Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The 2024 UK General Election - news, speculation and updates

I dunno what 'unnecessary restrictions' means. The 6 person picket? Although that was brought in under Thatcher iirc.
The most obvious one to me was the voting thresholds:
Section 2 of the Act introduced a new requirement of 50% of union members to vote in a ballot for strike action. It amended TULRCA 1992 section 226(2).[3]

Section 3 requires that workers in important services (health, school education, fire, transport, nuclear decommissioning and border security) must gain at least 40% support of those entitled to vote in a workplace for a strike to be legal.
 
...Increasingly convinced Labour should be absolutely bricking it, they are currently entirely reliant on the Con-Reform conflict being unresolved for 2029. And even then reliant on Reform holding its vote share after 5 years. Regression to the mean will also likely work for the Tories; Reform is a right wing protest vote this year, it may not be in 2029.

Interesting titbit that kind of gets in the way of this - even if the Tories won every single seat where the Reform vote was enough to gift the seat to Labour, the Tories would still not have won a majority in the HOC.

Some Stats: Labour, the LD's, and the Greens won a total of 15 million votes.

The Tories and Reform won 10 million.

So not only would the Tory and Reform votes have to coalesce almost entirety, but the Tories would also have to retain their 'wet' end and not have votes leech to the LD's and Labour. And they'd still not win...
 
Interesting titbit that kind of gets in the way of this - even if the Tories won every single seat where the Reform vote was enough to gift the seat to Labour, the Tories would still not have won a majority in the HOC.

Some Stats: Labour, the LD's, and the Greens won a total of 15 million votes.

The Tories and Reform won 10 million.

So not only would the Tory and Reform votes have to coalesce almost entirety, but the Tories would also have to retain their 'wet' end and not have votes leech to the LD's and Labour. And they'd still not win...

I will admit I haven't gone in-depth on more than er... 15 odd constituencies. But I still wouldn't exactly call that reassuring. I mean the Tories could not be in a worse position at the moment. Also Tory+ref is more like 11m, but that's quibbling.

e2a: also, after 1 term 3 PMs, the Tories 'not winning a majority' would be rightly viewed as a damning indictment of Labour. I honestly expected Labour to do better; in terms of vote share etc. And look, of course the votes would shake out differently, counterfactuals are always a bit fruitless. Nor, of course, do Labour need all their seats... But see Balbi's post below, this shit is genuinely deeply shaky, and this is fairly likely the most popular Starmer's labour will ever be.
 
Last edited:
Labour going right to secure however many votes they got from the Tories and try and win back the votes they lost to Reform brings the Greens and Lib Dems into play in the seats where they were second place, reducing the majority while also not guaranteeing that the Tory vote won't leave and the Reform vote won't stay.

Labour going left to try and sort out the results of them telling the left to get fucked and vote for someone else for the last four years definitely loses whatever % of their vote went to Reform and the Tory vote they picked up in the last few years. Also no guarantee they can get back the voters they explicitly told to go and vote for someone else.

This victory is one for Centrism, but it's been founded on getting fewer votes and relying on the Tories implosion and Reforms rise. It's a trick you can only do once.

In 1997 - 2010 Labour pretty much cruised through 2001 and 2005 slowly eating away at the majority they'd got because a lot of their majorities were fucking huge. You could lose 10k+ votes between 97 and 05 and still make it in as a Labour MP. Thats not the case any more, seats are a lot more marginal.

Look at how many are 5k and under, or 10k and under. There's a good solid Labour base there in the 10k+ but that's not a parliamentary majority I'm betting, almost every other seat is potentially up for grabs.

Screenshot_20240705_200148.jpg

There are almost no safe seats, especially if the old two party is being replaced with a four or even five way split if you factor in Greens, Lib Dem and Reform.

Edit: Forgot to add, incumbency weighs heavy. 2019 was fucking weird because it wasn't about the Tories record it was about Brexit. Can a Government make themselves more popular in power? Can this Labour leader do it? We'll find out.
 
Last edited:
I am very pleased that in my constituency (which is often assumed to be quite a right wing part of London, was part of Essex before it was incorporated into the Greater London Area and very impoverished), Reform and any other right wing options basically did shit all.
We've had a Labour MP since 1905, and this election hasn't changed that - although the Labour share of the vote did drop quite considerably, it was a pro-Palestine/left-leaning independent who came 2nd with a relatively healthy vote, with the Green candidate in 3rd place.
 
Last edited:
Labour going right to secure however many votes they got from the Tories and try and win back the votes they lost to Reform brings the Greens and Lib Dems into play in the seats where they were second place, reducing the majority while also not guaranteeing that the Tory vote won't leave and the Reform vote won't stay.

Labour going left to try and sort out the results of them telling the left to get fucked and vote for someone else for the last four years definitely loses whatever % of their vote went to Reform and the Tory vote they picked up in the last few years. Also no guarantee they can get back the voters they explicitly told to go and vote for someone else.

This victory is one for Centrism, but it's been founded on getting fewer votes and relying on the Tories implosion and Reforms rise. It's a trick you can only do once.

In 1997 - 2010 Labour pretty much cruised through 2001 and 2005 slowly eating away at the majority they'd got because a lot of their majorities were fucking huge. You could lose 10k+ votes between 97 and 05 and still make it in as a Labour MP. Thats not the case any more, seats are a lot more marginal.

Look at how many are 5k and under, or 10k and under. There's a good solid Labour base there in the 10k+ but that's not a parliamentary majority I'm betting, almost every other seat is potentially up for grabs.

View attachment 432266

There are almost no safe seats, especially if the old two party is being replaced with a four or even five way split if you factor in Greens, Lib Dem and Reform.

Edit: Forgot to add, incumbency weighs heavy. 2019 was fucking weird because it wasn't about the Tories record it was about Brexit. Can a Government make themselves more popular in power? Can this Labour leader do it? We'll find out.

That's a really distinctive change isn't it.

Also quite mad how many of the big majority MPs are now LDs. Albeit in a generally much reduced majority election
 
Some interesting polling on where Reform’s votes could have gone if Reform hadn’t been an option. Shows that it’s not as simple as just adding together the Tory and Reform votes in any given constituency to calculate the opposition to Labour.

IMG_3839.jpeg
 
I mean the principle is that by tacking 'centre' he's lost the votes of the likes of me in Labour safe seats to win support among LD/Greens/centrist Tories...
That's why I'm very sceptical about this so called strategy. I live in a formerly Tory seat and he definitely lost me (I left Labour and rejoined the Greens) but how did they know how to pitch their policies to exactly get the right amount of voters to vote Labour in Dover? I'm sure nobody but the local party thought about how to get the right voters in Dover, and which voters they can afford to lose (me getting blocked on Twitter suggests they kinda knew who they didn't want as supporters). Maybe by polling, but then the blunt instrument of having no policies to speak of, agreeing with the Tories and expelling the left applies the same everywhere - there is no bespoke set of policies for particular regions or constituencies - so i cannot believe this anything but luck.
 
Some interesting polling on where Reform’s votes could have gone if Reform hadn’t been an option. Shows that it’s not as simple as just adding together the Tory and Reform votes in any given constituency to calculate the opposition to Labour.

View attachment 432269

Yeah, I do actually know a Reform voter who I reckon probably would have gone Lab. It is complex. Apathy on the Tories will be part of that picture too though (i.e lower turnouts for them in general), so it's all very much dependent on what both blue parties get up to over the next 5 years.
 
What did he get up to with it at band camp??
There was a follow-up to that Tweet (without picture) claiming that Rachel Reeves too played the flute.
I was alarmed.

Then again some conductor somewhere tweeted his sorrow that Thangam Debonaire lost to the Green Party candidate.
Reason being that she is a cellist and would have been a culture secretary more in keeping with the needs of musicians.
Sorry - can't find the tweet - but this article relates to the issue
 
Then again some conductor somewhere tweeted his sorrow that Thangam Debonaire lost to the Green Party candidate.
Reason being that she is a cellist and would have been a culture secretary more in keeping with the needs of musicians.
Sorry - can't find the tweet - but this article relates to the issue

Looks like Debbonaire needs to trade her big violin in for a little tiny one.
 
It'll be interesting to see if there's any kind of alliance on this between Reform, the Greens and possibly other small parties.

Curious as to whether there's any way they could find to work together.

Although, would obviously benefit Reform the most, and that might dampen the enthusiasm of the Greens, et al.


They've got about 15 seats between them. I don't think Starmer will find that particularly intimidating.
 
Another Life Peerage for another unelected minister. As far as I'm aware this is the third. Are there any others?
 
Another Life Peerage for another unelected minister. As far as I'm aware this is the third. Are there any others?
I'm looking at this from two sides (this is how fence sitting I can be)

Vallance and Timpson are examples of experts who should be close to government. Our shitty system requires them to be in parliament and a peerage is the only way to do that. The US system of appointing SoSs who are not elected is a model to critique here.
 
Back
Top Bottom