Politics Thread!

[pogo]

Yes, see e.g. the graph I posted earlier:

To me that shows the country has for most of its history been two party: Tory/Whig, then after a tumultuous period at the start of last century Tory/Labour. The Liberals, then the Lib Dems, managed to regain a foothold in the 1970s but from a very low base.

The shame for them is they seem to have undone much of that progress, losing half or more of their seats. Given how long it took them to establish themselves it might be a long time before they ever have 50 seats again, if they even get another chance. UKIP in particular must be hoping to take over the Lib Dems role as the most viable third/protest party in England.

And in other news: police investigating a tweet sent out by George Galloway before polls closed, as a possible breach of election laws.

[zip accident]

Yes, see e.g. the graph I posted earlier:

To me that shows the country has for most of its history been two party: Tory/Whig, then after a tumultuous period at the start of last century Tory/Labour. The Liberals, then the Lib Dems, managed to regain a foothold in the 1970s but from a very low base.

The shame for them is they seem to have undone much of that progress, losing half or more of their seats. Given how long it took them to establish themselves it might be a long time before they ever have 50 seats again, if they even get another chance. UKIP in particular must be hoping to take over the Lib Dems role as the most viable third/protest party in England.

The protest vote will probably split between the UKIP and the Greens.

And in other news: police investigating a tweet sent out by George Galloway before polls closed, as a possible breach of election laws.

Yeah, I saw that. I think it's really just a technicality. I mean he shouldn't have done it, but on a national scale I certainly hadn't heard about it before I voted, so I wasn't influenced. If he's elected that's a locally important issue, if he isn't then I'd say fine him something trivial.

[pogo]

Not just a technicality. There are strict rules about not reporting the results of polls before polls close at 10:00pm, including exit polls in case people are deterred from voting. The rules apply to media organisations like the BBC, doubly so to parties and candidates who otherwise would be tempted to leak early results if they thought they would gain advantage.

[zip accident]

Not just a technicality. There are strict rules about not reporting the results of polls before polls close at 10:00pm, including exit polls in case people are deterred from voting. The rules apply to media organisations like the BBC, doubly so to parties and candidates who otherwise would be tempted to leak early results if they thought they would gain advantage.

Yeah, but he's a twit. If he wasn't, it would be a big deal I agree, and it's a rule that really shouldn't be broken, but he's a publicity seaker and this is a stunt.

[pogo]

I'm watching this page, while listening on the radio:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2015/results

As I write the swing to the Tories is 0.5%, -3.9% to Labour. But even that is worse than it seems for Labour.

Both parties the swing went down when the Scottish results started coming in, with the SNP gaining off everyone. But for the Tories Scotland hardly matters, they were behind Labour or the SNP already. The Tories are doing much better where it matters for them, in England. For Labour though Scotland is all bad news: their votes are all going to the SNP, and they are on course to lose almost all their seats.

Again, so far there is nothing to contradict the BBC’s exit poll. If anything these results are worse for Labour, with swings from them to the Tories in many seats.

[pogo]

Also interestingly it was 2:00 that the BBC called the election for the Tories in 1992, after polls and the exit poll all pointed to a Labour/Kinnock win. It’s 3:00 now. If the exit poll was radically wrong we would surely know it by now, we have a large enough sample of seats for any trends to be visible.

[zip accident]

Also interestingly it was 2:00 that the BBC called the election for the Tories in 1992, after polls and the exit poll all pointed to a Labour/Kinnock win. It’s 3:00 now. If the exit poll was radically wrong we would surely know it by now, we have a large enough sample of seats for any trends to be visible.

They can't call a Tory win with the Tories on 23.1% of the votes currently cast and Labour on 31.5%, even if that does match the prediction.

<edit> Now 24.6 vs 31.9, so both up, and will change again when I refresh, I can't keep up.

[pogo]

The only good thing for Labour? That report are that Miliband will resign once the results are in. He exceeded most people’s expectations with his pre-election performance but still they would have done better with his brother, or Ed Balls, or most any other serious contender.

The only question is what lessons Labour learn from this: Do they recognise that they lost in part as their leader and party moved too far to the left, losing much of the support Blair had gained by moving to the centre?

Or do they think they need to move more to the left, to compete with the SNP and regain some ground in Scotland? This would be a great mistake: the SNP’s appeal has little to do with socialism, while being even more left wing would just make them even less electable in England.

[pogo]

Also interestingly it was 2:00 that the BBC called the election for the Tories in 1992, after polls and the exit poll all pointed to a Labour/Kinnock win. It’s 3:00 now. If the exit poll was radically wrong we would surely know it by now, we have a large enough sample of seats for any trends to be visible.

They can't call a Tory win with the Tories on 23.1% of the votes currently cast and Labour on 31.5%, even if that does match the prediction.

<edit> Now 24.6 vs 31.9, so both up, and will change again when I refresh, I can't keep up.

In 1992 by 2:00 they were predicting an overall majority for the Conservatives. If the exit poll is right then they can’t call a Tory win as one is not predicted (In fact if the exit poll is right then the result is finely balanced with Tories + Lib Dems just short of having enough seats for an overall majority). My point was in 1992 the trends were clear by 2:00 and the same is true today, at 2:00 or now at 3:30 the trend either confirms the exit poll or is even worse than it for Labour.

As for why the Tory % of the vote is so low, Tory seats are mostly larger and more rural so their results will come in later. So those totals aren’t important: instead look at the % swings, or even the swings in seats. Labour -19, SNP +21, Conservative +1, Lib Dem -3.

[zip accident]

Also interestingly it was 2:00 that the BBC called the election for the Tories in 1992, after polls and the exit poll all pointed to a Labour/Kinnock win. It’s 3:00 now. If the exit poll was radically wrong we would surely know it by now, we have a large enough sample of seats for any trends to be visible.

They can't call a Tory win with the Tories on 23.1% of the votes currently cast and Labour on 31.5%, even if that does match the prediction.

<edit> Now 24.6 vs 31.9, so both up, and will change again when I refresh, I can't keep up.

In 1992 by 2:00 they were predicting an overall majority for the Conservatives. If the exit poll is right then they can’t call a Tory win as one is not predicted (In fact if the exit poll is right then the result is finely balanced with Tories + Lib Dems just short of having enough seats for an overall majority). My point was in 1992 the trends were clear by 2:00 and the same is true today, at 2:00 or now at 3:30 the trend either confirms the exit poll or is even worse than it for Labour.

As for why the Tory % of the vote is so low, Tory seats are mostly larger and more rural so their results will come in later. So those totals aren’t important: instead look at the % swings, or even the swings in seats. Labour -19, SNP +21, Conservative +1, Lib Dem -3.

You have to keep refreshing that page. The LDs are -5 at this point.

Yeah, I worked out the Tory seats were slow to post results. Still not enough English results to call England a Tory win, they lost one to Labour, and maybe clawed one back, the LibDems are giving seats to all the other parties:

<edit> though not yet to UKIP.

[pogo]

-9 now.

Every English contest I’ve looked at (only a fraction of them) the Tories have increased their share of the vote. Even in the one seat Labour have won off the Tories, they won it off a collapse in the Lib Dem vote, while the Tories also increased their share:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/cons ... /E14000674

[zip accident]

Every English contest I’ve looked at (only a fraction of them) the Tories have increased their share of the vote. Even in the one seat Labour have won off the Tories, they won it off a collapse in the Lib Dem vote, while the Tories also increased their share:

Yeah, but I think it's all the LDs collapsing to the favour of both Labour and the Tories, it maybe favours Labour more of the two, or maybe not. So far Labour have far more seats, for reasons previously mentioned no doubt, but I still think it's too early to call it against that many seats.

[Little stoned kiwi]

In 1992 by 2:00 they were predicting an overall majority for the Conservatives. If the exit poll is right then they can’t call a Tory win as one is not predicted (In fact if the exit poll is right then the result is finely balanced with Tories + Lib Dems just short of having enough seats for an overall majority). My point was in 1992 the trends were clear by 2:00 and the same is true today, at 2:00 or now at 3:30 the trend either confirms the exit poll or is even worse than it for Labour.

As for why the Tory % of the vote is so low, Tory seats are mostly larger and more rural so their results will come in later. So those totals aren’t important: instead look at the % swings, or even the swings in seats. Labour -19, SNP +21, Conservative +1, Lib Dem -3.

While prematurely counting chickens can be a fun past time, it's not as definitive as waiting until they have hatched.

[Portland]

Labour in Scotland, Libdems in general:

[gravy]

Well that was surprsing!

Another Scotland independence referendum has to be inevitable now.

Wonder if Cameron will got back on saying this is his last term as PM?