Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35836886)

Whilst not the biggest fan of Labour or Thornberry, I really wouldn't hold much credence with that site, as it believes

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35836798)

Corbyn is in complete denial over Scotland. Without the 40+ Scottish seats Labour has taken for granted for the last century there is no way they can form a working majority, and there are plenty of people in England who won't vote Labour if they believe the outcome will be a Labour government propped up by the SNP.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35836949)

But only once this century have Scottish seats played any role in the winning of an election iirc

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35836950)

4 times since 1945 (I cba looking any further back... ;))

Feb 74, Oct 74, 1964, and 1950.

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35836953)

Wouldn't 2005 count too?

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35836955)

No

Originally Posted by Damien (Post 35836959)

Why not?

Labour won 356 seats, 56 of which were in Scotland. They would have been 24 seats short of a majority. Fair enough they would be the largest party but to govern they would need the votes of the SNP or Lib Dems.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35836955)

Or to look at it another way, once in '64


http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-lab...need-scotland/

---------- Post added at 17:02 ---------- Previous post was at 17:01 ----------




No

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35836963)

Looks to me labour had a majority of 66 and without Scottish mps it would've been 43. Anyway the real point is labour have never relied on the Scottish vote to win elections

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35836965)

In Feb 74, Labour had 40 seats in Scotland, whilst the Conservatives had 21, which gives them 19 more seats than the Tories - in that General Electiom Labour had a majority of 4 over the Tories.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35836963)

Looks to me labour had a majority of 66 and without Scottish mps it would've been 43. Anyway the real point is labour have never relied on the Scottish vote to win elections

Originally Posted by Chris (Post 35836976)

No, a seat change has a double effect on the majority, because it is -1 to the government and at the same time +1 to the opposition. The net change in the difference between government and opposition seats is 2.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35836967)

That the first election, who ever won that would've collapsed and needed the second anyway so it really isn't worth counting