I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they only win one term then get burnt by the absolute mess the country is in and a Tory government are back in again straight after
While any incoming Labour government will have one hell of a clean up job to do after inheriting an absolute car crash, what do you think the defeated Tory party will do after their expected electoral wipeout?
1. Have an orderly leadership election and then unite behind that leader?
2. Commence bloodletting like we’ve never seen before and Unleash full-on factional warfare, fighting like rats in a sack?
If and its a big if the wipeout does happen ( they only have to recover 5%or so to avoid it) then I expect the tories to split with a chunk joining labour and a chunk going of to UKIP ( or whatever its called now) leaving a rump "real tory"party
That would then leave space on the left for an actual leftish party
I think it’s far more likely that the entire party just purges the few (relatively) sane people left and goes full UKIP under the leadership of one of total fruitloop ERG ‘Spartans’. Braverman would be my bet, if she keeps her seat
You just know that when they lose the election, the conclusion they’ll reach is that they weren’t Brexity/anti-immigrant/right wing enough.
This next election can’t come soon enough
I don’t understand the point of talking about the Tories being down to 23 seats when that is so obviously not going to happen.
Once you get to high 40% with opponents down to 20 odd % then you get wipeout in first past the post elections
Yeah I understand how first past post works, I am asking what is the point of suggesting that the Tories will get 21% when that will clearly not happen. There will not be just 23 Tory MPs after the next general election.
The Tories have never polled less than 30% in 200 years and whilst I recognise that they are in dire straits it is pointless exaggerating and coming up with fantasy figures.
There are clearly a lot of people who currently are not prepared to say that they would vote Tory if there was a general election tomorrow but will do precisely that when the general election eventually comes.
I can't believe that I am having to argue that the idea of the Tories only having 23 MPs is daft!
Yip. As soon as a general election is called, the right wing press and the Tory campaign social media misinformation team will crank into action
The press will run stories about Labour wanting to rejoin the EU so that they can open our borders to Transgender, Muslamic,terrorist rapists who will be put up in a 5 star hotel when they arrive, then get given a house and a big telly so they can sit on benefits while simultaneously taking your job (and probably grooming children)
It’ll work and ‘disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ will vote Tory, the same as they always do
As long as Labour end up with a working majority, I don’t care how many seats the Tory party end up with
I would put money on ‘my’ tory MP sill getting 50%+ vote come the election. He managed to get 50% in 1997 and has increased since then. I am surrounded by tory ****.
When even the plastic scotsman has turned against you there's a chance that Mr 50% may not get re-elected.
In the last US presidential election, it was the mobilisation of disenfranchised voters who swung the election. Now while the next UK election may not need them to bring labour to power, they could be significant in some constituencies like mr 50% and effect the margin of overall victory.
Some more analysis of the polling would be interesting.
How many trad tory voters are changing to labour (if any), how many are just not intending to vote?
How many mythical swing voters who voted tory at the last election will change to labour?
What are the voting intentions of people who didn't vote last time around? Do they still feel disenfranchised, are they motivated by any party or are they motivated to just get the tories out?
It’ll work and ‘disgusted of Tunbridge Wells’ will vote Tory, the same as they always do
They always will though but that's not the problem.
It's when 'absolutely skint of Nottingham' vote's Tory that there's a real issue. At this point in time, Labour are offering those people nothing, whereas the Tories will offer them nothing but give them someone to blame. It works well for them.
When even the plastic scotsman has turned against you there’s a chance that Mr 50% may not get re-elected.
As I said, I am willing to put money on him getting re-elected. Fancy a £1,000 bet?
It’s when ‘absolutely skint of Nottingham’ vote’s Tory that there’s a real issue. At this point in time, Labour are offering those people nothing, whereas the Tories will offer them nothing but give them someone to blame. It works well for them.
The Guardian did some polling in individual constituencies a good while back that showed that every single one of the ‘Red Wall’ seats would be returned to Labour if there were elections. That was long before the latest freefall in the polls.
Remember that most of these new Tory MPs up here are sat on paper-thin majorities (my own new Tory MP has a majority of 105) so all that’s required is a tiny percentage swing and they’re gone
Everyone up here can see that ‘Levelling Up’ was just a bollocks soundbite and that they were conned. None of those Tories will be here in two years time and they all know it.
showed that every single one of the ‘Red Wall’ seats would be returned to Labour
Yup, in fact the Labour lead in the 'red wall' seats is currently significantly higher than the national Labour lead :
https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/latest-red-wall-voting-intention-23-january-2023/
And it's worth noting that every one one of those red wall seats, where Labour now have a huge lead over the Tories, currently has a Tory MP.
We won't see the Tories reduced to 23 seats in 18 months time but we will see exposed as a lie the repeatedly made claim that Labour can't win a general election without Scotland.
I suspect that a fair few SNP supporters will be disappointed at the sight of the Tories losing a general election.
FFS Ernie - why that old canard? its nonsense
its nonsense
Yup, but it doesn't stop people coming out with it:
And still less than 6 months ago the claim was being made that Scotland was crucial to Labour if they are to form a government:
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/labour-must-win-24-seats-27746332
The reality is that Labour could lose every single seat in Scotland and still form a government with a very comfortable majority.
The old canard is that Scots will be upset if the tories lose.
I agree about the scots seats - very rarely does it matter who Scotland votes for - it really makes no difference to who wins the westminster majority and in the event of a hung parliament the SNP will always vote down tories
The old canard is that Scots will be upset if the tories lose.
I don't generalise when talking about a nation.
You must have surely heard the argument that the Tory landslide victory at the last general election made the case for Scottish independence even stronger?
Based on that I think my comment concerning that I suspect a fair few SNP supporters might be disappointed at the sight of the Tories losing the next general election is a reasonable one.
Aye right!
You underestimate how much the tories are loathed by the independence movement and while there is no love for labour there is no movement in the polls SNP to labour to back up your point.
SNP run at high 40s in the polls and have done so for many years.
You do realise the scotsman is a staunchly unionist tory paper ad the record a labour supporting unionist paper?
there is no movement in the polls SNP to labour to back up your point.
I have no idea what you are referring to. I have just made the point that Labour can win a comfortable majority at the next general whatever happens in Scotland.
I haven't suggested anything about a movement in the polls from SNP to Labour. In fact I am saying whatever happens in Scotland will be fairly irrelevant to the outcome of the next general election. It is very unlikely to be on a knife edge.
You do realise the scotsman is a staunchly unionist tory paper ad the record a labour supporting unionist paper?
And? I haven't suggested that the argument which was put forward in those links was a valid argument.
In fact I said the complete opposite.
You obviously read my post because you commented on it but you apparently missed this:
we will see exposed as a lie the repeatedly made claim that Labour can’t win a general election without Scotland.
You were saying a fair few SNP voters prefer a tory westminster government to labour.
i am pointing out there is actually not a shred of evidence to suggest this and that its a unionist canard. I have never heard this by any scots independence supporter or not.
Find a single non unionist source to suggest this.
And?
When talking about scottish politics you need to be aware of the bias of your sources. I am not sure if you are aware.
we will see exposed as a lie the repeatedly made claim that Labour can’t win a general election without Scotland.
I agreed with you on that several posts ago
You underestimate how much the tories are loathed by the independence movement
Once labour are in power and the Scots don’t have the Tories to despise I reckon there’s a high chance that labour will begin to chip away at the SNPs hegemony and independence will be forgotten about. There’s nothing like a bit of feel good factor to defuse nationalist sentiment.
You were saying a fair few SNP voters prefer a tory westminster government to labour.
I used the word suspect. I have no idea. I don't talk to Scottish nationalists nor do I make much effort reading what they say. The only person banging on about the issue that I really hear is you.
If you reckon that all Scottish nationalists will be cock-a-hoop at a Labour landslide victory next general election then that's great. It will still prove my point about not over-inflating the importance of Scotland.
Scotland really really isn't half as important as you seem to think it is. It represents only 8% of the UK population.
Although you seem to mention Scotland in 95% of your political comments! 😆
So the Guardian / Observer are reporting Sunak was told in October "that the tax issue involved a significant sum of money and was not a trivial accounting error"
Downing St continue to deny and IIRC he also denied knowing at PMQ's. It's unnamed sources but the papers are usually pretty robust in checking, so who's telling lies and what is the penalty for misleading parliament if it's Sunak?
I suspect Sunak’s wording will have been careful not to mislead parliament… (eg new “information has come to light”… which doesn’t mean that he didn’t already have that information himself, or 90% of it)… but the public know what’s what, and they know what he and his party are about. They want them gone.
what is the penalty for misleading parliament if it’s Sunak?
Nothing. It has to be proven to be deliberate and IIRC any censure goes to a vote of the whole parliament. Its obvious he was at best being "economical with the truth"
Interesting how many leaks are coming out tho. Rival camps briefing? civil servants just so browned off with the lies?
Zahawi sacked.
Dagnammitt - too slow!
So Sunaks line of "due process . Wait for the investigation to be complete" did not last long
I'm guessing more lies to come out.
Edit - I now see that the investigation was completed this morning. That was rather quick.
Sunak's letter states the investigation has been completed and zahawi has seen the conclusions.
EDIT: if so, why did zahawi not offer to resign?
This allows sunak to claim he has acted decisively; ha!
Haha, times were reporting that some tories were expecting him to be cleared
https://twitter.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1619610422163685379?t=P4P-RrlOX9bL_E2ZM-ZokA&s=19
But they were also saying he'd misled Simon case
https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1619408653055918082?t=kvRInSerMTDZme-aczyJcw&s=19
Zahawi sacked.
It's OK, he'll be re-appointed in a couple of weeks as "the best person to lead the party forwards" or more new information coming to light about him really not meaning to accidentally put those millions into an offshore account instead of HMRC's account or the next Party Chairman being even worse...
The whole bunch of them are utterly corrupt to the core.
agree. he is guilty of getting caught. what about the rest of them with millions squirreled away so they don't pay their fair share of tax
is labour just as guilty or are they a bit smarter at not getting busted by the press?
Having been sacked that will make it much harder to reappoint him as he has not "done the honorable thing" although my guess is its a sacking to make Sunak look tough not that Zahawi refused to resign
As for labour - some of the same behaviour no doubt at all but its generally on a much smaller scale. Cooper is one who has consistently bent the rules to get rich but labour folk it tends to be in thousands not millions
ooh, it's schadenfreude Sunday.
Raab next please
Somehow he's still an innocent victim 🙄
https://twitter.com/nadhimzahawi/status/1619635655835004929?t=FyUHO9_9-OTwSe0ZX3KjHg&s=19
Is there a 'clean skin' to replace him? Bit of a challenge that.
Is there a ‘clean skin’ to replace him? Bit of a challenge that.
Priti Patel?
is labour just as guilty or are they a bit smarter at not getting busted by the press?
No Labour aren't smarter imo. And a hostile press will always go through the affairs of politicians which they oppose with a fine tooth comb.
The story that Zahawi had agreed to pay several million pounds in tax to settle a dispute with HMRC was actually originally broken by the Sun on Sunday.
I don't know if it was the result of investigative journalism by the Sun on Sunday or someone tipped them off. Nor do I know their motivation behind their decision to publish.
It could have been simply because they felt it was an important exclusive story which would help to sell their paper. In which case I suspect they were tipped off rather than an example of investigative journalism - I can't imagine that the edit of the Sun on Sunday felt that it is the sort of scandal which their readers are so interested in reading about on a Sunday morning that it justify much effort uncovering.
Or it could be because the Murdoch owned title has decided to help the Opposition by uncovering and publishing a negative story about the Tories.
It is now all but certain that Labour will be in government in about 18 months time, Rupert Murdoch is well-known for liking to back winners - it helps to exaggerate the influence which he holds and creates the impression that he is owed favours. Political leaders are scared of Murdoch, if he can claim a role in bringing down a senior politician it will re-enforce that fear.
I see that Rees-Mogg has suggested a certain Mr. B Johnson should be the next party chairman.
There’s nothing like a bit of feel good factor to defuse nationalist sentiment.
So we'll be all feeling good within a couple of years?
Do you seriously believe that the current cluster**** is fixable in a few years - you think that, for example, we'll suddenly be producing twice as many cars as currently, and then selling them - are we joining the SM & CU on Day One, are we re-joining the EU on Day Two, or is it some economic miracle I'm unaware of?
It is interesting how on a forum which is so clearly hostile towards the current Tory government, and blames it for so much, there are still people who feel that the Tories merely have a marginal and insignificant effect.
A Labour government should represent a very positive and significant change. If you doubt that then I can't say that I entirely blame you.
I see that Rees-Mogg has suggested a certain Mr. B Johnson should be the next party chairman.
What an excellent suggestion. Count on JRM to speak sense, capture the mood of the nation and to select such a beacon of professionalism to chair the party.
Doubt he'd want it, lots of hassle involved, no real power, although full access to party donors would be attractive.
A Labour government should represent a very positive and significant change.
15 years of damage can’t be undone in 5. That’s a very challenging message for Labour… stopping the downward spiral the UK is currently in would be positive and significant change… but not being able to turn everything around before re-election will no doubt risk people with short memories turning back to the Conservatives, or even more likely to underestimate how important it is to keep them out and not bother voting.
