UK Politics Thread XI: Boris' Big Bombastic Brexit Bash

[The Archregimancy]

Aside from the plurality of those voting voting for the anti-Brexit parties.

Don't undersell it: LAB+LD+SNP+GRN is 50.3%.

Labour were not an anti-Brexit party in this election.

Their policy was to negotiate their own 'better' deal with the EU, and then hold a referendum on that deal. They refused to commit in advance whether they would support their own leave deal or remain in the subsequent confirmatory referendum.

Anyone attempting to claim that Labour were an anti-Brexit party, and then using that to argue that a majority or plurality of voters voted for anti-Brexit parties yesterday is either misinformed, deluded, or lying.

[Philjia]

Some might praise Labour for sticking to their principles to last, but in the end people can't eat principles. Principles don't treat cancer. If some of them have to be abandoned to fulfil more important ones, then they should. Democracy is a game, and games often require that pieces be sacrificed to win.

[Salandriagado]

Don't undersell it: LAB+LD+SNP+GRN is 50.3%.

Labour were not an anti-Brexit party in this election.

Their policy was to negotiate their own 'better' deal with the EU, and then hold a referendum on that deal. They refused to commit in advance whether they would support their own leave deal or remain in the subsequent confirmatory referendum.

Anyone attempting to claim that Labour were an anti-Brexit party, and then using that to argue that a majority or plurality of voters voted for anti-Brexit parties yesterday is either misinformed, deluded, or lying.

They functionally were for the purpose of treating this as a referendum: people were voting for them to get to that referendum to vote remain.

[The New California Republic]

Another small silver lining for LibDem voters:

(Image)

So of the three main national parties, only the LibDems gained vote share across the country.

That graph also helps to get across just how bad Labour's result was just about everywhere.

Also worth noting that the Tories gained 48 seats with just a 1.2% increase in national vote share, while the party that gained the most in national vote share - the LibDems, with a 4.1% increase - lost a seat compared to 2019.

I'll spare you my screed on the need for electoral reform; you can probably imagine how it goes.

I didn't see this graph until now. A decent increase overall, and I mirror the take on electoral reform.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

So did young people not vote, or did they mainly vote Conservative?

like 10% of young people voted Tory

The Tories are absolutely fucked in the long term and before someone goes "uh young people have always voted Labour" no they haven't, that's a myth and the youth vote was until very recently largely in line with the overall vote. Speaking as someone who should be a Tory but isn't

This is a pure lie. Both of them.

About one in three people aged 18-25 voted Conservative, and the young has always voted for Conservatives this way. Ironically, I'm 90% sure I saw somewhere that a lower number of this age group voted for Conservatives in 1987.

It's almost as if 'you become more conservative with age' is true.

[The Blaatschapen]

Another small silver lining for LibDem voters:

(Image)

So of the three main national parties, only the LibDems gained vote share across the country.

That graph also helps to get across just how bad Labour's result was just about everywhere.

Also worth noting that the Tories gained 48 seats with just a 1.2% increase in national vote share, while the party that gained the most in national vote share - the LibDems, with a 4.1% increase - lost a seat compared to 2019.

I'll spare you my screed on the need for electoral reform; you can probably imagine how it goes.

They lost a seat compared to 2019?

Do you mean 2017?

[The Archregimancy]

Labour were not an anti-Brexit party in this election.

Their policy was to negotiate their own 'better' deal with the EU, and then hold a referendum on that deal. They refused to commit in advance whether they would support their own leave deal or remain in the subsequent confirmatory referendum.

Anyone attempting to claim that Labour were an anti-Brexit party, and then using that to argue that a majority or plurality of voters voted for anti-Brexit parties yesterday is either misinformed, deluded, or lying.

They functionally were for the purpose of treating this as a referendum: people were voting for them to get to that referendum to vote remain.

I'm sorry, but this argument is nonsense. Labour's platform wasn't anti-Brexit. It promised a confirmatory referendum on the new deal that Labour hoped to negotiate with the EU, but it wasn't anti-Brexit. These are not the same thing.

It's entirely possible to claim that a narrow majority voted for parties that were either supporting a second referendum or revoke. The 'LAB+LD+SNP+GRN' combination (which, incidentally, leaves out Plaid Cymru, the SDLP, and Sinn Fein) makes sense from that perspective.

It's not possible to claim that a narrow majority voted for parties that were anti-Brexit, because Labour's policy wasn't anti-Brexit, only pro-second referendum.

[The New California Republic]

Some might praise Labour for sticking to their principles to last, but in the end people can't eat principles. Principles don't treat cancer. If some of them have to be abandoned to fulfil more important ones, then they should. Democracy is a game, and games often require that pieces be sacrificed to win.

It hints at a need to re-evaluate their policies, especially some of the policies further to the left like nationalisation, which was one of the things that possibly turned off the more moderate voters.

[The Archregimancy]

Another small silver lining for LibDem voters:

(Image)

So of the three main national parties, only the LibDems gained vote share across the country.

That graph also helps to get across just how bad Labour's result was just about everywhere.

Also worth noting that the Tories gained 48 seats with just a 1.2% increase in national vote share, while the party that gained the most in national vote share - the LibDems, with a 4.1% increase - lost a seat compared to 2019.

I'll spare you my screed on the need for electoral reform; you can probably imagine how it goes.

They lost a seat compared to 2019?

Do you mean 2017?

I did; I'll go and edit that.

[Hirota]

like 10% of young people voted Tory

The Tories are absolutely fucked in the long term and before someone goes "uh young people have always voted Labour" no they haven't, that's a myth and the youth vote was until very recently largely in line with the overall vote. Speaking as someone who should be a Tory but isn't

This is a pure lie. Both of them.

About one in three people aged 18-25 voted Conservative, and the young has always voted for Conservatives this way. Ironically, I'm 90% sure I saw somewhere that a lower number of this age group voted for Conservatives in 1987.

It's almost as if 'you become more conservative with age' is true.

It's a double whammy when you consider the older you are the more likely you are to vote.

It's why there was a whole kerfuffle over the supposed youthquake in 2017 when Corbs was supposed to have motivated the yoff into voting. Of course, evidence points to it being made up then.

Incidentally, I see with some amusement pre-exit poll crowing about a 2019 youthquake. It might have shaken a couple of glasses of water, but it seems to have failed to be felt in westminster.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

There's your second referendum, people want Brexit.

Aside from the plurality of those voting voting for the anti-Brexit parties.

Rofl what?

Did you follow a different election?

[New Bremerton]

So what will happen to Corbynism? He says he will resign, but not when, and much of his fan base is pretty fanatic.
A lot are very much “but next he will win, honest!”

Will Labour realize it needs to drop his foreign policies to win?

Corbyn himself will not, he is too steeped in it.
The only way is to get the Corbynistas out, not most of their domestic policies which are popular but the useful idiot anti western foreign policy is not the way to go.

Sure gives you an idea of what kind of a dictator he would have been had he won, attempting to cultivate a cult of personality and cling on to power like fellow leftist ideologue Nicolas Maduro. All I have seen Labour MPs do in the run-up to this election is dismiss, insult and denigrate, rather than respectfully engage, with their political opponents, including ordinary Brits who voted Leave in 2016. Karma's a bitch.

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

I found what I was looking for.

In 1974, the Conservatives reached rock bottom of 24% of the 18-24 vote. In 1997, it was still around 27%.

18-24 year olds, 76% of whom did not vote Conservative in 1974, are today between 63 and 69.

I am fairly confident that switched almost directly opposite with 76% of them voting Conservative yesterday night.

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/ ... tober-1974

Meaningless. Just like the idea what we would Remain because people died and more young people became 18. Forgetting that people still switch in 30s, 40s and 50s.

[Salandriagado]

They functionally were for the purpose of treating this as a referendum: people were voting for them to get to that referendum to vote remain.

I'm sorry, but this argument is nonsense. Labour's platform wasn't anti-Brexit. It promised a confirmatory referendum on the new deal that Labour hoped to negotiate with the EU, but it wasn't anti-Brexit. These are not the same thing.

It's entirely possible to claim that a narrow majority voted for parties that were either supporting a second referendum or revoke. The 'LAB+LD+SNP+GRN' combination (which, incidentally, leaves out Plaid Cymru, the SDLP, and Sinn Fein) makes sense from that perspective.

It's not possible to claim that a narrow majority voted for parties that were anti-Brexit, because Labour's policy wasn't anti-Brexit, only pro-second referendum.

My claim is specifically that a narrow majority voted against Brexit. I'm specifically claiming that Labour voters don't want to leave, and voted for them to block the Tories. (And I skipped PC/SDLP/SF because I just added parties in until I got over 50%).

[The Archregimancy]

So what will happen to Corbynism? He says he will resign, but not when, and much of his fan base is pretty fanatic.
A lot are very much “but next he will win, honest!”

Will Labour realize it needs to drop his foreign policies to win?

Corbyn himself will not, he is too steeped in it.
The only way is to get the Corbynistas out, not most of their domestic policies which are popular but the useful idiot anti western foreign policy is not the way to go.

Sure gives you an idea of what kind of a dictator he would have been had he won, attempting to cultivate a cult of personality and cling on to power like fellow leftist ideologue Nicolas Maduro.

This type of ridiculous hyperbole helps no one.

I've been fairly clear that I think Corbyn has been an unmitigated disaster as Labour leader, and one of the few bright spots about yesterday's thrashing is that it'll be impossible for him to cling on for long.

But the idea that Corbyn would have been some sort of Maduro-like dictator who would have engaged in Chavista tactics to 'cling to power' is risible.

[Munkcestrian Republic]

like 10% of young people voted Tory

The Tories are absolutely fucked in the long term and before someone goes "uh young people have always voted Labour" no they haven't, that's a myth and the youth vote was until very recently largely in line with the overall vote. Speaking as someone who should be a Tory but isn't

Nah.

The younger you are the more likely you are to vote Labour. It's generally been the case since 1974.

42% Tory, 33% Labour in 1983. As I said, largely in line with the overall vote.

AND LOOK AT 2010. 30% Tory, 31% Labour, 30% Lib Dem. Look at how that has collapsed.

[Liriena]

So what will happen to Corbynism? He says he will resign, but not when, and much of his fan base is pretty fanatic.
A lot are very much “but next he will win, honest!”

Will Labour realize it needs to drop his foreign policies to win?

Corbyn himself will not, he is too steeped in it.
The only way is to get the Corbynistas out, not most of their domestic policies which are popular but the useful idiot anti western foreign policy is not the way to go.

Sure gives you an idea of what kind of a dictator he would have been had he won, attempting to cultivate a cult of personality and cling on to power like fellow leftist ideologue Nicolas Maduro. All I have seen Labour MPs do in the run-up to this election is dismiss, insult and denigrate, rather than respectfully engage, with their political opponents, including ordinary Brits who voted Leave in 2016. Karma's a bitch.

The level of paranoid self-delusion in here...

[Munkcestrian Republic]

Nah.

The younger you are the more likely you are to vote Labour. It's generally been the case since 1974.

42% Tory, 33% Labour in 1983. As I said, largely in line with the overall vote.

AND LOOK AT 2010. 30% Tory, 31% Labour, 30% Lib Dem. Look at how that has collapsed.

and you clearly have no idea how polling was in 1974

[The Huskar Social Union]

42% Tory, 33% Labour in 1983. As I said, largely in line with the overall vote.

AND LOOK AT 2010. 30% Tory, 31% Labour, 30% Lib Dem. Look at how that has collapsed.

and you clearly have no idea how polling was in 1974

... are you arguing with yourself? Or just following up

[Munkcestrian Republic]

like 10% of young people voted Tory

The Tories are absolutely fucked in the long term and before someone goes "uh young people have always voted Labour" no they haven't, that's a myth and the youth vote was until very recently largely in line with the overall vote. Speaking as someone who should be a Tory but isn't

This is a pure lie. Both of them.

About one in three people aged 18-25 voted Conservative, and the young has always voted for Conservatives this way. Ironically, I'm 90% sure I saw somewhere that a lower number of this age group voted for Conservatives in 1987.

It's almost as if 'you become more conservative with age' is true.

it's not though! It's almost as if you're wrong and it's not a lie!

No, one in three people aged 18-24 did not vote Conservative.

also

1987 - 37% Tory 39% Labour

[Munkcestrian Republic]

and you clearly have no idea how polling was in 1974

... are you arguing with yourself? Or just following up

it's how i post. following up

[Definitely Not Trumptonium]

Nah.

The younger you are the more likely you are to vote Labour. It's generally been the case since 1974.

42% Tory, 33% Labour in 1983. As I said, largely in line with the overall vote.

AND LOOK AT 2010. 30% Tory, 31% Labour, 30% Lib Dem. Look at how that has collapsed.

In both of your examples the youth vote is 6% lower than the national vote

[Munkcestrian Republic]

42% Tory, 33% Labour in 1983. As I said, largely in line with the overall vote.

AND LOOK AT 2010. 30% Tory, 31% Labour, 30% Lib Dem. Look at how that has collapsed.

In both of your examples the youth vote is 6% lower than the national vote

6% lower then, 25% lower now

[Munkcestrian Republic]

In both of your examples the youth vote is 6% lower than the national vote

6% lower then, 25% lower now

(idk why Trumptonium wants to argue this instead of, idk, working to make the Tories more attractive to young people again)

(if they'd actually gone for home ownership and abolishing tuition fees they wouldn't be in this mess)

[The Archregimancy]

I'm sorry, but this argument is nonsense. Labour's platform wasn't anti-Brexit. It promised a confirmatory referendum on the new deal that Labour hoped to negotiate with the EU, but it wasn't anti-Brexit. These are not the same thing.

It's entirely possible to claim that a narrow majority voted for parties that were either supporting a second referendum or revoke. The 'LAB+LD+SNP+GRN' combination (which, incidentally, leaves out Plaid Cymru, the SDLP, and Sinn Fein) makes sense from that perspective.

It's not possible to claim that a narrow majority voted for parties that were anti-Brexit, because Labour's policy wasn't anti-Brexit, only pro-second referendum.

My claim is specifically that a narrow majority voted against Brexit. I'm specifically claiming that Labour voters don't want to leave, and voted for them to block the Tories. (And I skipped PC/SDLP/SF because I just added parties in until I got over 50%).

Then you're wrong.

Labour's ambiguous Brexit policy was deliberately designed to avoid alienating either Leavers or Remainers; we therefore should not assume that all 10,292,354 Labour voters 'didn't want to leave'.

It's certainly likely that a good majority of Labour voters would have supported Remain in a second referendum; but by no means all of them. So you're making the statistical error of assuming a majority should be taken as representing the totality of a data set when combining that data set with others.

And again, Labour was not an anti-Brexit party - only a pro-second referendum party.