Sign up to Gransnet Daily
Our free daily newsletter full of hot threads, competitions and discounts
Subscribe
Well, after all the brou-ha-ha over the days since last weeks election I’ve been looking at the actual figures coming out, and they show that nothing was as good nor bad as the hysteria would claim.
No one would deny that these elections were set in unique times, and these circumstances hopefully will never coincide ever again. Two factors Brexit and Covid and the vaccine roll out. The vaccine roll has 88% public approval, and it is unsurprising that all opposition parties struggled to be heard under these unique circumstances.
But, looking at the results now, it is clear that the incumbents throughout the U.K. did not win by a landslide that given the circumstances you might expect, but in fact the gains rather than landslides, were in fact quite modest.
So first to the SNP, Sturgeon only increased her vote by 1% in spite of her apparent popularity.
Second the local elections. The key figure here is the projected national share of the vote, and an estimate of how the parties would have faired in a GE.
By this yard stick, the Tories beat Labour 36% to 29% . Lib Dem’s 17%.
But, and here is the reason it is better to wait before getting to hysterical the result was neither huge nor groundbreaking for the Tories. In fact May achieved a better result in the 2017 local elections without the benefit if the vaccine rollout or Brexit.
Translated into parliamentary seats, this result would have sharply reduced Johnson’s majority.
The Tories also achieved much of their success due to the disappearance of UKIP and the Brexit party.
So to Hartlepool
In 2019 UKIP took 26% of the vote. Their absence saw the Tory vote almost double.
But the absence of UKIP in the locals and bye-election in England and Wales has not shown the overall increase of votes that the Tories might have hoped for. Tory vote increased overall by 5% since 2016, with a similar increase for Labour.
There can be little doubt that the centre right hegemony has gained control, but it is by no means firm and there are signs of fragmentation in the south of England where the Tories lost seats in true blue areas where voters feel culturally alienated from Johnson’s type of Toryism.
Once the covid period disappears and politics begins to settle into a more smiler pattern both Labour and the Tories will find they have work to do.
There is everything to play for.
Some stuff taken from Martin Kettle 13/5
lemongrove
A week in politics is a long time let alone three or four years.
It is rumoured in high places that Johnson intends to call an election early, in 2 years' time- whilst riding on the vaccination high, and before the findings of the Covid handling and contracts, etc, findings.
And possibly hoping Labour will still be tearing each other apart, instead of fighting Tories.
Polly Toynbee encourages the Labour Party to stand down in favour of the Libdems in the Amersham byelection.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/may/13/labour-party-deals-seats-chesham-amersham-byelection
The LibDems, Labour and four independents have agreed to run Cambridgeshire County Council as a joint administration.
That's in addition to the new Labour mayor for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough.
I would like to see the LibDems and Greens stand down in support of Labour in the Batley and Spen by-election, especially if Jo Cox's sister is the Labour candidate.
LibDems and Labour have also formed an alliance to run Milton Keynes Council.
This works for councils because there are a number of seats available, whereas parliamentary constituencies are much bigger and only have one MP.
Nevertheless, it's a positive sign for people who want consensus politics. Even though local councils increasingly have less power and will have a fight on their hands to get anything done, it might shift public perception of politics and, ultimately, they might change the way they vote at national level - if they see a viable alternative.
Whatever happens, the Conservatives aren't getting it all their own way at local level. Interesting times!
Thank you Whitewave. Very interesting and gives me some optimism for the future.
Thank you very much, Whitewave. Must have taken you ages.
I'm strongly agree about a progressive alliance.
One hurdle to overcome is that the press much prefers a confrontational two-party system. However well the smaller parties performed - which was very well on 6 May - council results were reported in terms of red and blue.
I don't think the parties will change anytime soon all I know is the rich get richer and the poor get poorer no matter which party rules once in power they will just carry on with the same so I'm living my life my way
Growstuff
I think you’ll find the Cambridge mayor, who is the Labour candidate this time, won on the second round of the count after the LibDem candidate was eliminated after coming in third place.
The Conservative candidate, the region’s previous mayor, had a majority of about 17,000 from the first round so would have won on a FPTP basis, but lost by over 5,000 in the second count.
Thanks for that MagicWand. Interesting.
Very interesting analysis, thank you.
This does not surprise me. As a longstanding member of the LibDems, I would guess that most LibDems are much more likely to put Labour second rather than Tory. That was why the decision to enter a coalition with the cons in 2010 was such a difficult one for us and the way they have since behaved must put them even further beyond the pale.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
It doesn't surprise me either. The area is a genuine three way split with the balance shifting from time to time. It's the kind of area where a progressive alliance works and compromise candidates accurately reflect the consensus.
If everybody who could vote did so, things might be different. My partner has 3 adult sons with partners, none of whom voted. They are in their 20s and 30s so need to be proactive. I don’t know how you encourage or persuade non voters to do so.
People don't vote for various reasons - laziness, cynicism, lack of interest in politics, lack of understanding of the importance of voting, lack of opportunity to vote in a meaningful way in a place where the result is a forgone conclusion.
If we had a democratic electoral system where every vote counted equally, there would be less excuse for not voting.
Having an undemocratic First Past The Post voting system is in itself a form of voter suppression, especially when, as often happens, it is combined with gerrymandering.
Since the US Presidential election, Republican states and districts have been very actively redrawing boundaries and introducing new voting rules to restrict and discourage voters less likely to vote for their party.
JillyBird
Whereabouts do you live?
You're having a laugh The SNP got 64 of 129 seats 63 of those constituency seats 65 is a majority in aPR system that is designed to prevent this They have won a FOURTH term
I read somewhere only 22% of the population bothered to vote.So hardly a glowing indictment for politics overall.
The Labour party at the moment are in the same position that the Conservatives were when Tony Blair was first elected. They too spent more time arguing amongst themselves than challenging the government. The result of this meant it was another 13 years before the Conservatives got back into power - and even then it was in coalition with the Lib Dems. Labour should learn the lesson from this if they do not want to spend many years out of power because of their own infighting. They need a new leader - Starmer is too bland and lawyer-like for many of the electorate. Unfortunately I cannot think of one single suitable candidate to replace him. Labour are done for the foreseeable future - maybe splitting the party into socialists and centrists will be necessary in the end?
Yep, same here in our ‘safe’ Tory seat, Labour don’t stand a chance and the Greens stood aside, leaving the Lib Dem’s to take the vote
Another LibDem and Labour coalition agreed
www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-57113990
Well observed WW.
Back to the SNP. Nicola Sturgeon got the highest number of votes EVER in the history of this parliament. The reason she did not win a majority of seats was because of tactical voting, (and the FPTP system). Tories voted for Labour, and, yes, Labour voted for Tories, in chosen seats. Let that sink in. The numbers polled support this. Still wasn't enough to unseat her.
But, imagine if tactical voting had happened in England, and all the opposition parties had taken on the Tories.
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »Get our top conversations, latest advice, fantastic competitions, and more, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter here.
