|
Post by uthacalthing on Jul 30, 2024 9:44:43 GMT
The actual question is this. How long before Labour lose an election?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,290
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 30, 2024 11:00:58 GMT
And the equally obvious answer is currently, and will likely remain for some time, "we don't know".
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jul 30, 2024 11:11:16 GMT
And the equally obvious answer is currently, and will likely remain for some time, "we don't know". there's some council by elections coming up
|
|
|
Post by swanarcadian on Jul 30, 2024 11:31:28 GMT
And the equally obvious answer is currently, and will likely remain for some time, "we don't know". there's some council by elections coming up It might be a while before Labour start losing significant numbers of council seats and I’m not getting too excited about May 2025, given the high base the Conservatives started from in 2021 (and remembering 1998). From 2026 we ought to start picking up seats in their hundreds again, but the challenge from other opposition parties is greater than in the past.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,290
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 30, 2024 11:46:36 GMT
Agree about 2025 (unless the government does become very unpopular very quickly) 2026 could be a mixed bag with Labour still doing well in some areas (perhaps including certain "flagship" councils) but suffering losses elsewhere. Not least because of what happened last time, 2027 is when the Tories should really be expecting to make big gains.
|
|
nyx
Non-Aligned
Posts: 955
|
Post by nyx on Jul 30, 2024 12:04:32 GMT
Agree about 2025 (unless the government does become very unpopular very quickly) 2026 could be a mixed bag with Labour still doing well in some areas (perhaps including certain "flagship" councils) but suffering losses elsewhere. Not least because of what happened last time, 2027 is when the Tories should really be expecting to make big gains. Agreed that Labour will end up declining a bit at some point, but I wouldn't assume the Tories will be the main beneficiary of this when there are so many other parties trying their best to grow. The Lib Dems, Greens, and Reform all currently have more momentum with them.
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jul 30, 2024 12:04:34 GMT
I suppose the big question is we won with a coalition of 'we want the Tories out'. Can we keep that coalition together
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Jul 30, 2024 12:06:10 GMT
You have to do better than that.
|
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,070
|
Post by ilerda on Jul 30, 2024 12:44:09 GMT
I suppose the big question is we won with a coalition of 'we want the Tories out'. Can we keep that coalition together And in reality less by assembling that coalition behind Labour, but more by having enough members of that coalition voting for other parties too.
|
|
|
Post by stb12 on Jul 30, 2024 13:02:39 GMT
I suppose the big question is we won with a coalition of 'we want the Tories out'. Can we keep that coalition together Maybe for a year or two but not indefinitely?
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jul 30, 2024 13:44:04 GMT
Worth noting the 1998 and 1999 local elections were very bad for Labour, partly because there seems to have been a feeling amongst some Labour supporters that now they had a Labour government, it wasn't important to vote Labour locally any more.
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jul 30, 2024 13:57:22 GMT
Worth noting the 1998 and 1999 local elections were very bad for Labour, partly because there seems to have been a feeling amongst some Labour supporters that now they had a Labour government, it wasn't important to vote Labour locally any more. the results in 1994-1996 were ridiculously good. It gave the image of 2,000 gains in 1998 a real success but really there were many seats that had no right to be labour
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jul 30, 2024 14:08:24 GMT
Worth noting the 1998 and 1999 local elections were very bad for Labour, partly because there seems to have been a feeling amongst some Labour supporters that now they had a Labour government, it wasn't important to vote Labour locally any more. in 1998 I went to a party at 11 Downing Street, as the Chair of the Local Government Committee of the Labour Party in my borough. The party was thrown to celebrate Labour's best election results in the history of the present-day London boroughs. Our results were certainly not "very bad" in London that year, although there were boroughs where we went backwards. In 1999, although Labour did suffer some significant losses from their high-water mark of 1995, the results were still good enough to see, to give one example, Castle Point council retained by Labour. Today there are still no Labour councillors at all on that authority. Many other councils were retained in generally difficult areas for the party.
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Jul 30, 2024 14:25:29 GMT
Did he give any reason? Seems slightly strange timing "rat joining sinking ship" comes to mind a little (other than not thinking Lord Heseltine is a rat) The ship is sinking, its at the bottom. In a FPTP the system there is always mean reversion. Probably because he, like Gauke who also rejoined, sees himself as a tory coming home and at least has hope that the party will come back to something closer to what they would like.
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jul 30, 2024 14:43:23 GMT
Worth noting the 1998 and 1999 local elections were very bad for Labour, partly because there seems to have been a feeling amongst some Labour supporters that now they had a Labour government, it wasn't important to vote Labour locally any more. in 1998 I went to a party at 11 Downing Street, as the Chair of the Local Government Committee of the Labour Party in my borough. The party was thrown to celebrate Labour's best election results in the history of the present-day London boroughs. Our results were certainly not "very bad" in London that year, although there were boroughs where we went backwards. In 1999, although Labour did suffer some significant losses from their high-water mark of 1995, the results were still good enough to see, to give one example, Castle Point council retained by Labour. Today there are still no Labour councillors at all on that authority. Many other councils were retained in generally difficult areas for the party. yes there were at least 16 or 17 labour councillors in St Alban's. Now there are 2
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 30, 2024 14:50:15 GMT
Worth noting the 1998 and 1999 local elections were very bad for Labour, partly because there seems to have been a feeling amongst some Labour supporters that now they had a Labour government, it wasn't important to vote Labour locally any more. in 1998 I went to a party at 11 Downing Street, as the Chair of the Local Government Committee of the Labour Party in my borough. The party was thrown to celebrate Labour's best election results in the history of the present-day London boroughs. Our results were certainly not "very bad" in London that year, although there were boroughs where we went backwards. In 1999, although Labour did suffer some significant losses from their high-water mark of 1995, the results were still good enough to see, to give one example, Castle Point council retained by Labour. Today there are still no Labour councillors at all on that authority. Many other councils were retained in generally difficult areas for the party. Braintree was another council they retained that year. The results were objectively pretty good in 1999 but as you say there were inevitably seats lost which they had gained in 1995 which had no business being Labour held. As matt alludes to, Labour made further advances in St Albans on the back of their general election, gaining seats which had been Lib Dem held for a long while. Similar thing occured in Hastings
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Jul 30, 2024 14:55:46 GMT
Did he give any reason? Seems slightly strange timing "rat joining sinking ship" comes to mind a little (other than not thinking Lord Heseltine is a rat) The ship is sinking, its at the bottom. In a FPTP the system there is always mean reversion. Probably because he, like Gauke who also rejoined, sees himself as a tory coming home and at least has hope that the party will come back to something closer to what they would like. Gauke has some interesting things to say about his return (whatever people think of him). It's particularly interesting that he perceives the failure of Braverman to find support as MPs drawing a line of sorts.
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on Jul 30, 2024 15:27:52 GMT
The ship is sinking, its at the bottom. In a FPTP the system there is always mean reversion. Probably because he, like Gauke who also rejoined, sees himself as a tory coming home and at least has hope that the party will come back to something closer to what they would like. Gauke has some interesting things to say about his return (whatever people think of him). It's particularly interesting that he perceives the failure of Braverman to find support as MPs drawing a line of sorts. Yes, I thought I’d copy it in case some blue members had missed it. conservativehome.com/2024/07/29/david-gauke-why-i-have-rejoined-the-conservative-party/
|
|
tomc
Conservative
Posts: 832
|
Post by tomc on Jul 30, 2024 18:58:17 GMT
But you know that the Voter ID introduced was complete bobbins? Including the admission that veteran cards couldn't be included because that would have to have allowed student cards. The system was created to supress non-Tory votes (fat lot of good that did mind). JRM later admitted most of those affected had been pensioners so it didn't "work" - saying the quiet part out loud alright. It wasn't intended as voter suppression, it was intended to gull right wing voters in to thinking action was being taken on vote fraud. The voters in question didn't understand that this is practically all connected to postal voting and also had an exaggerated view of the scale of the issue. They thought the government was doing something they agreed with so it was a minor and dishonestly gained win.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 30, 2024 23:26:25 GMT
Thank you for that. He expresses his case well and I agree with him about the Leader being solely selected by the MPs and not by the members : that change was an absurdist move and should be undone asap. But Gauke and I are two points on a compass within that party. I cannot live in a party embracing him and he would swiftly leave if I were to be in charge. The Big Tent cannot embrace Gauke/mass immigration/ECHR/multiculturalism/and concerns over Global Warming/Net Zero ... And ... Populism/Me/Closed Borders/Harder Brexit/Repatriation/Culture Wars stepped up. There is no meeting of minds here at all. A party with Heseltine and Gauke is going in the wrong direction and will see me voting against it rather than being near to rejoining.
|
|