To AV, or not to AV?

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

lets post the full picture.

Party Total +/- Total +/-
Conservative 157 +4 4820 +81
Labour 57 +26 2392 +800
Liberal Democrat 10 -9 1056 -695

% wise the tories lost out.

Is that the full picture, or just England? Are you conveniently ignoring the electoral wipeout Labour endured in Scotland?

Your hypothesis seems to be that Labour's projected gain at Westminster, were these results to carry across, would result in them taking just about all the Lib Dem seats while the Tories fail to make up the dozen or so seats they need to command an outright majority.

This is utter nonsense.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

I am just posting facts. In terms of their votes compared to labour, labours went up by a significantly bigger margin so they would likely win a general election held tommorow if people voted the same way. Now when I said the tories popularity has gone down, granted the council results dont reflect that so I am unsure of what to think of that. This forum seems to have a high amount of right wing support, however other forums and people I know in real life dont reflect that.

Bear in mind the last election labour lost a lot of seats, the tories had a very high swing in their favour, its easier for labour to get small swing back then it is for the tories to get a further swing which would be needed to get all out power. Usually the party in power especially in recession does not get a swing in their favour at a general election.

Perhaps that the Tories' popularity has not gone down?

Occam's razor and all that....

I have to be honest if there were an election next week i think the lib dems would be pretty much wiped out and labour wouldn't get near to government again. People might be willing to give labour a chance locally though i am not totally convinced thats the case despite the results last week but the chances that people have completely forgotten the mess labour made and left us in nationally is minimal.

Add in that apart from throwing a lot of muck about labour has come out with virtually no real world solutions to the problems we face and i think as much as people might hate the cuts they would vote tory and david cameron would be returned with a majority in the commons. People may well hate the cuts but they also know why they are happening, they know they have to happen and they do remember who caused all this.

If i were DC right now i think i would push the coalition to breaking point see how much of a spine nick clegg has and go to the country again if needs be. Sorry but his tough talk aside i think right now clegg knows he is in no real position to push his luck or that of his party and when push comes to shove he'll do what he has done from the start make a lot of noise but go along with it.

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

If i were DC right now i think i would push the coalition to breaking point see how much of a spine nick clegg has and go to the country again if needs be. Sorry but his tough talk aside i think right now clegg knows he is in no real position to push his luck or that of his party and when push comes to shove he'll do what he has done from the start make a lot of noise but go along with it.

Nick Clegg may think that he isn't in a position to continue with the coalition anyway. They are bearing the brunt of the damage from the Government's cuts with the Tories looking well protected. He may think the Liberal Democrats will be wiped of the political map unless they change tact.

You may think he hasn't got a lot of 'spine' but I think he cleared did to take the course he took with the Coalition.

[Ignitionnet]

The last thing the Liberal Democrats will want is to exit the coalition at this time. Repeating the kind of results they had in the local elections nationally would bring them incredible pain.

They have only themselves to blame, this is what happens when you try and be socialist in the north and free market in the south. If you are in the situation where you actually have the chance to be one way or the other you're in real trouble.

The party probably needs to look at where it's going and remember what liberal actually means rather than pandering to the left of their party who seem to be more orange than yellow.

If they were to follow that course some more and genuinely be yellow I suspect they would find themselves appealing to many who feel that both Labour and the Tories are failing rather than trying to be orange or turquoise.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The party probably needs to look at where it's going and remember what liberal actually means rather than pandering to the left of their party who seem to be more orange than yellow.

Do you mean what it means, or what you would like it to mean?

The term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism.[6] The phrase classical liberalism is also sometimes used to refer to all forms of liberalism before the 20th century, and some conservatives and libertarians use the term classical liberalism to describe their belief in the primacy of economic freedom and minimal government. It is not always clear which meaning is intended.

Social Liberalism

[Taf]

I thought our present Liberal Democrats were actually Labour members that got hacked off with their leaders?

The Gang of Five or something? It's ages ago and my memory is unclear about it all.

[LondonRoad]

Originally Posted by Taf

I thought our present Liberal Democrats were actually Labour members that got hacked off with their leaders?

The Gang of Five or something? It's ages ago and my memory is unclear about it all.

You're thinking of the SDP gang of 4 who merged (or swallowed by) with the Liberal Party to become the Liberal Democrats.

and here's a link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2531151.stm

[Chrysalis]

there is a site where will calculate the result if predict votes.

my prediction had the lib dems been slaughtered down to 16 seats and labour 15 short of a power. so probably would have led to a lab lib coalition. Labour are easily more popular than they were when lost the election in england and dont need much of a swing to get ahead of the tories again in seats, remember lab need less votes per seat than the tories.

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/swing-calculator

What happened in scotland is an event but those votes werent lost to the tories or lib dems which is very relevant.

Ironically I had the tories on a higher share of the national vote but with less seats, if that result came about in real life I think the media would make a big issue of a labour government been in power with less votes than the tories and PR would be raised again as it wouldnt be seen as democratic.

I repeat my earlier question: are you attempting to extrapolate UK Parliamentary seats from the %age votes cast in English council elections? Or have you allowed for the total wipeout of Labour in Scotland?

[Chrysalis]

do the SDP affect english elections?

the uk council results are more relevant than votes SDP have got off labour because they a party people would vote for instead of labour. It was a change.

It would go against all historical data if an election were called tommorow for labour voties to vote for tory in an era of brutal cuts. The majority of lib dem voters are mor elikely to side under lab than the tories so lost lib dem votes is more likely to boost lab than the tories.

I have explained this to you multiple times, whilst you have made short comments saying you disagree but your only reasoning is what happened in scotland under a different voting system.

I wonder why the tories arent calling an election now? seems they disagree with you and dont think they will get power.

Why would they call an election - there is no need; they increase the number of councils and councillors they control.

I don't remember Labour calling an General Election every time there was council elections, especially the years when they did badly....

[Chrysalis]

labour werent sharing power tho, if they were confident of winning they would call an election to free themselves of the lib dems.

Interesting viewpoint......

(doesn't appear to have worked too badly for them so far).

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

do the SDP affect english elections?

the uk council results are more relevant than votes SDP have got off labour because they a party people would vote for instead of labour. It was a change.

It would go against all historical data if an election were called tommorow for labour voties to vote for tory in an era of brutal cuts. The majority of lib dem voters are mor elikely to side under lab than the tories so lost lib dem votes is more likely to boost lab than the tories.

I have explained this to you multiple times, whilst you have made short comments saying you disagree but your only reasoning is what happened in scotland under a different voting system.

If my answers are short chrys, perhaps it's because all I'm doing is challenging you to provide some basis for your propositions. So far you're really not doing very well. And, by the way, it does nothing for my confidence in your grasp of the issues when you start talking about the SDP. I assume you actually mean the SNP.

You appear to think that someone has suggested Scotland would vote Tory rather than SNP in the event of a general election. This is bizarre. Nobody has suggested that - least of all me, because, guess what, I actually have some grasp of Scottish politics.

In Scotland, Labour tried to scare the voters by raising the spectre of evil Tories and suggesting that Scottish voters should use the Holyrood elections to send a protest message to David Cameron. Guess what: they didn't. The Tory vote in Scotland dipped a little, but well within its normal range. The Labour vote, on the other hand, totally collapsed, as did the Lib Dem vote.

The message is quite clear. Scottish voters are unmoved by the Tories (with the exception of about 10-15% of the electorate, the Scots don't like them, that's just how things are). They are fed up with Labour treating them contemptuously as some sort of mindless Labour-voting machine, and they blame the Liberal Democrats for the fact the Tories are in power.

You can stick your fingers in your ears and sing lahlah all you like chrys. The fact is, Labour cannot rely on the level of support it needs to deliver enough seats in Scotland; in the north of England Labour has merely reclaimed some of the disaffected instinctive Labour voters who went for the Lib Dems last time because they'd rather die than vote Tory, and in the south of England they made little or no impact at all.

If you want to concoct a Fantasy Commons based on last week's vote shares, you can't simply pick the %ages you like and ignore the ones you don't like (or don't understand). You either feed all the data in, or else don't bother.

And as for this:

I wonder why the tories arent calling an election now? seems they disagree with you and dont think they will get power.

I don't believe I have claimed that the Tories should call an election now and would 'get power'. I believe what I have claimed is that your idea that the recent elections show that Labour would win a snap election called now is a fantasy.