I’m not counting my chickens

Of 47 nations surveyed in Europe—a place where, on other matters, American progressives often look to with envy—all but one country requires a government-issued photo voter ID to vote. The exception is the U.K., and even there voter IDs are mandatory in Northern Ireland for all elections and in parts of England for local elections.
www.dailysignal.com/2021/06/01/in-europe-voter-id-is-the-norm/

Follow the rules and you get to vote….
Exactly how that ultimately helps is anyone’s guess.

ronib

I am seriously surprised that retired teachers on this site don’t understand the concept of following procedures…..

Well, I'm constantly surprised at the sheep like qualities of people on this site who follow the rules without questioning and even condemn those who may have perfectly valid reasons for not having conformed in this instance.

Not to mention uncritically accepting a completely unjustified limit to people's rights...

Well it’s an interesting premise that you raise… let’s begin to ask does having a vote actually have any value?
Just look at where we are …,

How are people going to have a say in how they would like the government to run if they have been deprived of their vote?

I am seriously surprised that retired teachers on this site don’t understand the concept of following procedures…..

Nope Maizie D

ronib

I have a fantasy of a Parliament run for the benefit of the people. Does a coalition have better outcomes? I don’t favour one party rule however.

Don't you actually mean run for the people who follow the rules and do the right things?

I kind of get that impression from your comments on people who didn't get ID for this election.

ronib

Dickens good points! But do we, the electorate, want one party government or is it more a continuation of tradition without the opportunity for reform? Feels a bit 19th century? Too late to move to Norway ….

Having seen the opinions expressed on various SM sites when this subject is aired, it appears that ours is the British way, and that's good enough because, well, it's British. Presumably Belarus feels similarly.

If I point out that most other nations have a form of coalition I'm informed that, it's-up-to-them and we-govern-our-way. And if you don't like it, move somewhere else!

Of course, there are others who discuss it more rationally, pointing out the pros and cons!

Too late for me to return to Norway, although at a push we could probably manage it. But I'm fond of my country, and my Swedish partner is a dedicated Anglophile, having become a British citizen years ago, found us a home in The Cotswolds which he loves... so I will stay put!

Dickens good points! But do we, the electorate, want one party government or is it more a continuation of tradition without the opportunity for reform? Feels a bit 19th century? Too late to move to Norway ….

ronib

I have a fantasy of a Parliament run for the benefit of the people. Does a coalition have better outcomes? I don’t favour one party rule however.

I'm with you ronib.

People lament that with a coalition, it slows down the parliamentary process. Maybe to some extent it would / does, but I'm not sure that's such a bad thing. Certainly if you look at some of the the u-turns this current government has had to make during its tenure because of ill-thought-through enactments / plans, hastily put together and rejected by the electorate, it does beg the question of whether a slower process might not be a bad thing.

Norway has such a coalition. When I lived and worked there I wasn't aware of any chaos caused by the parties having to confer and agree. All parties appear to be invested in the welfare and prosperity of the nation as a whole, as opposed to their own aggrandisement and personal ambition(s).

One party rule - be it right or left - doesn't strike me either as being the best for our country... look at the flippin' mess we're in at the moment. A coalition puts a brake on individuals like Boris Johnson and, had he been in power, Jeremy Corbyn... they can't just march ahead and ride rough-shod over the electorate.

The nation appears to want either / or but it's quite clear that both the Tories and Labour recognise we're still more middle-of-the-road and extremes of either left or right don't go down well. Which is why, I suppose, some people are convinced that the Tories are now 'left-wing' and that Starmer is just a red-rosette with a Tory agenda, both parties are having to compromise. We want a one-party government, but then oppose its ideologies and policies when we get it.

The Conservatives, or any other party have the right to change leaders as often as they like when in power - and one might say, Thank goodness, supposing we had been stuckwith Johnson or Truss, for 5 years each.

We are not a presidential country, like the US. We vote parties into power, not individuals - and long may it be so. The cult of the individual has gone too far in this country, especially in politics.

GG13 we haven’t tried Labour/Liberal Democrats yet. Maybe interesting coalition?

ronib

I have a fantasy of a Parliament run for the benefit of the people. Does a coalition have better outcomes? I don’t favour one party rule however.

Definitely a fantasy ronib unfortunately I do not have faith in any of the three main parties.

I have a fantasy of a Parliament run for the benefit of the people. Does a coalition have better outcomes? I don’t favour one party rule however.

ronib

I hope for a hung Parliament… never again an 80 seat majority. Absolute power gone forever and that applies cross party.

If it’s a hung Parliament do you think anything would ever be passed through the HoC?

My guess is that there will have to be a coalition.

I hope for a hung Parliament… never again an 80 seat majority. Absolute power gone forever and that applies cross party.

As regards the Conservative party, I think that they've been writing their own obituary for some time now, and all we've been waiting for is the invitation to the funeral. They're going to find it hard to put even a tiny speck of gloss on this, but that won't stop them from trying. Perhaps too early as yet to make any accurate assessment of what all this might mean in terms of a General Election, but Sunak's description this morning of it being "disappointing" may prove to be a massive understatement. The next few hours will tell.

Can’t help but wonder if the Tories will have the cheek to have yet another leadership change without a general election.

Oh I hope they do! That would surely be the final nail in the Tory party coffin. Hopefully they will be that stupid (though I doubt it). I just hope the results coming in today will send out a message, loud and clear, to the Tories that they are finished! A light at the end of a very long, dark tunnel indeed🤞🤞🤞

I think the blue-wall in the South is beginning to crumble somewhat... The Royal Borough of Windsor (and Maidenhead) has gone to the LDs.

I shall listen with interest while the losses are 'explained' by the Tory party who (like all parties) will have to find a way to put a bit of gloss on the results.

I think the more well-heeled traditional Tory voters are fed up with the sleaze - it does appear never ending, and constant changes of Premiership. The less well off, and the completely impoverished are just sick to the back teeth of the ever-rising cost of living and the decimation of the health and other services they rely on, to which there appears to be no end in sight.

I'm sure the Tories will at some point indicate - if they get the bloody-nose they're expecting - that they are "listening" to the voters. But they're on a make-Brexit-work, libertarian free-market economy, small-State, ticket, so how they will reconcile that with actually doing something tangible to ease the economic burden on the ordinary man-in-the-street, I've no idea.

Amused to see Sunak banging on about how well the Tories were doing in Bassetlaw, almost at the exact time it was announced Labour had won there with its best ever result.

Can’t help but wonder if the Tories will have the cheek to have yet another leadership change without a general election.

There’s a good summary on Sky News, which I’ve copied so we can keep a close eye on what’s happening. The Lib Dems are doing very well, but unfortunately this particular analysis is only for Tory and Labour parties.

Conservatives
Fewer than 300 losses: This would see the party winning council seats back from Independents, with Labour and the Lib Dems not prospering.
500 losses: The party could argue "mid-term blues" and will assume Labour could be caught before the general election.
750 losses: This would indicate a clear swing to Labour, but still less than opinion polls imply.
1,000 losses: A very bad night, with a third of all seats defended by the Conservatives lost.

Labour
700 gains: The best local elections for at least a decade. Labour would look on its way to becoming the largest party in Westminster, even if short of a majority.
450 gains: These results would be better than in 2022, when local elections took place in Greater London.
250 gains: A disappointing result for Labour in the context of recent opinion polls.
Under 150 gains: A step backwards for Labour.

I don’t actually care today if the majority of seats are won by independents with three legged donkeys, as long as the message to the government is loud and clear.

Yes silverlining same here straight Tory/Labour contest, both parties did put out a leaflet but otherwise nothing. DIL was Poll Clerking and after five hours fifty people had been to vote not exactly overwhelming.

Entirely agree Maggie. Exactly the Same thing here. Just a name with no other information. I emailed Labour HQ for more information but no response.
They didn’t really deserve my vote but there was no other choice. 2 Tory 1 right wing farage follower and two unknown Labour candidates. Very disappointing.

I’ve been wondering about the turnout, too. Typically very low for local elections - anything rather higher than usual would indicate a shift - or at least less apathy.