Polling: 2017 General Election, Council Elections and Independence

[Zern]

Can't imagine there is many Tory MPs willing to gamble on letting the hoi-polloi have a say, not today anyway.

[Left Back]

19 minutes ago, scottsdad said:

Had the most bizarre thought - what of Boris Johnson decides that the way to stave off being removed from the Tory leadership is to call a snap general election? 

I really think he might be thinking this. If it's that or waiting on his backbenchers finding a way to oust him, he'll go to the country. 

 

16 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

This has been discussed before.  Not sure he could do that without the support of the Tory MPs.

FTPA has been repealed so the PM can simply request the Queen dissolve parliament, as they used to.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tried-and-tested-system-for-calling-elections-restored#:~:text=The Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act does the following,calling of a new Parliament.

[Granny Danger]

Just now, Left Back said:

 

FTPA has been repealed so the PM can simply request the Queen dissolve parliament, as they used to.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/tried-and-tested-system-for-calling-elections-restored#:~:text=The Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act does the following,calling of a new Parliament.

If the PM asks for a dissolution of Parliament and the monarch believes that there is another MP who could command a majority in the Commons she would invite that MP to form a government.  That’s what would happen in Johnson tried to call a GE without the support of the Tories.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Johnson is a complete egotist, he's not going to call a snap GE which will result in him being remembered as an even more useless Prime Minister than Theresa fucking May. A GE now would result in the Tories getting a complete and utter hammering. 

[Left Back]

1 minute ago, Granny Danger said:

If the PM asks for a dissolution of Parliament and the monarch believes that there is another MP who could command a majority in the Commons she would invite that MP to form a government.  That’s what would happen in Johnson tried to call a GE without the support of the Tories.

That was the idea under FTPA if the government lost a vote of confidence.  If a leader could be found in two weeks the "Queen would invite them" to form a government in her usual ceremonial role.  The party would obviously have decided the chosen one could before the Queen was given a nod and a wink.

The system has now been reverted to how it was pre-2011.  If the PM asks the Queen to dissolve parliament she's dissolving it, no questions asked.  He doesn't need the support of parliament to ask the Queen to dissolve it.

[Albus Bulbasaur]

44 minutes ago, AndyM said:

I used to be quite left wing, these days I'm a shade of pink. At the end of the day in a GE Labour need to pile up about 10m votes to jettison the Tories and probably get about 12m plus to get a majority so being realistic I think we will be in hung parliament territory.

Think most people on here would certainly be glad to see the back of the Tories. The incessant lying and corruption is utterly wearing and the UK is an international joke.  I don't think Indyref2 will happen next year as it will be blocked so I'm at the stage I don't care who beats the Tories, I just want rid of them. If that means a progressive coalition where the angry rhetoric between them (Labour, Libs, SNP) could be shelved in the interest of getting the fucking Tories gone then I'm all for it.

This was quite a good post but the SNP won't be near the table thankfully. 

Either a Labour majority or they'll get propped up by Lib Dems. 

[AndyM]

7 minutes ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

This was quite a good post but the SNP won't be near the table thankfully. 

Either a Labour majority or they'll get propped up by Lib Dems. 

You know as well as I do that it depends on the seat numbers. If the combined Labour and LibDem numbers do not exceed 326 they'll have to start being nice to Nicola. 

 

 

 

[Paco]

Johnson is a complete egotist, he's not going to call a snap GE which will result in him being remembered as an even more useless Prime Minister than Theresa fucking May. A GE now would result in the Tories getting a complete and utter hammering. 

If it were tomorrow, sure, it would be a hammering.

After a couple of months of campaigning, whining about Nicola Sturgeon being the next PM, Labour being to blame for strikes, Europe not letting us legally drown brown people in the channel, some Labour idiot saying we should leave NATO and stop supporting Ukraine, and the usual media onslaught? I think at an absolute minimum we’d be into ‘flip a coin’ territory for largest party in parliament.

The absolute banter scenario of course would be Labour finishing second but being able to form a government with the support of the SNP and/or Lib Dems. Tears and snotters from Tories as they’re locked out despite ‘winning’ the election.

[Left Back]

23 minutes ago, Day of the Lords said:

Johnson is a complete egotist, he's not going to call a snap GE which will result in him being remembered as an even more useless Prime Minister than Theresa fucking May. A GE now would result in the Tories getting a complete and utter hammering. 

This is precisely why he might.  He'll be sitting there at the moment looking at his options.  Deep down he'll know he's getting bulleted before the next scheduled election.  He's a dead man walking.

If he calls a snap election and somehow scrapes through it then mandate restored, business as usual, all his detractors can shut the f**k up because the people have spoken.

ETA unlike most conservative MP's he couldn't give two fucks about the conservative party.  They're a means to an end for him and he's only aligned with them to serve his own ego.  He'll know he has no future in the party once he's done his stint as PM.  He therefore won't give a f**k about the risk of the Tories losing power or that they'll never forgive him if they do.

Edited June 24, 2022 by Left Back

[Albus Bulbasaur]

1 minute ago, AndyM said:

You know as well as I do that it depends on the seat numbers. If the combined Labour and LibDem numbers do not exceed 326 they'll have to start being nice to Nicola. 

 

 

 

Of course. I've said multiple times I believe the make up will be Labour and Lib Dems and they'll have enough. 

I also wouldn't be so surprised if they took a few from the SNP during the GE too.

Now of course SNP being a power player is possible but I think the chances are so miniscule that Labour would need the SNP and even if they did they're not going to concede on a referendum. 

Would be very odd to see SNPs strategy if we have a GE before their autumn plans. They've already said we're having a referendum so they can't really campaign on that issue. 

[Granny Danger]

37 minutes ago, Left Back said:

That was the idea under FTPA if the government lost a vote of confidence.  If a leader could be found in two weeks the "Queen would invite them" to form a government in her usual ceremonial role.  The party would obviously have decided the chosen one could before the Queen was given a nod and a wink.

The system has now been reverted to how it was pre-2011.  If the PM asks the Queen to dissolve parliament she's dissolving it, no questions asked.  He doesn't need the support of parliament to ask the Queen to dissolve it.

It was the way it was done well before the FTPA.  

[Left Back]

6 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

It was the way it was done well before the FTPA.  

Parliament had no say pre-2011.  It was entirely down to the PM to request dissolution.  One of the arguments against repealing the FTPA was it was considered more democratic if parliament had a say.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/elections

The Lords tried to insert an amendment into the repeal bill that retained a say for the commons.  that was rejected.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9308/

There's zero ambiguity here.

[GiGi]

2 hours ago, Richey Edwards said:

Starmer has more chance of winning a GE than Corbyn ever did.

He's a more well-behaved tory than the actual tories at present. That's all.

[Richey Edwards]

1 minute ago, GiGi said:

He's a more well-behaved tory than the actual tories at present. That's all.

He'd also do an infinitely better job than the actual tories.

Which, again, isn't exactly a high bar.

[Zern]

Lib Dems have a smaller number of MPs than the SNP, so if Labour do need support in order to form a government it seems an obvious choice to make. Where the numbers are close it would be mad to form an alliance that could be defeated by opposition.

The Libdem might pick up a few seats from Tories in England&Wales, but not in enough to outnumber the SNP.

And i doubt either Lib or Lab will make any inroads into SNP dominance in Scotland, mostly due to the FPTP system that the GE uses. But also in part due to the complete an utter set of nonentities they offer up for election.

[J_Stewart]

6 hours ago, Hedgecutter said:

I have images of her quitting her job in meltdown fashion going into one of the country's safest seats.

"... and f*** you too Hannah, you biscuit stealing whoor, and Gary, get rid of that ponytail, you look like a twat, and Carrie, you're without doubt the most boring person I've ever met. So f***ing boring I feigned Covid when I found out I was at the same table as you at the Christmas dinner."

Still wouldn't be a patch on big Glenn tbf

 

[Hedgecutter]

1 hour ago, Zern said:

Lib Dems have a smaller number of MPs than the SNP, so if Labour do need support in order to form a government it seems an obvious choice to make. Where the numbers are close it would be mad to form an alliance that could be defeated by opposition.

The Libdem might pick up a few seats from Tories in England&Wales, but not in enough to outnumber the SNP.

And i doubt either Lib or Lab will make any inroads into SNP dominance in Scotland, mostly due to the FPTP system that the GE uses. But also in part due to the complete an utter set of nonentities they offer up for election.

Imagine Labour being forced into the choice of either  i) stepping aside to let the Tories walk into government, or ii) let the SNP be in joint charge of running England.

[Brother Blades]

13 minutes ago, Hedgecutter said:

Imagine Labour being forced into the choice of either  i) stepping aside to let the Tories walk into government, or ii) let the SNP be in joint charge of running England.

I know which they’d choose! 

[carpetmonster]

5 hours ago, Albus Bulbasaur said:

You're talking about heads in the sand whilst arguing Labour can't win an election with Starmer on a thread when they've just overturned a seat and LD has also taken one from the Tories. If these numbers were to continue which is possible then they'd be in power after the next GE. 

Your argument is silly and posted at an idiotic time. 

I think Starmer can win one election, and that's going to be the next one, but after that I can see him struggling. We're a couple years in advance in the States, and having been run by an administration that's corruption is only rivalled by its mendacity and its incompetence, I can see the 'safe pair of hands' - hence Joey being given the Dem tip after the SC primary when it became clear the Black vote would come out for him en masse. 

Longer term tho, it doesn't work so well. The slavering c***s are never going to come over, they're just waiting to vote for the next evil shite to rule over them like the plebs they are - looking more and more likely to be DeSantis in our case (although there's a chance he gets emptied in the FL gubernatorial this year, which would be magnificent if it happened) - and the middle to left can't be placated by milquetoast. While the Biden admin has been quietly effective, the Dems are, as usual, shite at messaging, and I'd imagine Starmer would be the same. I can see them having to give him a term and turning to someone like Rayner or Burnham - centrist-ish but with a bit more about them. Much the same as over here where if the GOP continue to stymie anything and everything hitting the Senate (and we'll see what, if any, effect the January 6 hearings have on that with who they finger) then the Dems will have to look to someone centrist-ish but with less baggage of being in government for 100 years. I'm not sure who, but Chris Murphy, FBI Petey or JB Pritzker* would be who I'd stick money on if asked to do so today. 

I do also think the SNP could well be kingmakers and treating the Lib Dems as anything more than the traditional home for a protest vote is miles off.  

 

ETA - not necessarily in that order. Possibly Pedro, then JB then Murphy. 

Edited June 24, 2022 by carpetmonster

[Albus Bulbasaur]

17 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

I think Starmer can win one election, and that's going to be the next one, but after that I can see him struggling. We're a couple years in advance in the States, and having been run by an administration that's corruption is only rivalled by its mendacity and its incompetence, I can see the 'safe pair of hands' - hence Joey being given the Dem tip after the SC primary when it became clear the Black vote would come out for him en masse. 

Longer term tho, it doesn't work so well. The slavering c***s are never going to come over, they're just waiting to vote for the next evil shite to rule over them like the plebs they are - looking more and more likely to be DeSantis in our case (although there's a chance he gets emptied in the FL gubernatorial this year, which would be magnificent if it happened) - and the middle to left can't be placated by milquetoast. While the Biden admin has been quietly effective, the Dems are, as usual, shite at messaging, and I'd imagine Starmer would be the same. I can see them having to give him a term and turning to someone like Rayner or Burnham - centrist-ish but with a bit more about them. Much the same as over here where if the GOP continue to stymie anything and everything hitting the Senate (and we'll see what, if any, effect the January 6 hearings have on that with who they finger) then the Dems will have to look to someone centrist-ish but with less baggage of being in government for 100 years. I'm not sure who, but Chris Murphy, FBI Petey or JB Pritzker* would be who I'd stick money on if asked to do so today. 

I do also think the SNP could well be kingmakers and treating the Lib Dems as anything more than the traditional home for a protest vote is miles off.  

 

ETA - not necessarily in that order. Possibly Pedro, then JB then Murphy. 

I can see the comparisons but think it's probably too easy to directly compare them. 

I think it's too hard to try and work out what is likely to happen if Labour were to win the next election, they may well f**k it up and a bigger meaner Tory will come in but they may make a success of it and make serious improvements for people for a significant period of time. The Tories have the same issue as the SNP right now that they don't have a credible person to step up and continue as they were, the US comparison falls down there imo. I don't follow US politics but from what I gather this DeSantis fella is in the Trump mould whereas there's nobody really in the Boris mould. When he goes I'd imagine they'll pull back to the centre rather than doubling down. Labour can have Burnham and Nandy for the foreseeable, keep Angela around to placate the lefties but don't let her near the top job or all the good work is ruined imo. 

Let's just say for discussion sake that we have a General Election before next Autumn, what do the SNP stand for and campaign about considering they're already committed to having a referendum? 

Edited June 24, 2022 by Albus Bulbasaur