Corbynomics: A Dystopia

westernpromise

I am relieved Labour held Stoke. It means Labour is still stuck with Jezzer. Excellent!

In a way, a poorly-organised and generally operationally inept UKIP is exactly what Tezzer needs. Enough people will vote UKIP for this to lose Labour a lot of seats, but not enough will do so for UKIP to win any actual seats. So it's the SDP and endless Tory victories all over again until Labour and UKIP merge while Momentum spins off as La-La-Labour.

chris_m

martinsurrey wrote: »

Exactly, keeping a limping Corbyn until 2020 when, as well as a lame leader, the boundaries get re done, we should see a massive con swing.

Except that, if all the proposed changes go through, the Tories will now lose a seat they otherwise, until yesterday, wouldn't have had.

martinsurrey

chris_m wrote: »

Except that, if all the proposed changes go through, the Tories will now lose a seat they otherwise, until yesterday, wouldn't have had.

we're talking about on a national scale now.

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/boundaries2018.html

If we re ran the 2015 election with new boundaries and every vote being the same, the con would go from 50.7% of seats to 53.3% of seats.

Now add a 6.7% vote swing to Con (as in the seat they won yesterday) and you'd be looking at a much higher majority.

chris_m

chris_m wrote: »

Except that, if all the proposed changes go through, the Tories will now lose a seat they otherwise, until yesterday, wouldn't have had.

martinsurrey wrote: »

we're talking about on a national scale now.

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/boundaries2018.html

If we re ran the 2015 election with new boundaries and every vote being the same, the con would go from 50.7% of seats to 53.3% of seats.

Now add a 6.7% vote swing to Con (as in the seat they won yesterday) and you'd be looking at a much higher majority.

That is true - and, returning to the local scale, two of the constituencies that would expand to absorb Copeland are currently Labour and both contain industries that comrade Corbyn dislikes. That won't help Labour to retain them.

westernpromise

Tezzer vis a vis Jezzer is now in the position of a Monopoly player who has achieved a commanding position by owning a lot of properties. The outcome of the game is not in doubt, it's just all about winning as big as possible eventually. So such a player puts the odd house on Trafalgar Square or Vine Street and maybe a hotel on somewhere like Whitechapel.

The effect is to toy with the other players by deliberately keeping them juuust about in the game. Nothing bad enough to wipe them out ever quite happens. Instead their own rents, their £200 for passing Go, the odd £25 they get from a Community Chest card and any cash they can liberate by mortgaging properties all flow to Tezzer.

Eventually she tires of the fun, puts a hotel on the green and blue property groups and annihilates them. They are not bankrupted out of the game by the odd £20 or £30 they can't quite raise, but by £2,000.

And that is what Tezzer is doing to Jezzer. It's all about making sure he loses so bad in 2020 that 2025's a write off too. And so on.

Doshwaster

martinsurrey wrote: »

Exactly, keeping a limping Corbyn until 2020 when, as well as a lame leader, the boundaries get re done, we should see a massive con swing.

Although, as 2017 showed, expect the unexpected, and who knows whats going to happen before then!

The Tories will also be desperate for Nuttall to remain leader of UKIP as he is doing an excellent job of losing them votes.

I've just seen an analysis on the Guardian site that if May can win back half of the UKIP vote then that would mean and extra 45-50 seats currently held by Labour with a small majority.

Spidernick

martinsurrey wrote: »

we're talking about on a national scale now.

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/boundaries2018.html

If we re ran the 2015 election with new boundaries and every vote being the same, the con would go from 50.7% of seats to 53.3% of seats.

To my mind this further skewing of percentage of seats versus percentage of votes received is just more ammunition to those of us who feel that First Past The Post is not fit for purpose and that electoral reform is essential.

Do none of you on here want an effective Opposition? Surely a well-run democracy needs this and so Corbyn limping on will be bad for the country as a whole.

Malthusian

Thank you Westernpromise for reminding me why I haven't played Monopoly since I was 7. Silly game.

antrobus

Doshwaster wrote: »

...I've just seen an analysis on the Guardian site that if May can win back half of the UKIP vote then that would mean and extra 45-50 seats currently held by Labour with a small majority.

So basically, what with the new boundaries and (say) a 13 point lead giving the Cons a 350-175 win in 2015, now you're saying they could get another 45 seats, and make it a 395-130 win?

Crumbs almighty. Perhaps there is hope yet for those Lib Dems.:)



-

Malthusian

Spidernick wrote: »

Do none of you on here want an effective Opposition? Surely a well-run democracy needs this and so Corbyn limping on will be bad for the country as a whole.

Japan's Liberal Democratic Party had no serious opposition for decades and, despite the "lost decade", Japan is still one of the most prosperous and healthy countries in the world.

As long as the threat of being unseated is there to stop the polits doing anything too stupid or ruinous, it is not actually necessary for them to change places every four years (with all the waste that results).