General Election 2019

Posted on
Page
of 34
  • Depends on how many seats the LD's think they'll take off the Tories, does it not?

    I think the best case scenario is a hung parliament, the question then would likely be which of Johnson or Corbyn resigns first, which would dictate which party the LD's go into coalition with.

  • Depends on how many seats the LD's think they'll take off the Tories, does it not?

    In 1997 Blair got 328 seats in England, that's the sort of result you'd be looking for to get a Labour majority assuming Scotland stays with SNP. Can't see it.

  • Do you think if Corbyn has enough MPs to put together a coalition, he'd seriously resign?

  • Swinson has made it clear that she won't go into a coalition with Corbyn, so if he stays, it's a Tory-LD coalition. Unless she's lying.

  • In 1997 Blair got 328 seats in England, that's the sort of result you'd be looking for to get a Labour majority assuming Scotland stays with SNP. Can't see it.

    I don't think Labour have a chance of a majority, but if the Tories get under 310 then it's all to play for.

  • If, and it's a big if, there is the possibility of a Lab/LD coalition, the LibDems are the junior partner and, frankly, don't get a choice on who is PM.

  • I can't see any proper coalitions happening after the way the last one went. Tories sucked the LDs dry. It would be a second ref caretaker coalition or C&S or something.

    Corbyn has to get a hung parliament or he's gone. If Boris doesn't get back in as PM he's gone as well. I reckon anyway.

  • If, and it's a big if, there is the possibility of a Lab/LD coalition, the LibDems are the junior partner and, frankly, don't get a choice on who is PM.

    Of course they do, they simply refuse to go into coalition until Corbyn is gone.

    They can go into coalition with the Tories on the same terms as well - new leader and a referendum.

    We've just spent a year of Arlene Foster dictating what was acceptable for May to do - if you have the casting vote it doesn't matter how small your group of MP's is.

  • Yeah. The lib Dems weren't exactly the power in the coalition were they?

  • They put the Tories into power when they chose them.

  • Didn't really get a say while in power though?

  • They were in office rather than in power, and they enabled the rhetoric and the decisions of austerity.

    A confidence and supply agreement would have given them greater power to act as a moderating force on Cameron, Osborne and IDS, and it would have saved them (IMO) from a lot of the deserved opprobrium they now get.

    But it wouldn't have given them seats in Cabinet.

  • Pete, it's not a linguistic argument at all. It's very simple: These two ideas have been put together, and these are the problems with that. It's a matter of conceptual logic that's completely unaffected by banal generalities about linguistic determinism.

  • So, this is probably what the shape of this campaign is going to be like:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/201­9/nov/08/boris-johnson-goods-from-northe­rn-ireland-to-gb-wont-be-checked-brexit

    Johnson exploiting the fact that he is both incompetent and untrustworthy, so people can never really decide for what reason he says anything.

  • I'm not sure how anyone, including Mr McDonnell, can make any kind of prediction about this election. I personally don't have the foggiest idea what's going to happen, and I've looked at the polls, read about politics a lot, etc. In the words of Private Eye: Nobody really knows anything (or thereabouts).

    I mean, in Germany it's boring--the polls have mostly been extremely accurate (with honourable exceptions), and the outcome of elections really could be predicted before polling day. Somehow, they've got their methods in better shape than pollsters have here.

  • Maybe someone should make a poll advent calendar.

  • I think the large number of constituencies and FPTP makes polling difficult. National polling doesn't necessarily reflect what's happening in individual seats.

    Look at 2015 when UKIP got more votes than half a dozen other parties put together but ended up with 1 seat whilst those other parties got about 80 seats for instance.

  • Oh, absolutely, I wouldn't want to understate the difficulties. I don't understand polling, anyway. However, in Germany there's an element of FPTP, too--the Bundestag is composed of directly-elected MPs and those taken from the party lists, in a roughly 50:50 split, so German pollsters must have worked out methods that work for the 'direct mandates', as they're called in German, too.

  • Didn't really get a say while in power though?

    That's not the point I'm making. There were, and I suspect will be, Kingmakers in this election.

    And if the offer is (for e.g.) Kier Starmer as leader and a coalition, or nothing - then it's up to Corbyn to choose whether he wants the Labour party in power without his leadership, or out of power with him as leader.

    What happens next is the subject to negotiations, of course.

  • Why on earth should the junior party in a potential coalition be able to choose the leader of another party over the democratically elected incumbent? Just step back and think about that for a moment.

  • But it’s clearly more complicated than that. You’re voting for your mp, not for the leader of their party - who may well change during the course of Parliament. The party is democratically elected, the pm (in the context of the country as a whole) is not directly democratically elected.

    Anyway the fact is that they could hold a change of leader as a condition of entering a coalition.

  • Why on earth should the junior party in a potential coalition be able to choose the leader of another party over the democratically elected incumbent? Just step back and think about that for a moment.

    Because if they don't have their conditions met then they won't go into coalition.

    Labour don't get to specify what conditions the LD's bring to the table - they get to choose if they accept them or not.

    For e.g. the SNP will want an independence referendum as their price for coalition, which Labour will have to accept if they want said coalition.

  • Who was making banal generalities about linguistic determinism?

    The idea of news that isn't true has been around forever, what is now called fake news has existed for a long time. It's just shorthand for misinformation pretending to be news.

    Your argument that it doesn't exist is categorically untrue: you claim "There is no such thing as 'fake news'", which ironically is misinformation, because it does and is a well known and recognised problem both within the media industry and wider society.

    You are arguing that we shouldn't refer to it when it's clearly distinct from simple misinformation.

    Calling out misinformation parading as news is important, which is actually why the term fake news is a good thing.

    You also say:

    If you use that term, you either denigrate news (if you call something true false)

    When I was at Reuters I set up plenty of interviews for their senior editors about fake news (using the term fake news) precisely because what they did was the opposite, so they were therefore seen as experts on how to avoid fake news. We didn't do this to denigrate news, but to position the news agency as a trusted source of news, and it worked. Nobody thinks that by extension the term fake news encompasses all news.

  • this is exactly it.

  • This is an interesting page: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017­-40176349

    You can look at the seats that changed between 2015 and 2017:


    1 Attachment

    • Screenshot 2019-11-09 at 13.43.33.png
  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

General Election 2019

Posted by Avatar for dancing james @dancing james

Actions