When Will It All Go Wrong For The Tories/ Johnson?

[Snow1964]

I think the 2 by-elections showed there is a significant anything but Boris vote.

Voters then vote tactically to support the most likely to win against his party, the evidence is there in share of the votes with those in third falling drastically.

If the public were to take an anything but Boris attitude into next general election, and vote tactically, Labour would gain the red wall back, and whole chunks of South and SW would go LibDem and Conservatives would have similar number of seats as SNP.

 

[nw1]

I think the 2 by-elections showed there is a significant anything but Boris vote.

Voters then vote tactically to support the most likely to win against his party, the evidence is there in share of the votes with those in third falling drastically.

If the public were to take an anything but Boris attitude into next general election, and vote tactically, Labour would gain the red wall back, and whole chunks of South and SW would go LibDem and Conservatives would have similar number of seats as SNP.

Perhaps it wouldn't go that far but I would guess, the way things are now, the majority of red wall seats would flip back to Labour. Not the more socially conservative ones, such as Grimsby and Hartlepool perhaps, but certainly most of those in the Leeds/Sheffield/Manchester areas.

I can imagine the Lib Dems picking up a few in the SW, perhaps 8 or so, and in the SE, Winchester is certain I think, plus a few in areas like Surrey if tactical voting works properly (it's of note that Raab's majority is marginally less than the Labour vote in Esher and Walton last time; thus if all those Labour voters had voted Lib Dem, Raab would have been out!). So maybe 15 or so Lib Dem gains, split between the SW and SE.

Can also imagine possible Labour gains in places like Milton Keynes and Swindon. Sadly Reading West is unlikely because the new electoral map has a single Reading seat (which will almost certainly be Labour) with all other nearby seats rural, and thus likely solid Conservative.

Not sure how the maths of that adds up but the Tories only have to lose 40 seats to lose their majority.

I think that's a fair assessment. The next general election will be fought on tomorrow's issues and, as Harold Wilson said, a week is a long time in politics!

Do you seriously think Johnson has a real chance of winning the next election?

The next election will take place during or in the immediate aftermath of the cost of living crisis. In such situations, people tend to (rightly or wrongly) blame the incumbents - in this situation, in my view rightly.

 

[Typhoon]

Do you seriously think Johnson has a real chance of winning the next election?

The next election will take place during or in the immediate aftermath of the cost of living crisis. In such situations, people tend to (rightly or wrongly) blame the incumbents - in this situation, in my view rightly.

You don't need a crystal ball to know there will be big tax cuts (which we can't afford) shortly before the next election in a desperate attempt to keep hold of power (specially if it is still Johnson). To what extent traditional Conservative MPs call this out I don't know but you can guarantee that some voters will accept them and claim that we have turned the corner.
Enough to win, don't know but probably enough to save the massacre that some have mentioned.

 

[nw1]

You don't need a crystal ball to know there will be big tax cuts (which we can't afford) shortly before the next election in a desperate attempt to keep hold of power (specially if it is still Johnson). To what extent traditional Conservative MPs call this out I don't know but you can guarantee that some voters will accept them and claim that we have turned the corner.
Enough to win, don't know but probably enough to save the massacre that some have mentioned.

If so, it's a sign that sadly a lot of the electorate do not know the meaning of the word "bribe".

 

[daodao]

Not sure how the maths of that adds up but the Tories only have to lose 40 seats to lose their majority.

A plausible result might be:

CON 325 (-40)
LAB 229 (+27)
SNP 50 (+2)
LD 22 (+11)
NI parties 18 (no change)
PC 4 (no change)
Green 1 (no change)
Speaker 1 (no change)

As SF abstain, Con would retain power with a wafer-thin effective majority.

 

[py_megapixel]

If so, it's a sign that sadly a lot of the electorate do not know the meaning of the word "bribe".

Nor do they realise that a tax cut will lead to public services continuing to be run on a shoestring (and thus awfully). And probably a major tax hike at some point, because there will be a deficit as a result of them continuing to spend on headline-grabbing white elephants.

That adage, "you get what you pay for", applies with governments as well

 

[GusB]

Re the SNP: The mere thought that an enemy of the state could participate in governing a country that it wishes to destroy is bizarre. The Castle Catholics in the SDLP might do so, but SF, correctly in the light of their attitude to the UK state, abstain from participating at Westminster.

Calm down, dear!

Like it or not, the SNP were elected to parliament. Why shouldn't a party that represents part of the UK form part of the government of that country, and especially if being part of that government were to benefit the UK as a whole, in the short term at least?

Your cries of "enemy of the state" are overblown and, quite frankly, ridiculous.

 

[Acfb]

A plausible result might be:

CON 325 (-40)
LAB 229 (+27)
SNP 50 (+2)
LD 22 (+11)
NI parties 18 (no change)
PC 4 (no change)
Green 1 (no change)
Speaker 1 (no change)

As SF abstain, Con would retain power with a wafer-thin effective majority.

That would be a pretty bad result for Labour TBH. If Starmer doesn't get ~260 seats like in 2017 then he's failed badly.

I think the most likely result of the next election is something like Con 300-310 Lab 260 SNP 40-45 LD 20-30.

I do think the only way the Tories can retain a majority now is to replace Johnson with Wallace or Mordaunt so I hope that doesn't happen.

Calm down, dear!

Like it or not, the SNP were elected to parliament. Why shouldn't a party that represents part of the UK form part of the government of that country, and especially if being part of that government were to benefit the UK as a whole, in the short term at least?

Your cries of "enemy of the state" are overblown and, quite frankly, ridiculous.

Yes, I'm not worried about SNP influence in a hung parliament (they might even have a positive influence on issues like UK drug reform) and even I would admit they do have *some* decent MPs like Alison Thewliss and Philippa Whitford etc despite their current issues under Blackford. I would hope Labour makes a reasonable offer to them in terms of extra powers etc but I can't see how a 2nd referendum is granted now even under Starmer unless they get a really crushing mandate in 2026.

 

[Typhoon]

If so, it's a sign that sadly a lot of the electorate do not know the meaning of the word "bribe".

Or they are in such financial straights that they are quite prepared to be bribed? I understand that bribery was more than common in some eighteenth and nineteenth century constituencies (as shown by Hogarth and elsewhere).

Nor do they realise that a tax cut will lead to public services continuing to be run on a shoestring (and thus awfully). And probably a major tax hike at some point, because there will be a deficit as a result of them continuing to spend on headline-grabbing white elephants.

That adage, "you get what you pay for", applies with governments as well

It may be because I have been around for so long, but when it comes to cuts in public services, too many voters seem to only remember those that affect them. Library closed? Didn't go there. Bus services axed? Didn't use them. Parks sold off for housing? Isn't there another one they can go to. Clearing flytipping? Not down our road. Cuts to social services staff? We don't need them. It is only when the cuts really bite - bin collection monthly, charges for anything that they absolutely don't need to collect that it is time to contact the local paper (closed)/ councillor (who is it)/ local radio (now based a hundred miles away with a 2 minute bulletin - mainly about celebs). Turn to 'social' where your post is missed among the sea of others about lost cats, alarms going off at night, cute pictures of babies or of sunsets, Zumba classes, 'boy racers', Bingo, ...

 

[Yew]

EDIT I don't think anyone should vote because of habit or convention, people should vote based on some kind of analysis of the issues at the time and vote accordingly. I think that anyone who says and believes "never" is either wrong or stupid. I once said "never" and I was wrong, and I certainly wouldn't dispute my stupidity.

Was it John Maynard Keynes, who said, "When the facts change, I change my mind"?

 

[jfollows]

Was it John Maynard Keynes, who said, "When the facts change, I change my mind"?

Apparently not, or at least not attributably (is that a word?) but it's a good sentiment and one I agree with.
EDIT As a person I like to have a plan, so for example for my finances and spending, and indeed for voting in the next election, but I also know that the plan will change in the light of changing circumstances. So I plan to buy a replacement car in October 2024, but maybe I won't, but probably will.

It may be because I have been around for so long, but when it comes to cuts in public services, too many voters seem to only remember those that affect them. Library closed? Didn't go there. Bus services axed? Didn't use them. Parks sold off for housing? Isn't there another one they can go to. Clearing flytipping? Not down our road. Cuts to social services staff? We don't need them. It is only when the cuts really bite - bin collection monthly, charges for anything that they absolutely don't need to collect that it is time to contact the local paper (closed)/ councillor (who is it)/ local radio (now based a hundred miles away with a 2 minute bulletin - mainly about celebs). Turn to 'social' where your post is missed among the sea of others about lost cats, alarms going off at night, cute pictures of babies or of sunsets, Zumba classes, 'boy racers', Bingo, ...

I think you make a good point here - you describe me fairly well, too. I'd be annoyed out of proportion if my bin collection changed for the worse, because I don't use the other things - the bus service had already deteriorated to being dreadful before it started to be subsidised and I stopped using it a while ago, for example. And the local paper went away. We have a good local Web site to which I contribute but it's not news. Social media is dreadful, I subscribe to some things and try and answer obvious questions (the person posting about the huge increase in her train fare to Manchester, which was caused because her baseline was the fare during the summer and she didn't know about the minimum fare with a railcard during the rest of the year) but in general it's about lost cats and dogs plus many people never reply if you try and help them anyway ......

I think in general also people don't connect the erosion of local services with the financial strangulation coming from central government, so the government gets away with it, conversely it wouldn't get thanked for it much if it threw money at local government.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

That would be a pretty bad result for Labour TBH. If Starmer doesn't get ~260 seats like in 2017 then he's failed badly.

I think the most likely result of the next election is something like Con 300-310 Lab 260 SNP 40-45 LD 20-30.

How well was your crystal ball working when it helped with your predictions of the result of the last General Election? Were your predictions then close to what actually happened?

 

[Western Lord]

Calm down, dear!

Like it or not, the SNP were elected to parliament. Why shouldn't a party that represents part of the UK form part of the government of that country, and especially if being part of that government were to benefit the UK as a whole, in the short term at least?

Your cries of "enemy of the state" are overblown and, quite frankly, ridiculous.

It would be a strange situation indeed for a party forming part of the government to be pledged to creating a situation in which they could not be part of that government. The price of SNP support would be an independence referendum, to be repeated as often as they liked until they got the result they wanted. They might also be inclined to create policies at Westminster that would get Scots to support independence.

 

[D854_Tiger]

However, by virtue of delivering the Brexit that brought him to power, he'd already holed that economy below the waterline. Covid hitting was actually lucky for him, because it obscured the effects of his actions.

There's very little evidence that BREXIT has done that, yes there's disruption there always was going to be, anyway, we can argue about the merits (or otherwise) of BREXIT but really it's going take a decade to be sure, one way or the other.

However, what a lot of Europhiles seem to be oblivious of is that the eurozone is, once again, in huge trouble. Eurozone inflation is every bit as bad as the UK and the US but crucially they're scared to act by raising interest rates because of how it will impact on all that Southern European debt.

Italy is the next Greece (x 10), at some very soon point, the bond markets are going to turn on them (it's already happening with their debt spreads). France not far behind either, for sure, lot's of political pain coming and last week's French elections were a disaster for the EU. Italy goes to the polls anytime soon as well.

What's very rarely remarked upon in the MSM is the way it's the young in the EU that are turning on Brussels e.g, 60% of the under 30's in Italy voted for the populists at their last election, even higher in Greece.

Whatever BREXIT now does to us I suspect, even as early as the next election, that rejoining the EU will become the love that dare not speak its name.

Those EU debt levels don't lie, it may be tough here but at least were well out of it.

 

[Typhoon]

I think in general also people don't connect the erosion of local services with the financial strangulation coming from central government, so the government gets away with it, conversely it wouldn't get thanked for it much if it threw money at local government.

Good point. If Labour win lots of councils, what difference does it make? HMG starves local government of even more cash, gives them more responsibilities, sees them struggle, points the finger. (It, of course, could happen the other way around - Labour government, cuts back funding to councils following poor local government results, then say that the Conservatives are cutting back on key services.)

I'm tempted to think that councils run by some of these independent groups that seem to be springing up in some areas near me are worth voting for. At least they won't be biased in favour of any party in its current incarnation.

 

[D854_Tiger]

Re the SNP: The mere thought that an enemy of the state could participate in governing a country that it wishes to destroy is bizarre. The Castle Catholics in the SDLP might do so, but SF, correctly in the light of their attitude to the UK state, abstain from participating at Westminster.

Therein lies the problem for Labour, as soon as it becomes apparent that they would have to work with the SNP in government (the most likely scenario), most English voters will run a mile.

Then the Tories will not be slow in pointing it out either, like they did before with those posters of Ed Milliband peering out of Alex Salmonds top pocket. You can see it now, Nicola Sturgeon;s handbag with Keir peering out and it will work like a dream because basically it would be true.

The idea of an SNP Labour coalition would be utterly toxic to the English and utterly toxic to Labour as well given the SNP are their mortal enemies.

However Labour's biggest problem is still how to work with themselves successfully, never mind other parties. I'm old enough to remember the Lib Lab pact, lasted nine months, then bitter recriminations and that wasn't even a proper coalition, contrast that with they way the Tories held a coalition with the LDs together for five years.

 

[jfollows]

I'm tempted to think that councils run by some of these independent groups that seem to be springing up in some areas near me are worth voting for. At least they won't be biased in favour of any party in its current incarnation.

My council changed from Conservative to a coalition between independents and Labour in the 2019 elections; in my opinion it's much better than the one it replaced, which was mired in allegations of bullying and which acted in a very high-handed manner of basically ignoring the electorate (until it was too late). I don't think the new regime is doing a bad job, all things considered, and on current form I'll be voting for independent candidates again. It's interesting to see this is part of a country-wide trend, with some success in some areas like mine.

 

[Acfb]

How well was your crystal ball working when it helped with your predictions of the result of the last General Election? Were your predictions then close to what actually happened?

No my general election predictions have been pretty bad in 2015, 2017 and 2019.

I did think the Tories would probably get a small majority in the summer of 2019 once Johnson took over but I underestimated the extent Labour voters would abstain/switch to the Tories in the North of England.

I would be cautiously most optimistic about Labour winning back nearly all the seats they gained in 2017 and lost in 2019.

I'm also comparing with the 1992 result where the Tory vote only dropped 0.3% but Kinnock still gained 40 seats due to tactical voting.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

My council changed from Conservative to a coalition between independents and Labour in the 2019 elections; in my opinion it's much better than the one it replaced, which was mired in allegations of bullying and which acted in a very high-handed manner of basically ignoring the electorate (until it was too late). I don't think the new regime is doing a bad job, all things considered, and on current form I'll be voting for independent candidates again. It's interesting to see this is part of a country-wide trend, with some success in some areas like mine.

Will that council result be likely to have any effect on the next General Election result in your local area?

 

[daodao]

Will that council result be likely to have any effect on the next General Election result in your local area?

Why do you ask so many rhetorical questions? For this question in particular, I thought you lived in the same constituency as @jfollows so you should know the answer, namely zilch.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why do you ask so many rhetorical questions? For this question in particular, I thought you lived in the same constituency as @jfollows so you should know the answer, namely zilch.

Because I and another contributor possibly do live in the same constituency, it does not follow that we assume we both are of the same mind in political matters.

 

[jfollows]

Why do you ask so many rhetorical questions? For this question in particular, I thought you lived in the same constituency as @jfollows so you should know the answer, namely zilch.

Whilst you are quite right, and I treat many of the questions posed by Xenophon PCDGS as rhetorical questions as you say, there is the genesis of a real question here: are people now starting to vote deliberately against the Conservative party led by Boris Johnson rather than for a specific party? They obviously did so last Thursday, but will they do so in a general election? I don't know, but I think it's more likely than it used to be, and I hope so too.
In "our" constituency, a donkey with a blue rosette will get elected, it was ever thus (except for Neil Hamilton and Martin Bell) and there's no way I'd ever vote for Esther McVey whereas I had considered voting for George Osborne in 2017 until he decided not to stand. Again, I'm not wedded to fixed ideas, I change my mind and my vote according to the facts.
The big danger for the Conservatives is not that Labour/Liberal will make a formal alliance, but that the electorate will join the dots to vote for the candidate most likely to beat the Conservatives in those seats where the non-Conservative votes typically exceed those for the Conservative. That's not the case here in Tatton, where Esther McVey took 57.7% of the votes cast (28,277 votes) in 2019 (https://electionresults.parliament.uk/election/2019-12-12/results/Location/Constituency/Tatton). My vote was one of the 10,890 (22.2% of the votes cast) for the second-placed Labour candidate.

 

[D854_Tiger]

Do you seriously think Johnson has a real chance of winning the next election?

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

The Tories are only four points behind in the polls, that's unprecedented for a midterm government, normally you would expect the government of day to be fifteen points behind at least. Cameron certainly was 15 points behind Miliband and Thatcher was 22 points behind Kinnock at one stage.

OK Labour won Wakefield but that was unloseable, what matters is the rather small margin by which they took it no comfort there for Labour.

Forget Tiverton, most of those LD votes would return to the Tories in a GE, they always do.

Then remember all the **** is heading towards the Tories at the moment, through no fault of their own they've had a torrid time, that luck will change, so if Labour can't make any headway against Johnson now, I'm guessing they never will.

The cost of living crisis is transitory, caused by Covid and the Ukraine war, we all just found out the hard way that you can lock down economies in a day but starting them up again is a different matter.

The war has had a bad effect on gas and oil prices but that's mostly market panic, there are no actual supply problems, the oil price is now dropping and a little later expect the gas price to follow. The UK is actually awash with gas at the moment it's only a matter of time before that filters through.

 

[nw1]

Therein lies the problem for Labour, as soon as it becomes apparent that they would have to work with the SNP in government (the most likely scenario), most English voters will run a mile.

Then the Tories will not be slow in pointing it out either, like they did before with those posters of Ed Milliband peering out of Alex Salmonds top pocket. You can see it now, Nicola Sturgeon;s handbag with Keir peering out and it will work like a dream because basically it would be true.

The idea of an SNP Labour coalition would be utterly toxic to the English and utterly toxic to Labour as well given the SNP are their mortal enemies.

However Labour's biggest problem is still how to work with themselves successfully, never mind other parties. I'm old enough to remember the Lib Lab pact, lasted nine months, then bitter recriminations and that wasn't even a proper coalition, contrast that with they way the Tories held a coalition with the LDs together for five years.

Do many English voters (I am one) really actually care that much about whether the SNP is in a coalition government?

As far as I am concerned: If Scotland goes independent, so what? As long as they don't put up a hard border and implement Brexit-style restrictions on freedom of movement, restrict free trade, and restrict the rights for English people to work in Scotland and vice-versa, I personally don't give a damn. And I suspect I'm not alone.

If most English people see this as such a big issue that they are prepared to tolerate Johnson being in power until 2029, God help us.

 

[D854_Tiger]

The big danger for the Conservatives is not that Labour/Liberal will make a formal alliance, but that the electorate will join the dots to vote for the candidate most likely to beat the Conservatives in those seats where the non-Conservative votes typically exceed those for the Conservative.

In a by-election maybe but not at a GE.

That swing in Tiverton was a vote against the Tories but crucially not a vote for Labour.

The good people of Tiverton maybe angry but clearly not that angry.

 

[nw1]

Oh yes, there's absolutely nothing in the polling data or the voting data that says not.

The Tories are only four points behind in the polls, that's unprecedented for a midterm government, normally you would expect the government of day to be fifteen points behind at least. Cameron certainly was 15 points behind Miliband and Thatcher was 22 points behind Kinnock at one stage.

OK Labour won Wakefield but that was unloseable, what matters is the rather small margin by which they took it no comfort there for Labour.

Forget Tiverton, most of those LD votes would return to the Tories in a GE, they always do.

Then remember all the **** is heading towards the Tories at the moment, through no fault of their own they've had a torrid time, that luck will change, so if Labour can't make any headway against Johnson now, I'm guessing they never will.

The cost of living crisis is transitory, caused by Covid and the Ukraine war, we all just found out the hard way that you can lock down economies in a day but starting them up again is a different matter.

The war has had a bad effect on gas and oil prices but that's mostly market panic, there are no actual supply problems, the oil price is now dropping and a little later expect the gas price to follow. The UK is actually awash with gas at the moment it's only a matter of time before that filters through.

This is really worrying if what you're claiming is true - but what about all those people in Tiverton who have claimed they would normally vote Tory but did not due to Johnson?

I sincerely hope Johnson does not win the next election as it will suggest, to me, that much of the electorate is still convinced Brexit has saved their lives and/or is still following the personality cult of Johnson - so much so that they are prepared to overlook Johnson's arrogance, self-importance, lying and hypocrisy. The sooner people see this man for who he is, and stop the "Ooh! he's such a character!" or "Ooh! he's the messiah because he got Brexit done" nonsense, the better.

 

[D854_Tiger]

Do many English voters really actually care that much about whether the SNP is in a coalition government?

As far as I am concerned: If Scotland goes independent, so what? As long as they don't put up a hard border and implement Brexit-style restrictions on freedom of movement, restrict free trade, and restrict the rights for English people to work in Scotland and vice-versa, I personally don't give a damn. And I suspect I'm not alone.

English voters will take one look at a possible Labour SNP coalition and quite rightly ask how much is this going to cost us this time. It's utterly toxic to English voters and having the poisonous Nicola Sturgeon as their leader doesn't help

For what it's worth, I don't believe Scotland would ever vote for independence, the numbers just don't add up, they had to drop the euro like a brick and so have no alternative currency proposals, which is what did for them last time. The EU will do absolutely nothing to encourage them either because Spain won't let them.

N Ireland won't go either, they would have to give up free NHS healthcare, join the euro (dysfunction on a stick) and, of course, risk the peace they now enjoy if hard line nutter unionists decide to play up.

Though the Irish Catholic Church is no longer quite the threat it posed to Protestants that it once did.

 

[nw1]

English voters will take one look at a possible Labour SNP coalition and quite rightly ask how much is this going to cost us this time. It's utterly toxic to English voters and having the poisonous Nicola Sturgeon as their leader doesn't help

Which English voters? Not this one. We're not all hard-right pro-Brexit small-c conservatives, you know!

And Boris "BritTrump" Johnson is not toxic to many English voters?

 

[windingroad]

Which English voters? Not this one. We're not all hard-right pro-Brexit small-c conservatives, you know!

Nor this one! Though I did live in Scotland for a while so perhaps the evil nationalists have got their claws in.

 

[jfollows]

English voters will take one look at a possible Labour SNP coalition and quite rightly ask how much is this going to cost us this time. It's utterly toxic to English voters and having the poisonous Nicola Sturgeon as their leader doesn't help

I'm perfectly relaxed about having a SNP+Labour coalition. I don't find the SNP toxic. I don't find Nicola Sturgeon to be poisonous, and her example behaviour during Covid was in stark contrast to Boris Johnson's. I don't want to see Scotland break away from the United Kingdom, but if the people of Scotland decide that's what they want I don't have a major objection.