Politics Thread!

[Harlequin]

What does 'unelectable' mean in this context?

The 'in this context is' key. Because in normal times he would be unelectable.…

So can you answer my question, then? What does 'unelectable' mean in your sentence? He has been elected in his constituency and almost certainly will be again in 2015.

I mean electable in the national election. As that's his main job as leader: to win the next election. He's been elected to parliament and to lead the Labour party yes, but that does not automatically make him a good candidate for Prime Minister.

'Unelectable' == 'unable to win his party a majority in a general election'? So you do mean like David Cameron, then?

[Mayhem]

Cameron and the Tories got the largest number of seats in the last election. I suspect Pogo means Milliband shouldn't even be capable of that by his words...

[pogo]

The Tories would have won an outright majority if it weren't for the biases in our electoral system. They got more of the vote (36.1%) than Labour did in 2005 (35.2%) when Labour had a comfortable majority of 66.

(it's also often forgotten the Lib Dems did worse in 2010 than in 2005, losing five seats with 1% more of the vote. It was only the curious election arithmetic of the Tories not quite gaining enough seats that gave them a role for the first time in a generation. This is unlikely to happen again in the next election, even if their vote doesn't collapse as it probably will)

[Harlequin]

If it were not for the biases in our electoral system, surely any party would require at least 50% of the vote to win an outright majority.

[pogo]

No, that's proportional representation. With our first past the post system the party that wins the most seats wins the election. But they only need only a fraction of the votes to win each seat, e.g. 1/3 of them + 1 vote if there are three candidates. In theory a party could win half the seats with just over 1/6 the vote in a three party system, with all constituencies the same size.

The system's unfair as constituencies are different sizes: Labour ones are on average smaller so Labour needs fewer votes to win its seats and form a government. The government tried to fix this about a year ago but it was scuppered by the Lib Dems who also benefit from uneven constituency sizes.

[Harlequin]

The system's unfair as constituencies are different sizes: Labour ones are on average smaller so Labour needs fewer votes to win its seats and form a government. The government tried to fix this about a year ago but it was scuppered by the Lib Dems who also benefit from uneven constituency sizes.

I thought that was supposed to be the job of the Boundary Commissions, until the Government changed the rules in 2011.

[Jimaroid]

Okay, a clarification of what I meant.

Milliband is unelectable as a Prime Ministerial candidate by virtue of him being leader of the Labour party in the next general election. My point is that there are a vast number of people who, despite our system not working like this, will vote according to the person they want to see in No 10 as their priority.

It happened with Clegg's gains for the LibDems in the 2010 general election and arguably the individual dislike of Brown is what cost Labour. Again, Clegg's ineffectual and turncoat behaviour within the coalition is what has cost LibDems their ongoing support.

Milliband will likely keep his own seat, like Brown did in 2010, but I don't think Milliband can win Labour the next General Election. He has serious problems within the labour party and he is vastly disliked as a person who is a candidate for No. 10.

Can anyone honestly see Milliband on the world stage? We'd be better off electing Mr Bean.

How do you explain his poll lead?

You mean Labour's lead. 36% to 29% over the Conservatives and that is likely down to collapsing support for both the Conservatives and LibDems (most probably compounded by the Syrian mess). Look at poll results based on questions about Cameron and Milliband individually and it's a very different story.

[seibu]

If public opinion is roughly as it is now in 2015, Ed Milliband will be Prime Minister. Regardless of what anybody thinks of his hair / voice / shoes.

The idea that he can't be on the "World Stage", whatever that is, because the Murdoch papers have been quick to negatively characterise his appearance and manor is in my opinion a bit naive.

[Mayhem]

The system's unfair as constituencies are different sizes: Labour ones are on average smaller so Labour needs fewer votes to win its seats and form a government. The government tried to fix this about a year ago but it was scuppered by the Lib Dems who also benefit from uneven constituency sizes.

Different PHYSICAL sizes, but the number of voters in each constituency is roughly the same (about 70k I believe), which is why the areas vary from small to large. However when you do it like that, inner cities tend to have a LOT of constituencies, and they tend to vote Labour. So unless you change the system, Labour has a seats advantage from the off by virtue of population concentration.

[Ratsoap]

The Rev wrote a good piece about this last year: http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-kinnock-factor/

Miliband will not win. No way.

[KlaxonCow]

I think that, while negotiations are ongoing, these strikes are wrong...

[venusian]

He doesn't give the impression of even being in charge of his own party, never mind the country and with the unions trying to king-make in the background it's only going to get worse for him. They're doing the Major/Hague/IDS thing. Will not happen for them until they flush, especially as some statistics now seem to be going in vaguely the right direction.

[merman]

Given the current state of things, a coalition or minority government is the most likely outcome of the next election. The most effective way for Labour to win is to put its efforts into winning in the North while the Lib Dems challenge in the South. And hopefully the morons will vote UKIP rather than Tory, splitting the vote.

[pogo]

Given the current state of things, a coalition or minority government is the most likely outcome of the next election. The most effective way for Labour to win is to put its efforts into winning in the North while the Lib Dems challenge in the South. And hopefully the morons will vote UKIP rather than Tory, splitting the vote.

Actually think this is very unlikely. The Lib Dems didn't do well this time, getting less seats than the previous election. They're only in coalition as neither Labour or the Tories have a majority. But this happens rarely: this is the first time since 1977, before some of us were born, before most of us could vote.

Next time it's even less likely as the Lib Dems are facing electoral ruin. They can for as long as they're in coalition put a brave face on it and talk up their chances. But the fact is being in government has been very be to them. They were much more popular when they did not have any power. Now they've lost much support, and should be much diminished in the next parliament. Although theoretically possible it will be much less likely they form part of any government.

[merman]

Given the current state of things, a coalition or minority government is the most likely outcome of the next election. The most effective way for Labour to win is to put its efforts into winning in the North while the Lib Dems challenge in the South. And hopefully the morons will vote UKIP rather than Tory, splitting the vote.

Actually think this is very unlikely. The Lib Dems didn't do well this time, getting less seats than the previous election. They're only in coalition as neither Labour or the Tories have a majority. But this happens rarely: this is the first time since 1977, before some of us were born, before most of us could vote.

Next time it's even less likely as the Lib Dems are facing electoral ruin. They can for as long as they're in coalition put a brave face on it and talk up their chances. But the fact is being in government has been very be to them. They were much more popular when they did not have any power. Now they've lost much support, and should be much diminished in the next parliament. Although theoretically possible it will be much less likely they form part of any government.

And yet the Tories themselves polled their marginal constituencies, and found the Lib Dems gaining votes in areas the Lib Dems were in second place last time and Labour are gaining votes where they are the main challenger. So the Lib Dems could still have a number of seats making them a good coalition partner for either the Tories or Labour.

The European elections next year will not be a good guide to how people will vote at the next General Election. They will put more pressure on all the party leaders and possibly trigger leadership challenges.