to hear reaction to the debate, a good performance from Brown should see Labour get within striking distance, while the Lib Dems will get credit for sharing airtime with the big two, so by Monday could be back to the 3-5 percent gap that was seen at the start of the week.
dantheman
15/04/2010, 5:35 PM
My predictions FWIW!
Northern Ireland:
Lagan Valley (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/alv.htm)
DUP hold by 4000-5000 (safest DUp seat)
East Antrim (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/aea.htm)
DUP hold by 3000-4000
East Londonderry (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/ael.htm)
North Belfast (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/anb.htm)
Strangford (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/astr.htm)
Upper Bann (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/aub.htm)
North Antrim (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/ana.htm)
DUP hold by 1000-2000
East Belfast (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/aeb.htm)
South Belfast (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/asb.htm)
UUP gain by under 1000
South Antrim (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/asa.htm)
UUP gain by 1000-2000
North Down (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/and.htm)
Fermanagh and South Tyrone (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/afst.htm)
Independent Unionists by 1000-2000
Foyle (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/afoy.htm)SDLP hold by 2000-3000
South Down (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/asd.htm)
SDLP hold by 8000+ (ruane not popular)
West Belfast (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/awb.htm)
Mid Ulster (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/amu.htm)
Newry and Armagh (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/ananda.htm)
West Tyrone (http://www.ark.ac.uk/elections/awt.htm)
SF hold by 7000+
UK:
Tory + Lib Dem coalition government (all independents discarded)
Didn't get to see last nights debate, but a three way debate seemed to work based on the reports. If the opinion polls here stay as they are, surely our "debate" has to include Gilmore too? Maybe we could even have an independent chair next time too, who actually stops the incumbent shouting down the other speaker(s)!
culloty82
16/04/2010, 7:55 AM
Pretty much agree about the North, except I'll go for McDonnell to hold South Belfast.
In something of a surprise result, Nick Clegg was declared the winner of the first debate - he communicated his message well, but at times looked nervous and repeated himself. As for the real contenders, Brown was solid but not spectacular, stuck to facts and landed a few verbal digs, whereas Cameron was wooden, had no great ideas and didn't manage to score many points during the 90 minutes. The momentum seems to be slipping away from him, so I'd say put your money on a Labour-Lib Dem coalition.
Betfair had a chart up last night showing how their market went during the debate. Conservatives slipped considerably, Labour went up. Lib Dem total seats went up a fair bit too
bennocelt
16/04/2010, 9:27 AM
Looked at about 40 mins of it and I did think Clegg was on top. But what is with all the references to people they have met on the street, etc..........................
Looked at about 40 mins of it and I did think Clegg was on top. But what is with all the references to people they have met on the street, etc..........................
Joe the plumber all over again?
endabob1
16/04/2010, 11:30 AM
http://www.votematch.org.uk/2010/
I did mine and it matched my voting preference last time out, no longer living in the UK but it's still an interesting tool.
Pauro 76
16/04/2010, 12:36 PM
And a lot of mention of their families too....
bennocelt
16/04/2010, 12:58 PM
I am a UKIP voter!!!!!
Aberdonian Stu
16/04/2010, 1:19 PM
I've watched about half of it (watching now on YouTube). From the opening half it's Clegg by a distance, Brown comfortably in second with Cameron a poor third. I'm quite surprised Cameron agreed to three debates, he would know from his generally not great performances in the Commons that this is an aspect of an election contest he's not very good at.
Predator
16/04/2010, 5:50 PM
Watched it live and I think Clegg triumphed solely on how he conducted himself. It seems like he made the most effort to engage - addressing the crowd and closely paying attention to the other speakers.
He didn't even have to do much to be fair. He just had to sit back and let Brown and Cameron bicker.
It was funny seeing Cameron mimic Clegg's approach of addressing the individuals in the crowd personally, the chameleon
culloty82
17/04/2010, 7:25 AM
Lib Dems second
Of course, this will only be a one-day wonder, and the other parties will gang up to crush Clegg, but for 24 hours at least, it's a genuine three-way contest:
Tories 33%
Lib Dems 30%
Labour 28%
Naturally, because Labour come last, they're the largest party:
Labour 263
Tories 254
Lib Dems 101
Cymro
17/04/2010, 11:39 PM
The Daily Mail (of all papers) reporting that the Lib Dems are - get this - in the lead, with 32%; the Tories have 31% and Labour 28%. What a crazy result, that would never have happened without the debate.
It'll probably change before the election, but is already highlighting the inherent unfairness in the system here because that result would still leave them about 150 seats behind Labour, who would emerge as the biggest party despite having the third-highest vote share. :doh:
I would've loved to see the Lib Dems get in when Charlie was in charge, but not under the current idiot. Or the idiot before him.
Nick's still an idiot then? :p
dahamsta
18/04/2010, 2:09 AM
Nick's still an idiot then? :p
Yes. Although he probably doesn't put any credence in what the Daily Mail says.
thischarmingman
18/04/2010, 3:52 PM
Yes. Although he probably doesn't put any credence in what the Daily Mail says.
Continuing it's tradition of classy reporting, here's the Mail today: The United Nations of Nick Clegg (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1266826/The-United-Nations-Nick-Clegg.html).
Joking aside, that's a nasty, creepy little article.
dahamsta
18/04/2010, 6:27 PM
I read the first paragraph, remembered where I was, and have spent the intervening period trying to figure out why I clicked it in the first place.
The Lib Dems are polling well because Clegg has moved the party towards the center, period. In a bad way. Funny that, it sounds familiar...
culloty82
18/04/2010, 7:31 PM
Even YouGov (which is rated the most reliable) is putting the Libs first now, but I'd say the Mail piece will be tame compared to what follows. The next debate's on foreign affairs, and since being pro-EU and anti-nuclear weapons won't go down well in Middle England, expect the Tories to regain a five-point lead, Labour to improve and LD to fall back to around 25%.
I am struggling to get enthusiastic about the Lib Dems. Everything we know from previous elections is that the LD's poll well early but then enough people get buyers remorse to vote for the "safe" option. He didn't win the debate - he won the battle of relative expectations
A very long way to go
ArdeeBhoy
18/04/2010, 11:00 PM
If the largest party (probably Conservatives) fail to get 325 seats for an overall majority, most likely they'd look to do a deal as you suggest. I reckon Cameron would prefer to deal with the unionists, although given their limited numbers his working majority might still be very small.
Yeah, the unionists in bed with the Tories;as bigoted, paranoid, arrogant and detached from reality as each other.....
But could see that right enough.
On the current polling figures the likely outcome would be that the Lib dems would be in a coalition with Labour, able to extract a lot of concessions because of their 100+ seats. Clegg hasn't really moved the party towards the centre in my view - they're still quite leftist on a lot of issues, and their headline support for tax reform, scrapping tuition fees and homosexual marriage (as opposed to civil partnership) would sit better with Labour than the Tories.
That said, current figures are likely to change. I'd be surprised if the Lib Dems retained their current ratings throughout the campaign. Also, at the death, people will go with their instincts and so a lot of people are likely to switch at the last minute back ot Labour or the Tories.
A good result for the Lib Dems would be to establish themselves as serious contenders, even if that means finishing third. 25%+ of the vote would still be a good result considering that they usually poll no more than 21%.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.