mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on May 25, 2018 11:59:13 GMT
True, though I don't think either were especially encouraging from a LibDem point of view...... Actually a 1% swing from Labour to Lib Dem in the Metro-Mayor result would have won it for us, as it would have put us in the run-off which we would have won (evidence from samples on the day). We would have won that quite easily if T May hadn't called the GE and completely changed the dynamic through the last 3 weeks. True, very true. Perhaps now having another Tory councillor will help focus your friend's mind for the squeeze next time around though... Many left of centre still see the LibDems as the 'Tories' little helpers' from the Coalition years and find little reason to support them just to defeat a Tory. I hope those people are enjoying the governments we've had since 2015. At some point, sane people have to swallow their pride and just admit that the Coalition was vastly better than the utter shower of shit we've had since. People still pretending that there was no difference are just embarrassing themselves now. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 25, 2018 12:33:46 GMT
True, though I don't think either were especially encouraging from a LibDem point of view...... Actually a 1% swing from Labour to Lib Dem in the Metro-Mayor result would have won it for us, as it would have put us in the run-off which we would have won (evidence from samples on the day). We would have won that quite easily if T May hadn't called the GE and completely changed the dynamic through the last 3 weeks. Many left of centre still see the LibDems as the 'Tories' little helpers' from the Coalition years and find little reason to support them just to defeat a Tory. I hope those people are enjoying the governments we've had since 2015. At some point, sane people have to swallow their pride and just admit that the Coalition was vastly better than the utter shower of shit we've had since. People still pretending that there was no difference are just embarrassing themselves now. Many would argue that May & Hammond are far more centrist in outlook than Cameron/Osborne/Clegg & Alexander proved to be in the Coalition years. The latter misread the economy disastrously back in 2010 and applied unnecessary deflation on account of their obsession with the National Debt and PSBR levels. At least there has been some movement in a Keynesian direction and some signs of Heseltinian-type intervention - including the return of parts of the rail network to public ownership. Despite that, Fiscal policy remains too tight and Monetary policy too loose. Nevertheless a paralysed Tory minority government is far preferable to what we had to suffer during the Coalition period. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on May 25, 2018 12:46:27 GMT
Many would argue that May & Hammond are far more centrist in outlook than Cameron/Osborne/Clegg & Alexander proved to be in the Coalition years.  May and Hammond have cranked up even deeper austerity even though the deficit is now 1/3 of what is was in 2010. Have you see what they;ve done to local government budgets in the last 2 years? You're just saying this bullshit to try to save face. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 25, 2018 12:48:44 GMT
Helpful amendment for you... Well, even that is arguably not insignificant. And I still get the coalition years cited quite often as a reason not to trust/vote for the LibDems. Yes, and I quite often meet people who cite Corbyn as the reason they are not voting Labour... (or even the Iraq war, but not very often these days!).
Where I come from we have a ward where the Lib Dems just came from losing 48% to 2.6% (approx) to Labour in the General election to winning 40% to 32%, with a non-incumbent candidate and against a Labour target campaign including visits from 7 shadow cabinet ministers. Lots of Labour general election voters switched to Lib Dem (and of course lots of Tories)...
The Lib Dems do have a big credibility problem, and perhaps quite a low ceiling amongst young graduates, but where they are seen as credible and facing the Tories the coalition effect is down below 5% now. An example would be Twickenham, where the Labour vote in 2010 was 7.7%, and in 2017 9.2% (11.5% in 2015).
Of course, all over the country the Lib Dems have lost loads of votes to both Labour and the Tories but it is the general perception of irrelevance that has done that, not primarily being "the Tories' little helpers"
|
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 25, 2018 12:52:27 GMT
Many would argue that May & Hammond are far more centrist in outlook than Cameron/Osborne/Clegg & Alexander proved to be in the Coalition years. May and Hammond have cranked up even deeper austerity even though the deficit is now 1/3 of what is was in 2010. Have you see what they;ve done to local government budgets in the last 2 years? You're just saying this bullshit to try to save face. Far from it! Even Osborne & Alexander were forced to ignore their own projections and targets in the end - and Hammond has continued to do that. Austerity simply aborted and significantly delayed the cyclical recovery under way in 2010. Without such deflation the PSBR would have fallen back more rapidly. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 25, 2018 12:56:59 GMT
Actually a 1% swing from Labour to Lib Dem in the Metro-Mayor result would have won it for us, as it would have put us in the run-off which we would have won (evidence from samples on the day). We would have won that quite easily if T May hadn't called the GE and completely changed the dynamic through the last 3 weeks. I hope those people are enjoying the governments we've had since 2015. At some point, sane people have to swallow their pride and just admit that the Coalition was vastly better than the utter shower of shit we've had since. People still pretending that there was no difference are just embarrassing themselves now. Many would argue that May & Hammond are far more centrist in outlook than Cameron/Osborne/Clegg & Alexander proved to be in the Coalition years. The latter misread the economy disastrously back in 2010 and applied unnecessary deflation on account of their obsession with the National Debt and PSBR levels. At least there has been some movement in a Keynesian direction and some signs of Heseltinian-type intervention - including the return of parts of the rail network to public ownership. Despite that, Fiscal policy remains too tight and Monetary policy too loose. Nevertheless a paralysed Tory minority government is far preferable to what we had to suffer during the Coalition period. Just to remind you what Labour would have done if they had won in 2010
At that time austerity was the consensus. Blaming the Lib Dems in particular for applying that consensus is perverse (although there are quite a few things you can blame the Lib Dems for in coalition, I agree)
|
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 25, 2018 12:57:54 GMT
Well, even that is arguably not insignificant. And I still get the coalition years cited quite often as a reason not to trust/vote for the LibDems. Yes, and I quite often meet people who cite Corbyn as the reason they are not voting Labour... (or even the Iraq war, but not very often these days!). Where I come from we have a ward where the Lib Dems just came from losing 48% to 2.6% (approx) to Labour in the General election to winning 40% to 32%, with a non-incumbent candidate and against a Labour target campaign including visits from 7 shadow cabinet ministers. Lots of Labour general election voters switched to Lib Dem (and of course lots of Tories)... The Lib Dems do have a big credibility problem, and perhaps quite a low ceiling amongst young graduates, but where they are seen as credible and facing the Tories the coalition effect is down below 5% now. An example would be Twickenham, where the Labour vote in 2010 was 7.7%, and in 2017 9.2% (11.5% in 2015). Of course, all over the country the Lib Dems have lost loads of votes to both Labour and the Tories but it is the general perception of irrelevance that has done that, not primarily being "the Tories' little helpers"
I have not been a Labour Party member for over 20 years and will be spoiling my ballot paper at the next election because I cannot support a candidate selected from a gender-vetted shortlist. No way would I consider voting LibDem - despite having done so in both 2001 and 2005 when Charles Kennedy was Leader. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 25, 2018 13:05:28 GMT
Many would argue that May & Hammond are far more centrist in outlook than Cameron/Osborne/Clegg & Alexander proved to be in the Coalition years. The latter misread the economy disastrously back in 2010 and applied unnecessary deflation on account of their obsession with the National Debt and PSBR levels. At least there has been some movement in a Keynesian direction and some signs of Heseltinian-type intervention - including the return of parts of the rail network to public ownership. Despite that, Fiscal policy remains too tight and Monetary policy too loose. Nevertheless a paralysed Tory minority government is far preferable to what we had to suffer during the Coalition period. Just to remind you what Labour would have done if they had won in 2010 At that time austerity was the consensus. Blaming the Lib Dems in particular for applying that consensus is perverse (although there are quite a few things you can blame the Lib Dems for in coalition, I agree)
Even Alasdair Darling's plans were too restrictive - though far less damaging than what the Coalition came up with. Moreover, the LibDems went back on the economic policies they had advocated throughout the 2010 election campaign - when they had been highly critical of Osborne's plans.In the end,though, they showed themselves very happy to give the Tories a helping hand - and went to great lengths to legitimise the Tory propaganda message that they were 'clearing up Labour's mess'.The majority of academic economists see that s having been a blatant lie! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2018 13:36:22 GMT
Many would argue that May & Hammond are far more centrist in outlook than Cameron/Osborne/Clegg & Alexander proved to be in the Coalition years. The latter misread the economy disastrously back in 2010 and applied unnecessary deflation on account of their obsession with the National Debt and PSBR levels. At least there has been some movement in a Keynesian direction and some signs of Heseltinian-type intervention - including the return of parts of the rail network to public ownership. Despite that, Fiscal policy remains too tight and Monetary policy too loose. Nevertheless a paralysed Tory minority government is far preferable to what we had to suffer during the Coalition period. Just to remind you what Labour would have done if they had won in 2010 At that time austerity was the consensus. Blaming the Lib Dems in particular for applying that consensus is perverse (although there are quite a few things you can blame the Lib Dems for in coalition, I agree)
Before the election the Lib Dems acknowledged the supposed "need" for public spending cuts but were committed to a significantly more cautious and slower programme than the Tories - whereas in government they signed up to the Tory timetable wholesale, including in year cuts for 2010-11 (fairly modest, but the symbolism was there). As for Labour, what they would actually have done in Government is an interesting counterfactual, but that sort of language from Darling was certainly not helpful to anything - and rather an indicator of how far gone Labour was at that time that they thought promising to be tougher than Thatcher was somehow good politics. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on May 25, 2018 15:33:22 GMT
Bristol, Westbury-on-Trym & Henleaze - Conservative gain from Liberal Democrat| Party | 2018 votes | 2018 share | since 2016 "top" | since 2016 "average" | Conservative | 2,900 | 42.3% | +2.9% | -0.1% | Liberal Democrat | 2,704 | 39.5% | +7.3% | +10.1% | Labour | 891 | 13.0% | -2.6% | -2.8% | Green | 355 | 5.2% | -7.6% | -7.2% | Total votes | 6,850 |
| 67% | 80% |
Swing Conservative to Liberal Democrat 2¼% / 5% since 2016 The average vote share methods shows that actually this was really quite a good result, but the Lib Dems were just coming from too far behind to win (hold). |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on May 25, 2018 15:34:30 GMT
I {...} will be spoiling my ballot paper at the next election because I cannot support a candidate selected from a gender-vetted shortlist. Heh, I think this tells us enough about your degree of reasonableness. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on May 25, 2018 15:53:26 GMT
I {...} will be spoiling my ballot paper at the next election because I cannot support a candidate selected from a gender-vetted shortlist. Heh, I think this tells us enough about your degree of reasonableness. I hope it does - as reasonable as being opposed to an All-Black Shortlist - or an All-Gay Shortlist - or an All Transsexual Shortlist - or an All Paedophile Shortlist - or an All Disabled Shortlist. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on May 25, 2018 17:45:34 GMT
Heh, I think this tells us enough about your degree of reasonableness. I hope it does - as reasonable as being opposed to an All-Black Shortlist - or an All-Gay Shortlist - or an All Transsexual Shortlist - or an All Paedophile Shortlist - or an All Disabled Shortlist. I think turnout would definitely be improved if we could just get rid of those discrimitary all-human shortlists imposed by our evil Parliament! |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on May 25, 2018 19:14:29 GMT
When was the last time someone lost a local by election over 2,704 votes?
|
|
|
|
Post by warofdreams on May 25, 2018 19:24:25 GMT
When was the last time someone lost a local by election over 2,704 votes? May, even excluding Mayoral elections and the like, there were three in Leeds. Roderic Wood came fourth in the three-seat Calverley & Farsley ward, losing his seat despite taking 3,039 votes. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on May 25, 2018 19:58:59 GMT
I hope it does - as reasonable as being opposed to an All-Black Shortlist - or an All-Gay Shortlist - or an All Transsexual Shortlist - or an All Paedophile Shortlist - or an All Disabled Shortlist. I think turnout would definitely be improved if we could just get rid of those discrimitary all-human shortlists imposed by our evil Parliament! I can't remember ever seeing an all-human shortlist  |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on May 25, 2018 20:03:02 GMT
When was the last time someone lost a local by election over 2,704 votes? May, even excluding Mayoral elections and the like, there were three in Leeds. Roderic Wood came fourth in the three-seat Calverley & Farsley ward, losing his seat despite taking 3,039 votes. did say by-election and I don't think May elections count |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2018 20:19:09 GMT
May, even excluding Mayoral elections and the like, there were three in Leeds. Roderic Wood came fourth in the three-seat Calverley & Farsley ward, losing his seat despite taking 3,039 votes. did say by-election and I don't think May elections count there were by elections held on the same day |
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,438 
|
Post by iain on May 25, 2018 20:29:32 GMT
mboy did say by-election and I don't think May elections count there were by elections held on the same day Not in Leeds |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 25, 2018 20:32:37 GMT
there were by elections held on the same day Not in Leeds maybe Castle Ward in Leicester last June |
|
