Reform UK - A symptom of all that is wrong?

[valiant]

Vasco said:

valiant said:

As much as I’d like to see it happen, I don’t think it will happen.

I think the Tories will do better than the polls suggest as it’s one thing to say to a pollster and another thing when you’re actually in the polling booth especially if your local Tory MP is decent (yes! There are some).

Still, would be epic on here should Ed lead the opposition.

I thought Ed was only any good at playing the fool when TV cameras were about. I struggle to see him doing anything worthwhile.

Libdems have certainly pissed someone off in the media because they’ve received far too little attention for a party that’s on track to win 4x or even 5x their last result. Ed has complained that the only way he gets any exposure from the news media is to do these silly stunts otherwise he’d be totally ignored which is wrong especially when so much focus is on Reform who’ll only realistically win 5-10 seats if they are lucky.

If they do the impossible and beat the Tories into second then it will testament to Ed to achieve so much with so little exposure. Just goes to show that locally, they have a pretty effective operation.

[swisstoni]

Do you not think a lot, if not all, this sudden success for the LibDems is down to a mass exodus of erstwhile Tory voters who just can’t vote for the current crew?

[Mortarboard]

swisstoni said:

Do you not think a lot, if not all, this sudden success for the LibDems is down to a mass exodus of erstwhile Tory voters who just can’t vote for the current crew?

It's Reform splitting the vote.
In most areas, labour gains, in others it's the libDems.

Election calculus actually has the libdems vote going down slightly. (11.8% down to 11.1%)

M.

[valiant]

swisstoni said:

Do you not think a lot, if not all, this sudden success for the LibDems is down to a mass exodus of erstwhile Tory voters who just can’t vote for the current crew?

Partly and partly because of tactical voting where Labour voters are lending their vote to ensure the Tories lose.

The success isn’t sudden. They’ve polled pretty consistently throughout the campaign but their power base is very localised meaning they’ll pick up a lot more seats whereas Reform are spread thinly throughout the country and has no (well maybe one or two) areas that are nailed on to win.

Libdems were always destined to return to their natural number of seats of around 50. They may pick up 20-30 more seats through tactical voting and whatnot but it’s the annihilation of the Tories that may see them in opposition rather than winning hundreds of seats.

[Digga]

Mortarboard said:

swisstoni said:

Do you not think a lot, if not all, this sudden success for the LibDems is down to a mass exodus of erstwhile Tory voters who just can’t vote for the current crew?

It's Reform splitting the vote.
In most areas, labour gains, in others it's the libDems.

Election calculus actually has the libdems vote going down slightly. (11.8% down to 11.1%)

M.

I think, in terms of former Tory voters, there are many who would not vote Labour.

Reform, perhaps, assuming there is a candidate, but a lot of what we see of Reform might not appeal.

Lib Dems will, IMHO, pick up a lot of those votes, in a lot of constituencies.

[ChocolateFrog]

Reform were doing the rounds locally with a car towing one of those billboard trailers and a loudspeaker.

Farage's grid plastered everywhere.

I was pleased to hear his tacit support for Putin went down like a bowl of cold sick to most people in the polls.

Edited by ChocolateFrog on Wednesday 26th June 21:29

[Mortarboard]

valiant said:

Partly and partly because of tactical voting where Labour voters are lending their vote to ensure the Tories lose

Hadn't considered labour tactical voters- how would they respond to a pollster?

Could be under-represented in some areas.

M.

[wc98]

valiant said:

Libdems have certainly pissed someone off in the media because they’ve received far too little attention for a party that’s on track to win 4x or even 5x their last result. Ed has complained that the only way he gets any exposure from the news media is to do these silly stunts otherwise he’d be totally ignored which is wrong especially when so much focus is on Reform who’ll only realistically win 5-10 seats if they are lucky.

If they do the impossible and beat the Tories into second then it will testament to Ed to achieve so much with so little exposure. Just goes to show that locally, they have a pretty effective operation.

Think back to all the students the Lib Dems pissed off back in the day and then think where many of them will be working today. Karma can be a bh.

[frisbee]

valiant said:

Partly and partly because of tactical voting where Labour voters are lending their vote to ensure the Tories lose.

The success isn’t sudden. They’ve polled pretty consistently throughout the campaign but their power base is very localised meaning they’ll pick up a lot more seats whereas Reform are spread thinly throughout the country and has no (well maybe one or two) areas that are nailed on to win.

Libdems were always destined to return to their natural number of seats of around 50. They may pick up 20-30 more seats through tactical voting and whatnot but it’s the annihilation of the Tories that may see them in opposition rather than winning hundreds of seats.

I believe the technical term is "fk off you Tory fkwits" voters.

[swisstoni]

What happened to the LibDems to be vitually wiped out last GE then.
Corbyn cost Labour votes and Boris was Boris, so why didn’t they do ok last time?

(Off topic, so ignore as required.)

[valiant]

swisstoni said:

What happened to the LibDems to be vitually wiped out last GE then.
Corbyn cost Labour votes and Boris was Boris, so why didn’t they do ok last time?

(Off topic, so ignore as required.)

In a nutshell, Brexit.

2019 was the Brexit election. Boris with his ‘Get Brexit done’ and Corbyn doing his best to scare off the electorate and a public who were sick to the back teeth with Brexit.

For a party whose main campaign message was to ‘Stop Brexit’ and to revoke article 50 without a referendum, it was a major turnoff no matter how you voted in the referendum. From people sick of Brexit and wanted it to end to those who felt that it would be undemocratic to revoke A50, they were on a hiding to nothing and were pummelled for it.

[swisstoni]

valiant said:

swisstoni said:

What happened to the LibDems to be vitually wiped out last GE then.
Corbyn cost Labour votes and Boris was Boris, so why didn’t they do ok last time?

(Off topic, so ignore as required.)

In a nutshell, Brexit.

2019 was the Brexit election. Boris with his ‘Get Brexit done’ and Corbyn doing his best to scare off the electorate and a public who were sick to the back teeth with Brexit.

For a party whose main campaign message was to ‘Stop Brexit’ and to revoke article 50 without a referendum, it was a major turnoff no matter how you voted in the referendum. From people sick of Brexit and wanted it to end to those who felt that it would be undemocratic to revoke A50, they were on a hiding to nothing and were pummelled for it.

Interesting. Cheers.

[i4got]

Mortarboard said:

Wills2 said:

Zero influence and with a majority of 250 Labour won't need anyone's support as they are 250 seats ahead of all the other parties combined.

Based upon that the Lib Dems would be His Majesties Opposition which I'm sure Ed would love, Labour with a super majority and the Lib Dems as the opposition, wow has that ever happened before?

This.
They would get a lot of attention, and based on what they've got so far in terms of scrutiny, it might not go well for them.
If they sail those seas successfully, they'll need to get going on candidates in locals in order to have something to run on next time. Doing fk all might work the first time, but unlikely to work a second.

But during this cycle, it'll be labour unapposedfor whatever they want to do, while they have a majority of 250+.
Means labour can ignore their own headbangers as well as those of the "opposition"

M.

Is it feasible that Conservatives finish third behind LD and that they seek a Con/Reform coalition in order to become the official opposition.

[LimmerickLad]

i4got said:

Is it feasible that Conservatives finish third behind LD and that they seek a Con/Reform coalition in order to become the official opposition.

With Farage as leader of the opposition?

[i4got]

LimmerickLad said:

i4got said:

Is it feasible that Conservatives finish third behind LD and that they seek a Con/Reform coalition in order to become the official opposition.

With Farage as leader of the opposition?

Well who knows what the future may hold.?

[Mortarboard]

i4got said:

LimmerickLad said:

i4got said:

Is it feasible that Conservatives finish third behind LD and that they seek a Con/Reform coalition in order to become the official opposition.

With Farage as leader of the opposition?

Well who knows what the future may hold.?

Usually the "leader" would be from the larger of the two.
But can you imagine farage as shadow foreign secretary?

M.

[Elysium]

i4got said:

Mortarboard said:

Wills2 said:

Zero influence and with a majority of 250 Labour won't need anyone's support as they are 250 seats ahead of all the other parties combined.

Based upon that the Lib Dems would be His Majesties Opposition which I'm sure Ed would love, Labour with a super majority and the Lib Dems as the opposition, wow has that ever happened before?

This.
They would get a lot of attention, and based on what they've got so far in terms of scrutiny, it might not go well for them.
If they sail those seas successfully, they'll need to get going on candidates in locals in order to have something to run on next time. Doing fk all might work the first time, but unlikely to work a second.

But during this cycle, it'll be labour unapposedfor whatever they want to do, while they have a majority of 250+.
Means labour can ignore their own headbangers as well as those of the "opposition"

M.

Is it feasible that Conservatives finish third behind LD and that they seek a Con/Reform coalition in order to become the official opposition.

More likely that the conservatives finish second but merge with reform and Farage gets a front bench job in the opposition.

I don’t think you can have a formal coalition in opposition?

[Fast and Spurious]

ChocolateFrog said:

Reform were doing the rounds locally with a car towing one of those billboard trailers and a loudspeaker.

Farage's grid plastered everywhere.

I was pleased to hear his tacit support for Putin went down like a bowl of cold sick to most people in the polls.

Edited by ChocolateFrog on Wednesday 26th June 21:29

Support for Putin?!
You are a bit thick.

[Elysium]

turbobloke said:

Elysium said:

smn159 said:

Vasco said:

smn159 said:

So the £17bn that Reform are promising to spend on the NHS by not not doing Net Zero doesn't actually exist as there there has been no provision made in budgets for Net Zero, so the £17bn would have to come from tax raises.

Typical Reform modus operandi then - say something which on the face of it sounds plausible to those who don't want to / aren't able to dig any further but are complete bullst when anyone looks at the detail.

Plenty appear to be falling for it though

I probably agree with you but need a bit of convincing that the other parties are much different.
.

Reform are making very specific promises, knowing full well that the money for them doesn't exist. If you have examples of the others doing the same I'm all ears.

Isn't Nigel supposed to 'tell it like it is?"

Isn’t this a completely circular argument as both main parties are saying they are going to do net zero and spend that money.

Are they not all promising money that doesn’t exist?

Hence the warning over Labour's GB Energy plans and the massive borrowing needed, which still won't be enough.

As the Climate Change Commttee (infrastructure type costs) and Oxford Uni profs (storage costs) have already pointed out, if a UK gov't wants Net Zero by 2050 then it's going to cost more than one HS2 completion bill per year, every year, to 2050. If that astronomical sum per year isn't spent soon then the cost per remaining years will increase accordingly. Without that, it's Not Zero. Anyone looking / hoping for a Dallas type deus ex machina solution popping up including in terms of storage is probably thinking about cavemen/women and green hydrogen.

Politicians in the main Parties are ignoring reality.

CCC Infrastructure etc
https://forums-images.pistonheads.com/18454/202406...

Oxford Profs storage
https://www.netzerowatch.com/all-news/on-the-stora...

£trillions unachievable
https://forums-images.pistonheads.com/18454/202406...

A hydrogen plan is scrapped
https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/production/sse-scr...

Whatever else they are, Reform are alone in offering a choice over Net Zero. They have net zero chance of being elected, so we have no choice either.

Well who would have thought it. Turns out Labour are going to spend “hundreds of billions” on net~zero.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/26/la...

[JagLover]

Vanden Saab said:

No problem at all as I am in favour of democracy,

More than that the Conservatives deserve to be wiped out after all the broken promises. Regardless of how they try and rebuild themselves they will at least have learned a valuable lesson in humility and that MPs are elected to serve the people.