|
I get the feeling both Labour and the Conservatives kind of feel that whoever wins this election will end up losing quite badly in the long run. Its a rather poisoned chalice with the way the vote is now split. Its got the makings of the loser being able to stoke the fires that the winning coalition is weak and floundering etc for the time they're in, especially if some key policies get stopped because of infighting.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:01 |
|
|
# ? Apr 29, 2024 16:18 |
|
Prince John posted:Assuming a majority is out of reach, does anybody feel Miliband would be better served by not forming a government? It must be difficult to avoid being tarnished as weak/ineffective if you're having to engage in negotiations on a vote-by-vote basis, having ruled out a formal coalition with the SNP. I wonder what they think the impact will be on the 2020 election. I think it really depends on how much constitutional change happens and then that really depends on how readily labour admits that the era of one party majorities is probably over.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:03 |
|
This is a cool thing :http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion?CMP=fb_gu Consider sending it to Misters Balls and Osborne.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:03 |
|
Prince John posted:Assuming a majority is out of reach, does anybody feel Miliband would be better served by not forming a government? It must be difficult to avoid being tarnished as weak/ineffective if you're having to engage in negotiations on a vote-by-vote basis, having ruled out a formal coalition with the SNP. I wonder what they think the impact will be on the 2020 election. serious gaylord posted:I get the feeling both Labour and the Conservatives kind of feel that whoever wins this election will end up losing quite badly in the long run. Its a rather poisoned chalice with the way the vote is now split. Its got the makings of the loser being able to stoke the fires that the winning coalition is weak and floundering etc for the time they're in, especially if some key policies get stopped because of infighting. If Labour refuse to deal with the SNP and let a Tory government in that they could theoretically have stopped, that's them done in Scotland*. And probably the union is done as well in that situation. I also can't imagine it'll help Labour in their other heartlands either. *yeah, things are pretty grim for them at the moment, but they have a chance, a probability that they can rebuild, as the SNP inevitably ebb from their current high water mark.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:09 |
|
does Farage really think that UKIP will be the biggest party in northeast England by 2020
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:09 |
|
Prince John posted:Assuming a majority is out of reach, does anybody feel Miliband would be better served by not forming a government? It must be difficult to avoid being tarnished as weak/ineffective if you're having to engage in negotiations on a vote-by-vote basis, having ruled out a formal coalition with the SNP. I wonder what they think the impact will be on the 2020 election. I remember the suggestion was that at least some Labour MPs were thinking along those lines in 2010. That forming a government would be difficult, so they would just let in the Tories to cut everything and destroy the country and then Labour could just cruise to victory in 2015. Probably the Lib Dems took the choice out of their hands anyway, but it clearly hasn't worked out as they imagined.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:10 |
|
Badger of Basra posted:This is a cool thing :http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion?CMP=fb_gu Thanks, I have spammed my facebook friends. Sadly, I'm not rich and/or powerful enough for them to Tory MPs.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:14 |
|
mediadave posted:If Labour refuse to deal with the SNP and let a Tory government in that they could theoretically have stopped, that's them done in Scotland*. And probably the union is done as well in that Alternatively: if the SNP are unwilling to agree to whatever demands Labour makes then they could themselves be accused of letting in a Tory government?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:23 |
|
Badger of Basra posted:This is a cool thing :http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion?CMP=fb_gu On a similar topic, Simon Wren-Lewis has written a series of posts about 'mediamacro myths' over the last week or so: http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/mediamacro-myths-summing-up.html mainly macro posted:It is still commonplace to hear media commentators say that the economy is doing great, and ask why the government is not reaping the benefit in terms of political support. In truth the puzzle is the opposite - given how poor economic performance under the coalition has been, and that this poor performance has hit most people in their pockets, the real puzzle is why so many people think the government is economically competent. And the answer to that puzzle in turn lies in the myths that mediamacro has allowed to go unchallenged. Perhaps the latest growth figures might begin to dent them, but a remarkable feature of these myths is that they seem impervious to actual data.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:24 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Alternatively: if the SNP are unwilling to agree to whatever demands Labour makes then they could themselves be accused of letting in a Tory government? Failing to vote with Labour on legislation wouldn't let in a Tory government unless Labour MPs vote to call a general election.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:25 |
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:does Farage really think that UKIP will be the biggest party in northeast England by 2020 Going by the reasons that people have left labour in scotland it's not too far fetched that they'll end up losing the north as well if things don't change, and to be honest at the moment UKIP is probably the best placed to gain from that.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:27 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Alternatively: if the SNP are unwilling to agree to whatever demands Labour makes then they could themselves be accused of letting in a Tory government? If the last seven months have taught me anything, its that the SNP seem to be unstoppable or unarguable against when they're framing the argument. EDIT: I mean, they're arguable against, you can argue until the cows come home about SNP obsfucations over Full Fiscal Autonomy or point out that 'as near federalism as possible' doesn't actually mean full independence with a shared defence policy or query what policies or spending plans they have that are to the left of Labour, but it doesn't dent the supporters and it certainly isn't denting their polling. I have no doubt that the SNP crying betrayal by the Red Tories would go down very well. mediadave fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:27 |
|
dispatch_async posted:Failing to vote with Labour on legislation wouldn't let in a Tory government unless Labour MPs vote to call a general election. If Labour is the smaller party than the Tories then how is it in Labour's gift to call another general election? We're talking about the 'coalition building' phase of proceedings here, right? mediadave posted:If the last seven months have taught me anything, its that the SNP seem to be unstoppable or unarguable against when they're framing the argument. Well, they did lose the referendum so I'm not sure about unstoppable. But yes, there's a lot of nationalist sentiment in Scotland at the moment that transcends logic. mediadave posted:spending plans they have that are to the left of Labour That's the funny part: they don't have any. Pissflaps fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:36 |
|
Taking into account that poll this morning that said the SNP would win all 59 seats in Scotland and that voting intention thing on the last page, we're looking at the delicious possibility of Danny Alexander and Nick Clegg losing their seats and Farage not getting elected? That would be amazing.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:45 |
|
I do not believe the polls, they are just another unionist red tory trick.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:49 |
|
Badger of Basra posted:This is a cool thing :http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion?CMP=fb_gu Very interesting article, thanks.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:50 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Well, they did lose the referendum so I'm not sure about unstoppable. But yes, there's a lot of nationalist sentiment in Scotland at the moment that transcends logic. Yes - my point exactly. It's just taken as true that the SNP are to the left of Labour - well to the left in fact. In my mind, the SNP at the moment are like Tony Blair in 1997 x2 (at least). Every critiscism, no matter how legitimate it is, is just bouncing off. I think it'll take a few years for them to deflate. The 2016 Scottish parliament elections could be the start of that deflation depending on how the SNP handle the referendum question (either way could blow up in their faces), and if Miliband has run a good minority government then in 2020 Scottish Labour may well be back in a position to retake seats.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:51 |
|
Badger of Basra posted:This is a cool thing :http://www.theguardian.com/business/ng-interactive/2015/apr/29/the-austerity-delusion?CMP=fb_gu As an addendum, this is still an incredibly relevant watch. A lecture from the Dundonian Ivy League political science professor Mark Blyth about the history of austerity and why it is so loving dangerous. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQuHSQXxsjM
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:52 |
|
Traditionally, the quickest cure preelection for hype is reality, but man the SNP have done some wonders in Holyrood. I don't know if they did it to be blatant populists and also I don't care; bring home some populism. edit: Mark Blyth is loving amazing
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:53 |
|
Pissflaps posted:That's the funny part: they don't have any. That depends if you trust a right wing think tank that use a "household budget" model of the economy.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:54 |
|
At the moment it looks possible that the only viable grouping of parties would be Labour/SNP/Lib Dem and the amount of anti-SNP wankery means that a viable government won't get formed. We all know why Miliband is acting tough on the SNP (i.e. otherwise it's like admitting he can't win a majority) but it seems then we're relying on the Lib Dem's backpedalling on their anti-SNP stance. Of course that'll be much easier when loses his seat and they elect a new leader. Will the Lib Dems demand cabinet seats or just support the minority government? We're going to have a minority coalition supported by the SNP?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:55 |
|
dispatch_async posted:That depends if you trust a right wing think tank that use a "household budget" model of the economy. They were specifically measuring deficit:gdp though. It doesn't matter what kind of model of the economy you're using, if two parties have a ratio that's basically the same as an objective, then government spending will be basically the same. Edit: Gotcha, sorry, brain not being engaged. Prince John fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:56 |
|
Prince John posted:They were specifically measuring debt:gdp though. It doesn't matter what kind of model of the economy you're using, if two parties have a ratio that's basically the same as an objective, then government spending will be basically the same. Yes but the key point is that the GDP figure will be different! Government spending increases GDP so you can also borrow more in absolute terms and maintain the ratio easier.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:58 |
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:At the moment it looks possible that the only viable grouping of parties would be Labour/SNP/Lib Dem and the amount of anti-SNP wankery means that a viable government won't get formed. We all know why Miliband is acting tough on the SNP (i.e. otherwise it's like admitting he can't win a majority) but it seems then we're relying on the Lib Dem's backpedalling on their anti-SNP stance. Of course that'll be much easier when loses his seat and they elect a new leader. The game completely pivots depending on Labour and SNP getting 326 seats between them, it's pretty interesting actually. Greater then 326, we probably get a weakish Labour government which the SNP can dictate a lot of terms against. Less then 326 and who the gently caress knows.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 19:59 |
|
But seriously as far as I can tell when it comes to constitutional reform it's Tories EVEL, Lib Dems Federalization, Labour giving more power to English cities and SNP... Uh... Their manifesto is a loving mess created by someone that has never heard of the word "Contents". Anyone know off the top of their head if they have a stated preference the UK beyond getting out?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:00 |
|
Kaislioc posted:
The SNP have no policies on the UK constitution aside from Scotland leaving the UK, changing the voting system to STV, and abolition of the Lords.* * they would however not oppose moves for regional devolution in England (as long as it did not impact on Scotland's funding) keep punching joe fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:01 |
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:At the moment it looks possible that the only viable grouping of parties would be Labour/SNP/Lib Dem and the amount of anti-SNP wankery means that a viable government won't get formed. We all know why Miliband is acting tough on the SNP (i.e. otherwise it's like admitting he can't win a majority) but it seems then we're relying on the Lib Dem's backpedalling on their anti-SNP stance. Of course that'll be much easier when loses his seat and they elect a new leader. Will the Lib Dems demand cabinet seats or just support the minority government? We're going to have a minority coalition supported by the SNP? The Lib Dems have also categorically refused to work with UKIP, and if the polls are accurate the Conservatives will need them as well as the Lib Dems. So God knows what they want.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:01 |
|
CoolCab posted:The game completely pivots depending on Labour and SNP getting 326 seats between them, it's pretty interesting actually. Greater then 326, we probably get a weakish Labour government which the SNP can dictate a lot of terms against. Less then 326 and who the gently caress knows. More than 300 and they can pick and choose between them. Probably the best outcome Labour can realistically hope for. Odds are 6-1 for 301-325 Labour seats on William Hill atm. hookerbot 5000 posted:The Lib Dems have also categorically refused to work with UKIP, and if the polls are accurate the Conservatives will need them as well as the Lib Dems. So God knows what they want. A brief and self destructive Con/Lib/UKIP/DUP coalition before a second election and a Labour victory would both be highly entertaining and one of the better outcomes for Labour actually! Lord of the Llamas fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Apr 29, 2015 |
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:01 |
|
CoolCab posted:Greater then 326, we probably get a weakish Labour government which the SNP can dictate a lot of terms against. Can they though? With a manifesto that largely mirrors Labour's, and already having blown their strongest bargaining chip by declaring they absolutely won't deal with the one other possible partner in government, and a single 'red line' issue that the Tory's won't vote with them on, what terms could they dictate?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:02 |
|
Kaislioc posted:
Honstly I don't know - I'd be surpirised, any suggestion that the UK system could be improved is undercutting their own argument.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:02 |
|
hookerbot 5000 posted:The Lib Dems have also categorically refused to work with UKIP, and if the polls are accurate the Conservatives will need them as well as the Lib Dems. So God knows what they want. I think the Lib Dems want to be out of government again and so are proposing all kinds of red lines and deal breakers about all kinds of things so they can refuse to form another coalition while remaining 'principled'.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:04 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Can they though? With a manifesto that largely mirrors Labour's, and already having blown their strongest bargaining chip by declaring they absolutely won't deal with the one other possible partner in government, and a single 'red line' issue that the Tory's won't vote with them on, what terms could they dictate? There will be lots of other legislation that Labour will want to get passed, that the Tories won't vote with them on, that they will need SNP support on.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:06 |
|
marktheando posted:There will be lots of other legislation that Labour will want to get passed, that the Tories won't vote with them on, that they will need SNP support on. So the big mansion tax vote comes around and what are the SNP going to do? Vote with the Tories against it? Abstain?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:08 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Can they though? With a manifesto that largely mirrors Labour's, and already having blown their strongest bargaining chip by declaring they absolutely won't deal with the one other possible partner in government, and a single 'red line' issue that the Tory's won't vote with them on, what terms could they dictate? They don't have to deal with the Tories to abstain on Labour legislation and prevent it getting passed. Also I find it bizarre that people think that every single policy that a Labour government might want to bring forwards over the next 5 years is already set out in their manifesto. Much of the awful poo poo the last Labour government did wasn't in any manifesto (as was some of the positive stuff - circumstances change over the course of a parliament).
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:10 |
|
Pissflaps posted:Can they though? With a manifesto that largely mirrors Labour's, and already having blown their strongest bargaining chip by declaring they absolutely won't deal with the one other possible partner in government, and a single 'red line' issue that the Tory's won't vote with them on, what terms could they dictate? See, I sort of see the SNP as protest-Labour? I think there's a pretty good reason that their manifesto mirror's Labour; they, like their base are loving Labour. It's the slightly-to-the-left element of the slightly-to-the-left party, which naturally found a home in Scotland; I think there's a lot more in common then election rhetoric suggests. They're not bound to the Labour whip anymore, so I would guess stuff they'd go against would be the same stuff you'd normally see backbencher rebellions on; they'd kind of functionally be a permanent backbench rebellion. It would be easier to work with the SNP then work against them, is my take.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:10 |
|
Pissflaps posted:So the big mansion tax vote comes around and what are the SNP going to do? Vote with the Tories against it? Abstain? The SNP have already backed the Labour mansion tax proposal. It's in their manifesto pages 6 and 25.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:11 |
|
Pissflaps posted:So the big mansion tax vote comes around and what are the SNP going to do? Vote with the Tories against it? Abstain? They could refuse to vote with Labour on devolved issues, that'll not do much damage their reputation in Scotland and could screw Labour up. Especially if more stuff gets devolved.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:12 |
|
Pissflaps posted:So the big mansion tax vote comes around and what are the SNP going to do? Vote with the Tories against it? Abstain? Voting for the mansion tax is in the SNP manifesto, which is why I said other legislation.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:13 |
|
keep punching joe posted:The SNP have already backed the Labour mansion tax proposal. It's in their manifesto pages 6 and 25. Exactly! They've got little room to 'dictate terms' to the Labour party.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:14 |
|
|
# ? Apr 29, 2024 16:18 |
|
The point is that the SNP won't be 'holding Labour's feet to the fire' - an ongoing process of horse trading is far more likely.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2015 20:15 |