Tories lose Chesham and Amersham

[Kalimantan Gull]

- two things are clear in politics, the status quo never perserves for long, and there will always be a fairly fine balance between the two sides. This means that there HAS to be a counter balance to the strengthening of the Tories in the northern Labour heartlands, and the fall of Labour and Libdems in Scotland, and it will come in the shires and Southern towns. As soon as people think that 'their party' its starting to value people 'not like them' at their own expense, they will switch.

- the Libdems and Greens need to exist as a nice friendly place for these people to switch to, Labour are a bridge too far for many. A merger wouldn't work. However an electoral pact should be a must. Tories got 45% or thereabouts in the council elections and it was seen as a landslide. The centre-left is fractured between parties.

- A one election left of centre pact in England with a commitment to coalition and revising the voting system if they win would be desired by many. Labour wouldn't normally support as they stand to lose just as much in a PR system as the Tories - but if they can't make inroads in Scotland they may see it as the only way. SNP wouldn't want PR either, and may be needed to join the coalition, but an indy ref 2 would be an easy way to get them on side.

 

[beorhthelm]

Could a government like this have got into such a powerful position on such a share of the vote anyway other than under FPTP ?

ask Italy, they seem to lurch from one incompetent government to the next without FPTP. governments look powerful while the opposition fight among themselves.

everyone assumes a non-FPTP system would automatically deliver a left wing government and everything will be solved. reality is parties and voting patterns would change. evidence from Scotland is same problems persist and new ones come about.

 

[Machiavelli]

As others have said, it's largely meaningless. Incumbent party, been in office for 11 years. It's just a one-off, so far. Most of the other data (local elections, by-elections, opinion polls) hugely positive for the Tories. The Lib Dems have been on the slide for a decade-plus, and they'll need plenty more of these to reverse that. Really poor for Labour. Specific very local conditions.

The Tory Party still dominate England, and the country is currently headed towards becoming a one party state.

Its problems, in the short term, won't come from England or Wales. They'll come from NI and, more pressingly, Scotland. If that materialises prior to the GE, it could have repercussions but, if it doesn't, I'd be a little surprised if they don't turn out as the governing party in the aftermath of the next GE.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Millions and millions.

Folk who value competence, honesty, transparency, loyalty, partnerships etc.

I’m not sure the “priced-in’ qualities of the PM and his Government will hold with middle England come the next election if the opposition can organise effectively like they did in this by-election.

Hyacinth Bucket held her nose to vote for Johnson last time, I very much doubt she’ll do it again after the incompetence that has led to thousands of excess deaths in the pandemic allied to the lies and chaos that characterise any Johnson administration.

I hope you're right, I really do, but . . . .

Anyway, another 3 years to go.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

HS2 is the big local issue yes,... this wont be replicated in a GE, almost certainly.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

It wasn't a one-issue vote. It was a Remain area, and many commute to the city, working in financial services, which have lost billions since Brexit. There is also concerns over building and planning issues.

 

[Machiavelli]

Yes another missed opportunity by the Lib Dems in 2010 who basically ended up selling out on their bedrock policy totems, PR, Tuition fees and the EU.

I was not a fan of the AV system but I voted for it anyway in preference to FPTP, but it was a rubbish referendum that merely held the beer of the next one.

Yup. Remember Clegg-mania? That was odd. He was always a chancer devoid of principles beyond PR and free markets, and has sold his party down the river. He's now doing PR for one of the largest capitalised companies in the world.

 

[Machiavelli]

- two things are clear in politics, the status quo never perserves for long, and there will always be a fairly fine balance between the two sides. This means that there HAS to be a counter balance to the strengthening of the Tories in the northern Labour heartlands, and the fall of Labour and Libdems in Scotland, and it will come in the shires and Southern towns. As soon as people think that 'their party' its starting to value people 'not like them' at their own expense, they will switch.

- the Libdems and Greens need to exist as a nice friendly place for these people to switch to, Labour are a bridge too far for many. A merger wouldn't work. However an electoral pact should be a must. Tories got 45% or thereabouts in the council elections and it was seen as a landslide. The centre-left is fractured between parties.

- A one election left of centre pact in England with a commitment to coalition and revising the voting system if they win would be desired by many. Labour wouldn't normally support as they stand to lose just as much in a PR system as the Tories - but if they can't make inroads in Scotland they may see it as the only way. SNP wouldn't want PR either, and may be needed to join the coalition, but an indy ref 2 would be an easy way to get them on side.

I disagree on just about everything in this.

 

[Hugo Rune]

It wasn't a one-issue vote. It was a Remain area, and many commute to the city, working in financial services, which have lost billions since Brexit. There is also concerns over building and planning issues.

Simplifying this might indeed give Conservatives some comfort but in reality, this loss is as complex as the Labours in the north.

It seems that the old traditional working class/middle or upper class divides for both parties are falling away. Johnson is clearly at risk of alienating core conservatives by throwing their values under a bus in order to pursue his own particular form of right-wing populism where the object is singularly to keep himself in power.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

As others have said, it's largely meaningless. Incumbent party, been in office for 11 years. It's just a one-off, so far. Most of the other data (local elections, by-elections, opinion polls) hugely positive for the Tories. The Lib Dems have been on the slide for a decade-plus, and they'll need plenty more of these to reverse that. Really poor for Labour. Specific very local conditions.

The Tory Party still dominate England, and the country is currently headed towards becoming a one party state.

Its problems, in the short term, won't come from England or Wales. They'll come from NI and, more pressingly, Scotland. If that materialises prior to the GE, it could have repercussions but, if it doesn't, I'd be a little surprised if they don't turn out as the governing party in the aftermath of the next GE.

The Tories have held that seat since 1974. Many Labour voters lent the LD their vote to get the Tory out.
This was a solid safe seat which had a swing of 25%. There are quite a few of the remaining 79 seats which are a lot more marginal.

 

[WATFORD zero]

ask Italy, they seem to lurch from one incompetent government to the next without FPTP. governments look powerful while the opposition fight among themselves.

everyone assumes a non-FPTP system would automatically deliver a left wing government and everything will be solved. reality is parties and voting patterns would change. evidence from Scotland is same problems persist and new ones come about.

I wouldn't assume that a non-FPTP system would deliver a left wing government. What on earth makes you think that ?

What it would do is return a parliament that is reflective of the votes cast across the country. What Government is formed from that Parliament is still open to all sorts of influences but, GENERALLY, the major power of coalitions based around proportional representation tend to favour the parties in the middle, because that's where the majority of votes and, therefor seats go. (That's not to say extreme parties do not form coalitions, just when they do, their influence tends to be minimal).

 

[Hotchilidog]

Yup. Remember Clegg-mania? That was odd. He was always a chancer devoid of principles beyond PR and free markets, and has sold his party down the river. He's now doing PR for one of the largest capitalised companies in the world.

Absolutely. Clegg sold out the Lib Dems so badly and turned them from a mid-sized third party with decent parliamentary presence to an untrustworthy irrelevance. The scale of that sell-out cannot be overstated.

 

[beorhthelm]

Absolutely. Clegg sold out the Lib Dems so badly and turned them from a mid-sized third party with decent parliamentary presence to an untrustworthy irrelevance. The scale of that sell-out cannot be overstated.

sold out by forming an coalition? or sold out by sacrificing one small policy? either way, highlights problem which parties will have to address in any formal alliance, pissing off many who vote for them instead of the other.

 

[Gwylan]

I wouldn't assume that a non-FPTP system would deliver a left wing government. What on earth makes you think that ?

What it would do is return a parliament that is reflective of the votes cast across the country. What Government is formed from that Parliament is still open to all sorts of influences but, GENERALLY, the major power of coalitions based around proportional representation tend to favour the parties in the middle, because that's where the majority of votes and, therefor seats go. (That's not to say extreme parties do not form coalitions, just when they do, their influence tends to be minimal).

Going to PR would have a revolutionary effect on politics. We'd certainly see the end of the current party system. The Labour party would absolutely split between the Corbynistas and the Centrists (there may even be a third split with the far-left forming their own group). The Conservatives would split too, between the UKIP Light faction and the more traditional Tories. I imagine the likes of Stewart, Soubry and Grieve would be prominent here - they may well merge with the more right-wing LDs. I suspect the LDs would be a smaller group as some of their more radical members would join the Lab Centrists or even the Greens.

The election would therefore see

Conservatives, New Conservatives, Labour, Labour Left, LDs, Greens fighting for your votes with various right and left wing groups (and SNP/PC in Scotland/Wales). It would bring a bit of real excitement to elections

 

[WATFORD zero]

Going to PR would have a revolutionary effect on politics. We'd certainly see the end of the current party system. The Labour party would absolutely split between the Corbynistas and the Centrists (there may even be a third split with the far-left forming their own group). The Conservatives would split too, between the UKIP Light faction and the more traditional Tories. I imagine the likes of Stewart, Soubry and Grieve would be prominent here - they may well merge with the more right-wing LDs. I suspect the LDs would be a smaller group as some of their more radical members would join the Lab Centrists or even the Greens.

The election would therefore see

Conservatives, New Conservatives, Labour, Labour Left, LDs, Greens fighting for your votes with various right and left wing groups (and SNP/PC in Scotland/Wales). It would bring a bit of real excitement to elections

I'd certainly like to think so. It really can't be worse than where we are currently, and I know that we would have [MENTION=1200]Harry Wilson's tackle[/MENTION] full support on PR.

The only thing I'm not sure about is this UKIP Light faction. I'm guessing they sit somewhere between the traditional conservatives and the current government

 

[Audax]

Politics has to move on. Even the names 'Labour' and 'Liberal' are rooted in the past. Look at the USA. Imagine if they had 2 parties on the left - the Republicans would walk every election.

If the Democrat Party can win multiple terms in what is the most freedom-loving democracy on earth then there is hope for a single left of centre party in the UK.

The path towards a merger is debatable and maybe a coalition at the start is the way to go, an agreement to field only one candidate per seat could work but it is also fraught with risk as there is no central ethos to the coalition, it would be purely anti-Tory agenda which is intrinsically negative.

I speak as a card-carrying member of the Liberal Party and would welcome the opportunity to vote for such a new party - my vote might actually count for something for the first time in my life (I am 52)

Liberal / National (both centre-right, although have moved further right in last decade or two similar to Tories here) have been in a formal coalition almost permanently since 1946. It works in Australia because the Liberal voter base is predominantly urban, the National voter base is predominantly rural, and in seats where both parties stand it's because there is no clear winner and by standing both they minimise votes going to other parties safe in the knowledge that the preferential voting system means that the vast majority of the split vote will come back together again (unless Labor takes 50%+ first preference votes and wins outright).

Over here I think it would be more complicated. It's easy enough to assign the old red-wall seats to Labour, and perhaps swathes of Cornwall/Devon etc to the Lib Dems? And because of FPTP over here, you can't risk competing against each other as the vote doesn't come back together. So how do you pick who steps aside in those seats where there's no clear Lib Dem / Labour winner?

Edit: forgot to say - forget this result being down to tactical voting. Lib Dems won it even if Labour vote had held up. The story here is a collapsed Tory vote that's gone Lib Dem to give a narrow Lib Dem victory, and then been reinforced by Labour tactical voting to beef up the margin of victory to something substantial.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Absolutely. Clegg sold out the Lib Dems so badly and turned them from a mid-sized third party with decent parliamentary presence to an untrustworthy irrelevance. The scale of that sell-out cannot be overstated.

Similarly:

"Absolutely. Arlena Foster sold out the DUP so badly and turned them from the leading NI party in Westminster to an untrustworthy irrelevance now polling 9% behind the republican Sinn Fein party in NI. The scale of that sell-out cannot be overstated."

The common link? Coalition with the Tories.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I'd certainly like to think so. It really can't be worse than where we are currently, and I know that we would have [MENTION=1200]Harry Wilson's tackle[/MENTION] full support on PR.

The only thing I'm not sure about is this UKIP Light faction. I'm guessing they sit somewhere between the traditional conservatives and the current government

Very funny.

I find it quite surprising that folk can confidently predict what would happen if we changed our electoral system to PR. 'Anything would be better than the present shit show'? That was the argument for Brexit, wasn't it?

I'd like to see some tweaks to our FPTP system, for example mobile home visits so that elderly women can do a supervised vote in privacy and not be bullied by their partner looming over them. That also means an end to postal voting. Online voting for overseas voters, possibly, albeit to avoid fraud it may be best to do it supervised via Teams or something. I'd like to see an option on a ballot paper for 'no candidate', which would then facilitate making voting compulsory (which I favour with this proviso). I'd also allow 'no candidate' to win in a constituency so that if all the candidates are all shit the electorate can send them all on their bike.

Most of all I will never let go of the idea that I can vote for one candidate with an expectation that my vote won't be transferred to another candidate.

And yes, as a labour party member I am sanguine if the nation votes in a tory government by FPTP. I don't want a sodding coalition. Nobody ever voted for a coalition, not in Italy or Israel or anywhere else where the electorate are held to ransom by PR bollocks.

That aside, PR? Why not? Bring it on!

 

[BBassic]

sold out by forming an coalition? or sold out by sacrificing one small policy? either way, highlights problem which parties will have to address in any formal alliance, pissing off many who vote for them instead of the other.

My mate will never vote Lib Dem again because of the tuition fee fiasco. He would absolutely say they sold out.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I disagree on just about everything in this.

Awesome

 

[Pavilionaire]

Liberal / National (both centre-right, although have moved further right in last decade or two similar to Tories here) have been in a formal coalition almost permanently since 1946. It works in Australia because the Liberal voter base is predominantly urban, the National voter base is predominantly rural, and in seats where both parties stand it's because there is no clear winner and by standing both they minimise votes going to other parties safe in the knowledge that the preferential voting system means that the vast majority of the split vote will come back together again (unless Labor takes 50%+ first preference votes and wins outright).

Over here I think it would be more complicated. It's easy enough to assign the old red-wall seats to Labour, and perhaps swathes of Cornwall/Devon etc to the Lib Dems? And because of FPTP over here, you can't risk competing against each other as the vote doesn't come back together. So how do you pick who steps aside in those seats where there's no clear Lib Dem / Labour winner?

You've articulated one of the reasons why standing candidates down won't work.

There is another factor at work here - political baggage. Voters still have a problem with the Lib Dems entering coalition with Tories and tuition fees, similarly there is a reaction against Tony Blair selling out and his Iraq dossier, Corbynism and anti-semitism. Therefore, if they want an alternative to the Tories they will be forced to hold their nose and vote for a party they'd previously rejected.

A merged entity with a manifesto drawing on the best from both parties would not have that political baggage, but unlike the Independent Group For Change there will be no left alternative - it is either the new party, the Tories or a fringe group like the Greens or the Socialist Workers Party. I feel sure that the energy created by the desire to overthrow the Tories and get back into government will enable the 2 parties to compromise where required.