Follow RoF

For all the breaking news, follow RoF on Twitter and Facebook

         
   
  

Asia-Pacific

Check out this week's top Asia-Pacific news on the Asia Pacific Headline page.
  
  

Main Discussion

Rate it
0
Report as offensive
bookem
Posted - 13 June 2017 12:35
I think it's pretty clear who won.
Captain Mal
Posted - 13 June 2017 12:39
Report as offensive
By "spinning the Tory disaster" are you meaning:

a) those spinning that everything is fine for the Tories and it's onwards and upwards; or
b) those spinning that the party with the highest vote share, most seats and (likely) all government posts going forwards somehow "lost" the election.

Both pretty intellectually bankrupt views if you ask me.
The Grapes of Khan
Posted - 13 June 2017 12:49
Report as offensive
Why don't we go on?

5. By making it clear the election was a binary choice - you either vote for a Tory government or a Corbyn led "Coalition of Chaos". The clear majority (a much bigger majority than for Brexit which is apparently the cast iron will of the people) chose the latter.
Barnsbury
Posted - 13 June 2017 12:59
Report as offensive
There's something I don't understand about the Tory disaster. The main complaint about the campaign was the manifesto. The main complaint about the manifesto was the "dementia tax", which meant lots of the elderly up in arms about having to sell their houses to pay for care.

Yet the thing (supposedly) what won it for Labour was all the young voters. Fine, but I would have thought the dementia tax would have played quite well with the young. There has been a lot written about the elderly holding on to too much wealth and living in enormous houses they don't use when there's a housing crisis etc etc. And then when someone actually does something about it The Young all say "ooh that's a bit nasty, we'll all go vote for that nice man with the beard".

Or am I missing something?
minkie
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:02
Report as offensive
Hank
I think that is a bit disingenuous.
If more people had wanted Lab in power they would have voted Lab not the smaller parties. Share increased for both Lab and Con.
If you want to blame sometjing blame fptp ( not excusing TM omnishambles ofc)
The Grapes of Khan
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:04
Report as offensive
I do blame fptp but I don't think it is disingenuous - I think nearly everyone that voted SNP, PC, Green or LD would rather see a Labour led coalition than a Tory government.
The Grapes of Khan
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:06
Report as offensive
what you are missing is that the young don't care very much either way about dementia tax - they voted positively for Labour, in large part because of tuition fees paid for the middle class youth and a minimum wage of £10 per hour for the working class youth (tongue in cheek here but basically true)
Many Dark Actors
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:08
Report as offensive
You can't start an election with a majority, end it without a majority, and claim to have won. Everyone knows that "winning" a British GE means getting a majority of parliamentary seats. Everyone knows this, now shut up sit down and suck it up.
minkie
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:09
Report as offensive
Barns, I was on favour (still am) of asking people with equity to assign it to hmrc after deathto pay for care. I also believe TM was surprised it went down badly, it was designed yo address generational inequality, I think she thought it would be a winner.
I think the problem was that it was poorly explained, the press went off on a frenzy of dementia tax and thats all people heard. The u-turn on a cap looked like they were trying to back down on a bad policy too when she shpuld have explained it better directly to the electorate. She obv made other mistakes too but I agree, the young might come to regret not seizing the opportunity to deal with this problem seeimg as they will be paying for it. And regrettably there will have been some people sho were thinking of their own inheritance.

I would not be surprised if Lab introduced something similar, it fits a socialist policy.
calmly chaotic
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:28
Report as offensive
Jethro yhm.
12
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:35
Report as offensive
It's very strange when after any vote, certain commentators immediately assert that 'people' voted for x y or z reasons. People voted labour for, not doubt, many nuanced reasons. Ditto conservative, who got more votes than in 97.

Plainly to conservatives one. Plainly the victory was pyhrricus maximum. Plainly it marked a big step forward for Labour, if only because the Tory party is usually a well oiled political machine, but here they were out-manoeuvered at almost every turn.
12
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:37
Report as offensive
the* won* maximus*

Typing like the bellend I am today.
Excession
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:40
Report as offensive
'Yet the thing (supposedly) what won it for Labour was all the young voters. Fine, but I would have thought the dementia tax would have played quite well with the young. '


But they weren't 'passing the money to the young' were they? They were quadrupling the number of elderly people they were going to make pay for care so they could say 'you can keep your last £100k'. It was a botched attempt to ameliorate the demnentia lottery amiongst the elderly but it didn't shift money down the generations to the young, so why should they care about it?

By contrast - writing off all the student debt imposed after the middle aged and well-off MPs pulled the ladder up (having had it all for free themselves) does shift money down the generations, so they voted for it in droves.
3-ducks
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:46
Report as offensive
Really?

I know Corbers bossed it, but he didn't technically get a majority.



bookem
Posted - 13 June 2017 12:35
I think it's pretty clear who won.
Many Dark Actors
Posted - 13 June 2017 13:59
Report as offensive
The Tory party is typically a creaking 1970s bus carrying a gaggle of moaning pensioners up a steep hill, its ancient engine wheezing and its brakes unlikely to halt it the other side.
Lydia
Posted - 13 June 2017 14:13
Report as offensive
I don't understand Labour supporters points. The Tories could hvae done better but we are still in charge and the Tories had a huge vote behind them.

Also it's not true that no young people vote Conservative. My sons have lots of friends who did.
calmly chaotic
Posted - 13 June 2017 14:15
Report as offensive
Tbf, Lydia, there is quite a lot you don't understand.
The Grapes of Khan
Posted - 13 June 2017 14:19
Report as offensive
what is there not to understand Lydia? May called an election to increase her majority - instead she lost her majority and is now playing an extremely dangerous game with the DUP that will almost certainly not last the full term and may destroy decades of hard work building peace in Northern Ireland. She did not "win".

Think of her as gambler - she had a small majority which she gambled to get a bigger one. She lost the bet.
calmly chaotic
Posted - 13 June 2017 14:25
Report as offensive
Not mine, BC.
Saillaw
Posted - 13 June 2017 14:51
Report as offensive
The dementia tax would have resulted in lots of elderly selling their properties sooner than they tend to and one of the main complaints of the young appears to be elderly people staying in family sized properties they don't need because there's no incentive to downsize.
calmly chaotic
Posted - 13 June 2017 14:53
Report as offensive
Not sure how much effect it would have had on that demographic, Saillaw.

Even if a flurry of family sized homes (probably still decorated from top to bottom in 1960s style) suddenly came on to the market, millennials still wouldn't be able to afford them.
Saillaw
Posted - 13 June 2017 15:02
Report as offensive
I don't know I picked up one such place for a steal after the owner died. It is now nearly in the 21st century.
Pinkus
Posted - 13 June 2017 15:03
Report as offensive
It was utter humiliation for the Tories and the Prime Minister, make no mistake. Where's the landslide? Where's the increased majority? Where's the mandate from the British people for Tory Brexit? Where's the strong and stable leadership that only Tories can deliver? Being propped up by Northern Irish nutbars just to cling on to power. Utter humiliation with a side of desperation.

The attempts at spinning it as 'everything is OK, we won - look vote share!' is simply denial and going down that path will just cause them further problems in the future. They shoild have spent more time on their policies and less time slinging mud at other people.

FWIW I thought dementia tax was a good policy - it's like, the problem needed attention and they came up with a decent policy to deal with the problem. Then it all went a bit Tory, didn't it? Uh-oh, the electorate don't like it. We may lose some power. U-turn, FFS, U-turn! And that was the point they lost any credibility.

Terence Brent D'arby
Posted - 13 June 2017 15:17
Report as offensive
'The Tories could hvae done better'


'but we are still in charge'


'Also it's not true that no young people vote Conservative.'

Thereisnotri
Posted - 19 June 2017 12:18
Report as offensive
In (probably a vain) an attempt to get some objectivity back, it's probably fair to say that everyone lost, except possibly the bearded one/JC/the new messiah.

The Tories lost - had a majority, and then ran an awful campaign, hopelessly presidential, with a PM who as part of a Cabinet committee looked competent, but as the sole focus of a campaign can't connect, you know, with other (on the assumption that she is, which she probably isn't) humans.

Having said that, the Tories have a working and an actual majority (although not a majority of seats). They could theoretically govern without the DUP. If you take Sinn Fein's seats out of the mix, and the speaker and deputy speaker (who don't vote), the Tories actually have an effective majority of 2.

I'm really worried about the DUP. Partly because of the religious fanaticism (which isn't terribly British) and their social policies, but mainly because I've been listening to Republicans on the radio and thinking "gosh, that doesn't sound unreasonable" and frankly if the DUP have that result, they have to be a bad thing.

Lib Dems - not quite as crap as they were after the last election, but crapper than they have been apart from that for several decades.

UKIP - totally b*ggered. Good.

Labour - they were relying on JC messing up so that they could go back to good old Blairism, which didn't cause any sort of problems at all ... He didn't. They're stuck with him. Lots of revisionist stuff going on and now, with an eye on political survival, they're actually in favour of him.

JC - fought a great campaign. Has no idea how they will pay even for the stuff they costed - tax projections will never produce as much as you/they want them to and they've only costed the day to day stuff, not the really expensive nationalisation and other projects. They can't do those (even if the electorate agreed that they should, which they didn't) without massively increasing taxes beyond even what they've suggested, which would inevitably have to work its way down to the masses.

Worth remembering that JC, despite being the new messiah, is only about as (un)popular as the last deeply unpopular Labour PM (Gordon Brown) who lost an election, but not quite as crap as Milliband, who lost by more.

It can only be put down as a success because a) he actually campaigned very well and in fairness did connect to you know, actual voters, rather well, and b) Labour weren't annihilated as most pundits (and in fairness Labour's own private polling) anticipated.

The polls got everything wrong (again) until the exit poll.

The country is now rather polarised and divided. The unfortunate thing is that it's not clear how to deal with that. Labour probably can't win a majority - they lost seats in Wales, the North and Scotland, with the Tories or others picking them up. They won seats in liberal, metropolitan areas. There aren't that many more of those which realistically they can win. JC might theoretically push a few more seats so that you could get a coalition (whether of chaos or otherwise) and displace the Tories, but it's very hard to see how he could actually win a majority as rural seats just will not support Labour.
The Grapes of Khan
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:16
Report as offensive
I am not sure why we are even having a debate on whether the Tories lost or not as we have already heard it from the horses mouth. May said categorically many times that if she were to lose 6 seats she would have lost the election.
3-ducks
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:21
Report as offensive
What the OP said.

The Tories are a joke under May.
Captain Mal
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:23
Report as offensive
Yes Hank, and we all know the purpose she of a GE is to avoid being the party in government at the end of it.

Lib Dems #winning since 1988.
calmly chaotic
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:26
Report as offensive
Well technically we are still not completely sure what kind of government we have at the moment, Mal. They seem to have gone a bit quiet on the outcome of their talks with the DUP, and without the DUP they don't have a working majority. It would be nice if they could tell us WTF is going on.
Excession
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:27
Report as offensive
'[Labour] lost seats in Wales'

They didn't - Wales was Tories -3, Labour +3, LIb Dem -1, Plaid +1.

calmly chaotic
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:30
Report as offensive
In fact, Mal, given that the Tories didn't need to call a general election and they managed to campaign in a way which caused them to lose their majority despite having a 20 point lead in the polls, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that their objective was to avoid being the party in government at the end of it. In which case, their biggest problem now is that they failed to lose enough seats.
Captain Mal
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:31
Report as offensive
Anna, they don't have an actual majority but someone else was posting to the effect that with Sinn Fein and the speaker and deputy speaker out they actually do have a working majority.

Which is before recognising that even they don't do a deal with the DUP it isn't as if the DUP is going to back Corbyn.
minkie
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:31
Report as offensive
sNP lost way more than Con.

How much do you think TM is desperate to pack her bags? Worse then when you hVe yo setve your notice and cant be bothered ....she has the mother of all kittens right now.

Not saying I feel sorry for her but this must be shortening her life by decades.
calmly chaotic
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:33
Report as offensive
Tbh I don't think it really matters whether they do a deal with the DUP or not. Either way the government is probably going to collapse sooner rather than later.
The Grapes of Khan
Posted - 19 June 2017 13:34
Report as offensive
Mal, a working majority of 2 is not really a working majority at all. Given inevitable absences amongst 650 people they will not have a majority as often as they do and that is before by-elections, which will inevitably be lost by the Tories start (we usually have around half a dozen a year)