Jump to content

2017 election post-mortem


ICTChris

Recommended Posts

On 12 June 2017 at 09:54, ICTChris said:

I don't think there really is an Orange vote in Scotland.  Certainly not in most of the places that the Tories made gains.

 

4000 Tory votes in Glasgow North East?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 149
  • Created
  • Last Reply
55 minutes ago, virginton said:

They're really not being 'outflanked on the constitutional issue': there is absolutely nothing new on the table from the three Britnat parties; the pro-independence parties have a majority at Holyrood and support for independence remains unchanged.  

You're mistaking a more efficient split of the Britnat vote for a change in popular opinion.

Meanwhile the question of what 'Corbyn can do' is going to be sorely tested. He remains without a scrap of political power and has to actually conduct an effective parliamentary opposition - a task that he has complete failed at since becoming leader. Given the prospect of the government's slender majority now being undone by a handful of rebels, Labour's abject shitebaggery will not be given as much of a free pass. 

 

The Tories are the party reaping the benefits of the referendum discussion still dominating up here. I'm not saying there's anything new or that support for independence has even changed but the strategy of continually making every issue about the referendum is obviously paying dividends for one party and one party only at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Andy_AUFC said:

I think Corri Wilson being caught up in an expenses debarcle with Chic Brodie concurrent to a number of her family members as caseworkers etc would of made her look like abit of a bellend to voters.

Moreover, she seems to be having a bit of a heads gone on Twitter since being outsted...

 

That only compounded it for her, she was as effective as Sandra Osbourne before her, between them they couldn't make a decent MP.

This is the woman that ran the independence campaign in South Ayrshire, says it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ayrmad said:

That only compounded it for her, she was as effective as Sandra Osbourne before her, between them they couldn't make a decent MP.

This is the woman that ran the independence campaign in South Ayrshire, says it all.

Really hope she cans it after this loss. 

Surely to f**k the SNP can muster somebody else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

The Tories are the party reaping the benefits of the referendum discussion still dominating up here. I'm not saying there's anything new or that support for independence has even changed but the strategy of continually making every issue about the referendum is obviously paying dividends for one party and one party only at the moment. 

Indeed - the SNP have taken 56 and 35 out of 59 Scottish MPs in elections since the referendum. Clear majorities on both occasions. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UK Labour

The UK electoral map now probably marginally favours the chances of a Labour Government next election, but it would still be a tall order and hung Parliament seems rather more likely. The question is one of momentum and where the marginals now are. It's easy to forget given all the coverage that for all the Tories didn't win the election, Labour still emphatically lost it, distant second in seats and with no realistic prospect of forming a government commanding the confidence of the Commons. Not even close. They would have to win twice as many Tory seats as they did at this election to gain an overall majority, and even then it would be a slim one dependent on Sinn Fein absentionism. Unless a third party can significantly eat into the Tory seat total, a stronger showing in a second election might still not see Labour able to form a stable government

Labour's problem is a combination of Parliamentary arithmetic and the question of how strong their new electoral coalition is. If they at any point find themselves having to make actual decisions about Brexit, and if scores of moderates genuinely think a Corbyn government will happen and could lead to swathes of nationalisation and state aid, it could crack at the seams. Having secured a lot of goodwill among the electorate and eliminated (in my view, not really supported) views of Labour as "Red Tories" now is the time for Corbyn to be a conciliatory leader and to bring the moderates in his party into the Shadow Cabinet. This would show he was serious about governing and allay fears that a Labour Government would be run by John McDonnell pulling the strings in a small cabal of Trots.

UK Tories

The situation for the Tories is grim but not as bad as it might be thought. The problem is chiefly one of personnel. A competent leader and a well-negotiated Brexit deal could see them at least hold steady, but the deal with the DUP is going to make that a lot harder. The Tories have made it absolutely impossible to secure any other allies for even something vaguely approximating a Tory platform: Brexit means the Lib Dems can't work with them even if they otherwise wanted to, which after the way the Tories went for their seats in 2015 they don't. How they handle the next six months determines whether the Tory Party is headed for a modest recovery or a shambolic collapse.

 

UK Lib Dems

The UK Lib Dems, after a churn in their vote, are probably going to stagnate. They don't really have a locally concentrated base beyond the seats they hold. They've basically won seats here where the Remain vote is high but Labour weren't competitive. In Scotland it's a similar story but they're constrained to places where the No vote was high but they're ahead of both the Tories and Labour. It means their UK ceiling, almost completely independently of their national vote share, is about 20 seats, and their Scottish one is maybe 6 if you bring North East Fife into contention and then they win something in the Highlands and Islands. Their problem in Scotland is that as soon as they lose seats, if a Tory or Labour candidate has also overtaken them they're pretty much dead in the water. Berwickshire Roxburgh and Selkirk is a good example of this but so are the Highland and North East seats, like Ross Skye and Lochaber or Gordon.

 

SNP

On the Scottish front, the SNP's task is only going to get more difficult from here. They've now got a three-way pincer movement on their vote. Yes-Brexiteers in the North East are going Tory because of the Common Fisheries Policy, Labour is compensating for its loss of Yoons to the Tories by winning over left-leaning Nats in the central belt, and the SNP generally is losing votes to people who believe one or a combination of that (a) there shouldn't be another independence referendum and (b) that they've been a bit shit in government and (c) don't like Nicola Sturgeon.

Their task is not now to win those seats back; it's how to stop the bleeding and avoid losing even more seats. Labour is now competitive in most central belt seats, The Unionist vote in North East Fife and Perth and North Perthshire will now in all probability vote tactically even more aggressively than before, and this will push the SNP back into, essentially, Dundee, parts of the Highlands and places where the Unionist vote is most aggressively split. If another election were held this year, you could conceivably see the SNP going down to 20 or fewer seats, even if their national share of the vote holds up.

Strategically, I think the smart thing for them to do is to take the second independence referendum off the table for the lifetime of this Holyrood Parliament. The Unionist parties are clearly now emboldened to the point where they're very unlikely to grant a new section 30 Order and neither Theresa May (nor a successor) nor Jeremy Corbyn are in a position now among their own critical Parliamentary parties where they can't politically afford to accede to one. This is constitutionally objectionable, but unfortunately the blunt truth is the people don't care. Taking it off the table might stop the bleeding and begin to placate a lot of the middle class voters the SNP are losing to the indyref2 message.

They then need to recognise that, the election result notwithstanding, Labour is the main threat to their existing levels of Parliamentary strength, not the Tories, who have few plausible gains left to make. Sturgeon will likely have to tack left domestically, raising taxes more aggressively to stop the Corbyn effect on her central belt vote. If that means them losing some seats in the North East, Highlands, Borders and Edinburgh in the next Holyrood Election, that's just a price they'll have to pay. For all that the Tories could potentially become the largest party or close to the largest party at Holyrood if their popular vote share continues to rise, there's not a cat's chance in hell that Labour would vote Ruth Davidson for First Minister; she'd need a majority or somehow to convince the Lib Dems to self-immolate what's left of themselves. If the SNP strongly beat Labour, ensuring they come third not second then the SNP lead the Holyrood administration from 2021 for the Parliamentary term; that's the bottom line. If Labour comes second, and there's a Unionist majority in the Parliament, the SNP are out. Again: bottom line. The Tories aren't going to repeat what they did in 2007: in their mind the SNP are now what Scottish Labour was then; the fiefdom to be slain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Andy_AUFC said:

Really hope she cans it after this loss. 

Surely to f**k the SNP can muster somebody else.

Indeed, although I was very displeased with Bob Shields bringing politics into his page in the AP to the level he did, he was making a really important point about our elected representative and the cabal surrounding her, at no time during indyref did listening to people like Corri Wilson inspire me, I was inspired in the main by left wingers and non-politicians giving out the sort of messages Corbyn was esposing in recent weeks, the SNP have been making the same mistakes as May by surrounding themselves with those of similar view, differing views is very healthy when deciding policy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, virginton said:

They're really not being 'outflanked on the constitutional issue': there is absolutely nothing new on the table from the three Britnat parties; the pro-independence parties have a majority at Holyrood and support for independence remains unchanged.  

You're mistaking a more efficient split of the Britnat vote for a change in popular opinion.

Meanwhile the question of what 'Corbyn can do' is going to be sorely tested. He remains without a scrap of political power and has to actually conduct an effective parliamentary opposition - a task that he has complete failed at since becoming leader. Given the prospect of the government's slender majority now being undone by a handful of rebels, Labour's abject shitebaggery will not be given as much of a free pass. 

I think they are being outflanked on the constitutional issue. A party doesn't lose more than a quarter of its share of the popular vote in an election when literally the only thing their opponents have talked about is opposing a second independence referendum and not have that be at least in significant part a result of their position on holding one. I say this as someone who agrees with the SNP that they had a political mandate for that referendum following the result last June and the motion passed by the Scottish Parliament in favour of devolving the power again.

They may well have won the majority of seats in Scotland, but off the lowest share of the vote for a party to do so since 1983. Only then and in the 1974 elections since the introduction of universal suffrage has a Parliamentary majority in Scotland depended-upon such a low share of the vote.

The "efficiency" of the split of the BritNat vote reflects the strength of feeling their segment of the electorate has on this issue. It has become a lightening rod of their discontent at the SNP Government's record and platform. Remember, most polls still say that about 45% of Scots support Scottish independence. But in an election in which the Scottish Greens put up precisely three candidates, the SNP got only 36.9% of the vote. Where is that other 8% going? At the very least the SNP is losing the turnout war because of this issue, but even then turnout dropped only 5% in Scotland on 2015.

It's tempting to conclude that this is just organisation and trickery, but the cold hard fact is that there is now the political pretext for Westminster to deny a second referendum, and even if there wasn't the public perceptions of whether or not such a referendum should be part of the current political debate is damaging the SNP's performance in elections. It is doing so to such an extent that if another election were held in the next 12 months at a Westminster level they would probably lose the narrow majority they won this time, and lose it quite badly. If another Holyrood election were held inside the next 2 years, they would be at serious risk of not forming the government.

I don't like it, knowing what the alternative is, but that's the complicated and muddy truth of this election and its consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, virginton said:

Indeed - the SNP have taken 56 and 35 out of 59 Scottish MPs in elections since the referendum. Clear majorities on both occasions. 

 

The 35 MPs is probably nearer the true SNP number. 

2015 was a complete one off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

I think they are being outflanked on the constitutional issue. A party doesn't lose more than a quarter of its share of the popular vote in an election when literally the only thing their opponents have talked about is opposing a second independence referendum and not have that be at least in significant part a result of their position on holding one. I say this as someone who agrees with the SNP that they had a political mandate for that referendum following the result last June and the motion passed by the Scottish Parliament in favour of devolving the power again.

They may well have won the majority of seats in Scotland, but off the lowest share of the vote for a party to do so since 1983. Only then and in the 1974 elections since the introduction of universal suffrage has a Parliamentary majority in Scotland depended-upon such a low share of the vote.

The "efficiency" of the split of the BritNat vote reflects the strength of feeling their segment of the electorate has on this issue. It has become a lightening rod of their discontent at the SNP Government's record and platform. Remember, most polls still say that about 45% of Scots support Scottish independence. But in an election in which the Scottish Greens put up precisely three candidates, the SNP got only 36.9% of the vote. Where is that other 8% going? At the very least the SNP is losing the turnout war because of this issue, but even then turnout dropped only 5% in Scotland on 2015.

It's tempting to conclude that this is just organisation and trickery, but the cold hard fact is that there is now the political pretext for Westminster to deny a second referendum, and even if there wasn't the public perceptions of whether or not such a referendum should be part of the current political debate is damaging the SNP's performance in elections. It is doing so to such an extent that if another election were held in the next 12 months at a Westminster level they would probably lose the narrow majority they won this time, and lose it quite badly. If another Holyrood election were held inside the next 2 years, they would be at serious risk of not forming the government.

I don't like it, knowing what the alternative is, but that's the complicated and muddy truth of this election and its consequences.

It's not really narrow though is it ? It's equivalent of the Tories getting a 120 majority at Westminster. Aye the SNP had a shit election but it's not as bad as people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It now seems to be totally accepted (does anyone argue this isn't the case) that Labour, Tory & Lib Dem candidates effectively stood aside - presumably carving up the country between them. Each constituency only saw actual campaigning & leafleting from one of the three. This has worked remarkably well, either by their design or a happy accident the Tories have come out the winners of that arrangement.  There's nothing wrong or illegal about doing that, and there was no way to force voters to go along with it, but it seems to have worked incredibly well. In some constituencies the plummeting of the Labour & Lib Dem votes is unbelievable.

The SNP had no comeback to being drawn in to questions about devolved issues - I understand why - they didn't want to look like they were avoiding questions or trying to hide their record in Holyrood but they were never able to set the agenda on anything. I'm not an SNP memember but have voted for them in the last 2 GE's, for me a) their record of government is actually astonishingly good in all but a couple of areas and it seems like they're never confident enough to crow about their successes. b) the level of journalism has been appalling. The way the media in this country completely control the agenda of everything is crazy there was barely any un-biased reporting (from any direction) never any clear setting out of everyone's position and a rational review of those - just fake news everywhere!

The real kick in the teeth seems to be that the movement has gone; many SNP voters shifted back to Labour because of Corbyn (without a guarantee that those MPs would support him), Labour & Lib Dem voters en masse lent votes to Tories to "send a message" & because I don't doubt a lot of those remaining SLab voters didn't much like what Corbyn was saying. If the Scottish Labour vote had held or had the SNP managed to get their vote out better, Corbyn would be PM today - again that's not Scottish Labours fault - it is a real shame though

tl;dr SNP need to get better at controlling narrative and defending their own record. Labour & Lib Dems flung themselves under Ruths golden carriage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(apologies if posted/pasted elsewhere)

 

John Curtis gives his view:

 

UK’s leading poll expert lays out four possible interpretations of why the SNP lost seats

WHAT’S THE REAL STORY behind the SNP’s shock loss of 21 seats in the 8 June General Election?

Though the SNP still won the election in Scotland, with 35 of 59 seats, the party was challenged by the success of Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party in toppling the Tory majority government.

CommonSpace spoke to leading poll expert Professor John Curtice about the pressures on the SNP vote, and how its relative electoral decline can be explained.

From the (very much incomplete) polling data available, Curtice outlined for possible scenarios for that would explain the blow to SNP support, adding it is “impossible at this stage to tell you which one of these is right and which one is wrong, but they are all perfectly possible candidates”.

CommonSpace presents Curtice’s four interpretations of the SNP’s travails in the 2017 General Election.

 

 

1. Independence supporters were less enthusiastic about the party than 2015

Curtice said: “Some of those who supported independence are not wild on the idea of a second independence vote soon. Either because they don’t think they’d win it and are therefore not keen on it, or because they thought it would be once in a generation and they don’t want to push it again soon.”

This claim suggests that it was calling for a fresh independence vote could have been too early for some previous SNP supporters, and that they opted for others parties that claimed to support other political priorities.

 

 

2. Criticism of devolved policy was enough to put voters off

Curtice said: “The Scottish Government’s domestic record are not regarded as particularly favourable in certain areas, particularly in respect to education, means that some pro-Yes voters have been put off.”

The SNP has been in power in Holyrood since 2007 – first as a minority government, then as a majority government, and now again as a minority government. This has included responsibility for areas including health, education, policing, housing, and some economic and tax powers. Criticism from the left and the right, called on voters to leave the party based on its domestic record.

 

 

3. The SNP was again sidelined by the Westminster election system 

Curtice said: “Apart from 2015, its always been difficult for the SNP to do well in Westminster elections. Unfortunately no one ever did a poll in which they had both the Holyrood and Westminster voting intentions. So we don’t know to what extent the Westminster voting intention was below what might have been the Holyrood voting intention at the time, but it’s possible we are back to a situation where people are saying – what’s the point of voting for the SNP [in a Westminster election].”

Prior to 2015, the SNP had faired relatively poorly in Westminster elections. The party’s victories in 2007 and 2011 were not replicated in the prior Westminster elections of 2005 and 2010, when the Labour Party swept Scotland. Arguably, it is difficult for the SNP to dominate the agenda where it cannot form the leading government. With the two-largest UK parties in the ascendency, the SNP faced an added challenge in a UK election.

 

 

4. The Corbyn surge squeezed the SNP from the left

Curtice said: “Then the final factor is the impact of the Corbyn surge and the SNP undoubtedly lost out as a result of some of that.”

Labour made a previously unexpected come back in Scotland – winning seats in Rutherglen and Glasgow. As Jeremy Corbyn’s campaign picked up in England, there was also a polling increase for Labour in Scotland – which may have been a crucial factor in reducing SNP support among left-wing, anti-establishment voters that decided to back Corbyn.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't quite add up that the Corbyn factor had a major effect in Scotland.

10,000 extra SLAB votes from 2015 spread over 59 Scotttish constituencies works out at approximately 170 votes per seat. 

The real question is why thousands of SNP voters stayed at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scottish Labour won support from 2015 SNP voters because of Corbyn

was levelled out by the numbers of 2015 Labour voters going Tory because of a divisive second independence referendum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Glenconner said:

Doesn't quite add up that the Corbyn factor had a major effect in Scotland.

10,000 extra SLAB votes from 2015 spread over 59 Scotttish constituencies works out at approximately 170 votes per seat. 

The real question is why thousands of SNP voters stayed at home.

Probably because half of them, including me, don't want a referendum right now. Also a lot of them probably thought the SNP would stroll it anyway. They won't make the same mistake the next time. It's a bit different to Holyrood as well. I stay in Central Ayrshire and voted SNP as they were the most likely non Tory candidate to win it. I would have voted for Corbyn if it was a Labour candidate keeping them out even though I would have to hold my nose whilst doing so. I will vote SNP at any Holyrood election. It's not as cut and dry as people make out. The electorate have many different motivations when voting. It's certainly not blow to independence either. The support hasn't gone away. Getting beaten in the next couple of years would have been the real blow. I'm happy with the outcome. The SNP are still comfortably the dominant party and independence has been shelved for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GoTeamGaz said:

Scottish Labour won support from 2015 SNP voters because of Corbyn

was levelled out by the numbers of 2015 Labour voters going Tory because of a divisive second independence referendum

:lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without a door being opened by the EU referendum IndyRef2 wasn't on the cards without the polls showing 50% plus months on end.

None of us know the future in politics, the last few years has shown us that, but outside of a complete Brexit disaster, another referendum might well be over for a generation and beyond Nicola Sturgeon's time.

The problem is no SNP leader can come right out and say it, they'd be telling the YES movement to go home and close the door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, AUFC90 said:

It's not really narrow though is it ? It's equivalent of the Tories getting a 120 majority at Westminster. Aye the SNP had a shit election but it's not as bad as people think.

It isn't. You can't just extrapolate like that. Otherwise you would have to say that the SNP losing a by-election would be like losing eleven by-elections in England. That isn't a useful comparison.

The SNP did win a narrow majority of Scottish seats. Just six seats would have to switch for that majority to be lost. That is narrow. A ten seat majority in a Parliament of 100 MPs is not "larger" than a 100 seat majority in a Parliament of, say, 1000 MPs. Narrowness of majorities concerns sufficiency and how vulnerable they are to being overturned.

The SNP now holds more than 10 seats by around or less than 1000 votes. That majority is a vulnerable one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...