Stop voting for fucking Tories

[tabascoboy]

If you are turned away outside or leave without presenting yourself then nothing is recorded...so stats on reduced turnout are likely to be very misleading and no doubt justified by "we prevented mass fraud!" or "they wouldnt have voted in any case!"

[Yeeb]

I'm going to go with; because Apple are a shower of gouging wankers, who'll charge whatever the market will tolerate.

It's not just apple.

The price of tools in America is a fraction of over here

Don't forget the charge VAT after...

That kind of apple price difference , seems the same as it’s always been for tech ? America is a bigger market so tellies and computers and stuff have always been cheaper there.
In SA, Tech stuff seemed expensive compared to UK - but tools were mentioned and hand tools like a chisel were a fraction of what B&Q rape us on, when power tools seemed similar.
Am not sure you can put Apple price gouging, purely at the door of the Tories.

[I like neeps]

Not much council elections posting?

Quite a big election I reckon. A redo of the 2019 council elections, when May was on her last gasps as PM and Brexit was feeding into every election in a big way. The Tories didn't do well in that election, it's not looking good for them if they're even worse this time. The other interesting element is how much voter suppression works in favour of the Tories.

Contests worth watching are around Teesside. Sunak was still heavily promoting freeports as a way to boost UK growth very recently as PM (I remember an interview at the end of last year). For a lot of reasons they're not going to work in the UK, but the Tories are wedded to the idea that if you get rid of all government and let the rich and powerful have total control great things happen. The only places this has worked are formerly heavily impoverish places (famine conditions), or city states with a mostly migrant population. The largest freeport is Teesside, it has been controversial. It's both a local issue there, but also a national issue. If Teesside vote against the Tories it would be a rejection of Tory grand plans for the UK (it may seem ridiculous that what amounts to "make mega multinational corporations even richer" is their grand plan, but it is).

That's how you get desperation campaigning like this ...



Which no journalist I've seen has made the obvious connection to this ...



Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council currently has: Labour 24, Tories 16, Lib Dems 1, micro parties and independents holding 15 seats.
Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council currently has: Labour 15, Lib Dems 14, Tories 6, micro parties and independents holding 24 seats.

I'm not going through all of them, but both of those are going to the polls today.

I predict turnout to be absolutely dreadful. Maybe the worst turnout ever.

[Paddington Bear]

Given I have a surname that people routinely mis-spell, showing my driving licence this morning actually sped up the process of voting.

[Hal Jordan]

Anecdotally, it appears a lot of the turned away are pensioners, as a good deal of them lack the ID. That would chime with my experiences truing to get ID from elderly clients, everything has expired as they no longer go abroad or drive.

[Paddington Bear]

Anecdotally, it appears a lot of the turned away are pensioners, as a good deal of them lack the ID. That would chime with my experiences truing to get ID from elderly clients, everything has expired as they no longer go abroad or drive.

I did say this before, but just about everyone under 35/40 (may be slightly different for very young voters who have drifted away from driving) carries their driving licence around in their wallet/purse as a matter of course.

[tabascoboy]

Anecdotally, it appears a lot of the turned away are pensioners, as a good deal of them lack the ID. That would chime with my experiences truing to get ID from elderly clients, everything has expired as they no longer go abroad or drive.

If they are as the demographic usually suggests Tory voters then it would be a pretty spectacular own goal #hoping

[tabascoboy]

Anecdotally, it appears a lot of the turned away are pensioners, as a good deal of them lack the ID. That would chime with my experiences truing to get ID from elderly clients, everything has expired as they no longer go abroad or drive.

I did say this before, but just about everyone under 35/40 (may be slightly different for very young voters who have drifted away from driving) carries their driving licence around in their wallet/purse as a matter of course.

I've never had a Driver's License so never had cause to carry ID unless it's very specifically needed

Seems to be some confusion about passports, some saying an expired passport is fine as long the photo still resembles you, and others saying it has to be valid. Mine expires next year and not planning on going abroad so no intention to renew.

[_Os_]

I predict turnout to be absolutely dreadful. Maybe the worst turnout ever.

There's very little media coverage. The BBC News channel was playing over lunch, I was half paying attention. Wall to wall royals, makes sense as lots of people are interested in that. A full segment on the Turkish elections 5-10 minutes. Fuck all on the council elections, an under 30 second slot.

Which to me is very odd.

But quite a lot of this election is odd. I won't get deep into it, but the council I know best has suffered under Tory corruption. I know a fair bit because a Labour councillor has told me about it (names, sums, company names, etc). If I Google it all, there's some news articles on it but not much. The council is also in debt. The value of assets which have found their way into (probably) Tory connected property developer hands (think that Teesside story on a smaller scale), roughly matches the size of the council debt. In other words if the assets had been sold in regular fashion there would be no council debt, instead there is and the assets were given away. To top it all off there's such a pathological commitment to not building houses, that there's been no redevelopment of the assets that were given away (objections, planning, blah blah).

Where it gets odd is Labour campaign material doesn't mention any of this, beyond maybe half a sentence on the council debt. Instead Labour is campaigning on greenwashed NIMBYism: re-wild, don't build on greenfield land, make the parks better. One of the assets given away they make out is still council owned and want it re-wilded. Greens are a weaker version of Labour. Lib Dems are full NIMBY without the greenwash, they've gone full on "no new developments because no new things in my back yard", literally in bold block capital font. The Tories are attacking landlords and businesses that would quite like to stay open, whilst praising the vast amounts they've spent (which is all debt). Labour/Lib Dems/(Greens?) are desperate for Tory voters, whilst the Tories are attacking their own voters and a trying to be a demented Labour parody. Meanwhile some roads are so potholed you have to slow down to walking pace to use them, and the debt presumably keeps stacking up.

[tabascoboy]

Council elections are notorious though for generating little to no interest with 35% turnout considered normal! Unless there is a real burning issue affecting them personally most people don't get that worked up about it and while mine and the next door wards kicked out the Tories a few years ago the boundaries have now been redrawn and they now include parts from other wards that have remained Tory ( purely coincidence I'm sure...).

I'd like to think that discontent means that people are more inclined to try and deliver a kicking to Tory councils but have my doubts that the effect will be as significant as I'd wish.

[I like neeps]

I predict turnout to be absolutely dreadful. Maybe the worst turnout ever.

There's very little media coverage. The BBC News channel was playing over lunch, I was half paying attention. Wall to wall royals, makes sense as lots of people are interested in that. A full segment on the Turkish elections 5-10 minutes. Fuck all on the council elections, an under 30 second slot.

Which to me is very odd.

But quite a lot of this election is odd. I won't get deep into it, but the council I know best has suffered under Tory corruption. I know a fair bit because a Labour councillor has told me about it (names, sums, company names, etc). If I Google it all, there's some news articles on it but not much. The council is also in debt. The value of assets which have found their way into (probably) Tory connected property developer hands (think that Teesside story on a smaller scale), roughly matches the size of the council debt. In other words if the assets had been sold in regular fashion there would be no council debt, instead there is and the assets were given away. To top it all off there's such a pathological commitment to not building houses, that there's been no redevelopment of the assets that were given away (objections, planning, blah blah).

Where it gets odd is Labour campaign material doesn't mention any of this, beyond maybe half a sentence on the council debt. Instead Labour is campaigning on greenwashed NIMBYism: re-wild, don't build on greenfield land, make the parks better. One of the assets given away they make out is still council owned and want it re-wilded. Greens are a weaker version of Labour. Lib Dems are full NIMBY without the greenwash, they've gone full on "no new developments because no new things in my back yard", literally in bold block capital font. The Tories are attacking landlords and businesses that would quite like to stay open, whilst praising the vast amounts they've spent (which is all debt). Labour/Lib Dems/(Greens?) are desperate for Tory voters, whilst the Tories are attacking their own voters and a trying to be a demented Labour parody. Meanwhile some roads are so potholed you have to slow down to walking pace to use them, and the debt presumably keeps stacking up.

Yeah I think that's part of the problem, parties don't run on a national platform and very often local parties actively go against the priorities of the national party. And where people can and do vote on hyper local issues it's unusual to do so.

And all the juice has been taken from local democracy so councillors don't matter much. I'm politically pretty engaged but I have no idea what my councillors get up to.

[I like neeps]

Oh dear.

[fishfoodie]

As that thread shows, he has a long track record of fucking awful quotes, which reflect some pretty fucking awful opinions.

[Hal Jordan]

Anecdotally, it appears a lot of the turned away are pensioners, as a good deal of them lack the ID. That would chime with my experiences truing to get ID from elderly clients, everything has expired as they no longer go abroad or drive.

I did say this before, but just about everyone under 35/40 (may be slightly different for very young voters who have drifted away from driving) carries their driving licence around in their wallet/purse as a matter of course.

I'm always dumbfounded by the number of people who

A). Forget to bring their ID to a meeting when asked to do so; and

B). Don't carry their driving license.

More people than you think still have paper licences, usually falling to bits due to their age.

Also, Starkey can go fuck himself, the racist old fool.

[Happyhooker]

Anecdotally, it appears a lot of the turned away are pensioners, as a good deal of them lack the ID. That would chime with my experiences truing to get ID from elderly clients, everything has expired as they no longer go abroad or drive.

I did say this before, but just about everyone under 35/40 (may be slightly different for very young voters who have drifted away from driving) carries their driving licence around in their wallet/purse as a matter of course.

I'm 53 and the only thing with my name on it that i carry around as a matter of course is my bank card.

My passport and driving licence stay at home, cos replacing them when they've been nicked is an arse.

It's really ironic that the tories are so anti id cards but are insisting on id to vote. It's almost like it's not an ideological thing

[Biffer]

After a few drinks I felt the need to post this, on this week of all weeks.

[_Os_]

Woke up had a look at the count. It's looking seriously bad for the Tories if this direction is maintained. Kuenssberg has a face like a smacked arse on the BBC coverage.

Some "OOOFF" result maps.

[Jim Lahey]

Good, they deserve a good kicking.

Although Worcester is fucked, voting in the Greens

[GogLais]

I have never understood the aversion to ID to vote. Seems counter intuitive

Nobody would think twice about it if we’d always had it. The issue is more the way it’s been implemented.

[Tichtheid]

Good, they deserve a good kicking.

Although Worcester is fucked, voting in the Greens

I nearly voted Green as they are going to win here, they currently lead a minority in the council, have done for while now.

I switched to Labour at the last minute because I know one of the candidates and he was standing outside the polling station when I went to vote.

[Jim Lahey]

Good, they deserve a good kicking.

Although Worcester is fucked, voting in the Greens

I nearly voted Green as they are going to win here, they currently lead a minority in the council, have done for while now.

I switched to Labour at the last minute because I know one of the candidates and he was standing outside the polling station when I went to vote.

Well for your sake I hope the Greens in GB are less delusional than their Irish cousins.

[Tichtheid]

Good, they deserve a good kicking.

Although Worcester is fucked, voting in the Greens

I nearly voted Green as they are going to win here, they currently lead a minority in the council, have done for while now.

I switched to Labour at the last minute because I know one of the candidates and he was standing outside the polling station when I went to vote.

Well for your sake I hope the Greens in GB are less delusional than their Irish cousins.

As a city Brighton and Hove has its own set of problems which I won't go into, it would take too long here, but overall the council does an okay job, I think. I have the full house of privilege so for me the most annoying thing is the difficulty in finding parking.

[Paddington Bear]

Good, they deserve a good kicking.

Although Worcester is fucked, voting in the Greens

I nearly voted Green as they are going to win here, they currently lead a minority in the council, have done for while now.

I switched to Labour at the last minute because I know one of the candidates and he was standing outside the polling station when I went to vote.

Well for your sake I hope the Greens in GB are less delusional than their Irish cousins.

They spend most of their time on local councils here trying to veto solar panel farms, so no they are not.

[tabascoboy]

Some of them still don't get it...and seem to want a return back to Truss/Kwarteng policies...

Sunak urged to cut taxes and 'go for growth'


A small number of Tories are already calling for tax cuts to reverse their fortunes.

David Jones MP said: “Conservative voters want a lower tax regime and control over illegal immigration.”

Sir John Redwood MP tweeted: “If the PM wants to win back lost Conservative voters he should try offering some Conservative policies. Cut taxes, get better value for state spending and go for growth.”

Tories lost control of Andrew Bridgen's North West Leicestershire

[Line6 HXFX]

Tories will allow people with litterally zero qualifications to mess with disabled and sick people.

Work coaches will now have life or death power over some of the most vulnerable people in the U.K.
As it is , the sick and disabled have 5 times more chance of getting sanctioned than a fit person.
Reminds me of the movie "The killing fields", when a 12 year old kid (as kids were clean slates) was deciding who lived and died.

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/ ... -admits/

Job coaches with no academic qualifications could be making life-changing – and potentially life-ending – decisions on whether a disabled person must carry out work-related activity, if the government goes ahead with its plans to scrap the “fitness for work” test.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has told Disability News Service (DNS) that there are no minimum academic qualifications to undertake the role of a work coach in a jobcentre.

It is these work coaches who will take on the role of deciding if disabled claimants of universal credit are able to carry out tasks such as attending training courses or work-related interviews.

DWP announced plans to scrap the work capability assessment (WCA) in its Transforming Support white paper in March.

Its plans, which will only go ahead if the Conservatives win the next election, will see eligibility for out-of-work disability benefits – through a new universal credit “health element” – decided by the personal independence payment (PIP) assessment.

This means that decisions on whether a sick or disabled person must attend job-focused interviews or other work-related activity will in future be decided by a jobcentre work coach.

DWP decisions around deciding fitness for work and work-related activity through the WCA have been linked to countless deaths over the last 15 years, but there are now fears that the government’s plans could lead to even more deaths.

The white paper says: “We want to introduce a more tailored approach, to allow work coaches to build a relationship with an individual and determine what, if any, work-related activities an individual can participate in.”

Tom Pursglove, the minister for disabled people, has told Labour’s shadow disability minister Vicky Foxcroft that work coaches would “have tailored conversations with claimants to determine what they can do and what, if any, work-related activities they can participate in”.

He added: “We will work with our work coaches to develop these proposals and ensure they have the right training and support needed to fulfil this change in their role.”

But DWP has now told DNS – in response to a freedom of information request – that there “are no current minimum academic qualifications required to undertake a Work Coach role in a Jobcentre”.

Instead, DWP uses its own “Work Coach specific Situational Judgement Test as the first selection tool in Work Coach recruitment”.

When the forerunner of the WCA – the “all work test” – was introduced in 1995 under Conservative social security secretary Peter Lilley, all assessments had to be carried out by a doctor.

By the time the WCA was introduced 13 years later, ministers had decided that paramedics, nurses and physiotherapists had enough healthcare expertise to carry out assessments and recommend if a claimant could carry out work-related activity.

Now those decisions – if ministers’ controversial proposals become law – could be made by work coaches who do not even have a single GCSE.

[tabascoboy]

Which councils have changed hands so far?
With just under half of the local election results declared, here's a list of the councils that have changed hands so far:

Brentwood - Conservatives loss to no overall control
Tamworth - Conservatives loss to no overall control
Plymouth - Labour gain from no overall control
North West Leicestershire - Conservatives loss to no overall control
Hertsmere - Conservatives loss to no overall control
East Lindsay - Conservatives loss to no overall control
Stoke-on-Trent - Labour gain from no overall control
Boston - Independent gain from no overall control
Windsor & Maidenhead - Lib Dem gain from Conservatives
Medway - Labour gain from Conservatives
South Kesteven - Conservatives loss to no overall control
East Hertfordshire - Conservatives loss to no overall control
South Gloucestershire - Conservatives loss to no overall control
Welwyn Hatfield - Conservatives loss to no overall control

And Tories just lost Maidstone to NOC

[Begbie]

Tories will allow people with litterally zero qualifications to mess with disabled and sick people.

Work coaches will now have life or death power over some of the most vulnerable people in the U.K.
As it is , the sick and disabled have 5 times more chance of getting sanctioned than a fit person.
Reminds me of the movie "The killing fields", when a 12 year old kid (as kids were clean slates) was deciding who lived and died.

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/ ... -admits/

Job coaches with no academic qualifications could be making life-changing – and potentially life-ending – decisions on whether a disabled person must carry out work-related activity, if the government goes ahead with its plans to scrap the “fitness for work” test.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has told Disability News Service (DNS) that there are no minimum academic qualifications to undertake the role of a work coach in a jobcentre.

It is these work coaches who will take on the role of deciding if disabled claimants of universal credit are able to carry out tasks such as attending training courses or work-related interviews.

DWP announced plans to scrap the work capability assessment (WCA) in its Transforming Support white paper in March.

Its plans, which will only go ahead if the Conservatives win the next election, will see eligibility for out-of-work disability benefits – through a new universal credit “health element” – decided by the personal independence payment (PIP) assessment.

This means that decisions on whether a sick or disabled person must attend job-focused interviews or other work-related activity will in future be decided by a jobcentre work coach.

DWP decisions around deciding fitness for work and work-related activity through the WCA have been linked to countless deaths over the last 15 years, but there are now fears that the government’s plans could lead to even more deaths.

The white paper says: “We want to introduce a more tailored approach, to allow work coaches to build a relationship with an individual and determine what, if any, work-related activities an individual can participate in.”

Tom Pursglove, the minister for disabled people, has told Labour’s shadow disability minister Vicky Foxcroft that work coaches would “have tailored conversations with claimants to determine what they can do and what, if any, work-related activities they can participate in”.

He added: “We will work with our work coaches to develop these proposals and ensure they have the right training and support needed to fulfil this change in their role.”

But DWP has now told DNS – in response to a freedom of information request – that there “are no current minimum academic qualifications required to undertake a Work Coach role in a Jobcentre”.

Instead, DWP uses its own “Work Coach specific Situational Judgement Test as the first selection tool in Work Coach recruitment”.

When the forerunner of the WCA – the “all work test” – was introduced in 1995 under Conservative social security secretary Peter Lilley, all assessments had to be carried out by a doctor.

By the time the WCA was introduced 13 years later, ministers had decided that paramedics, nurses and physiotherapists had enough healthcare expertise to carry out assessments and recommend if a claimant could carry out work-related activity.

Now those decisions – if ministers’ controversial proposals become law – could be made by work coaches who do not even have a single GCSE.

I don't work for the DWP but I have regular dealings with JCP Work Coaches, and I can confirm they are beyond useless. That's being generous.

[C69]

Stoke goes red and so does the Bellwether that is Swindon.
If the Reform Party actually do what they have stated and run in every constituency at the GE then the Tories are Royally fecked.

[Hal Jordan]

Stoke goes red and so does the Bellwether that is Swindon.
If the Reform Party actually do what they have stated and run in every constituency at the GE then the Tories are Royally fecked.

They'll harvest the donations and then announce at the 11th hour that they're not standing, just like the previous incarnation of the Party, starring the same cast.

That cunt Martin Daubney kept showing up on my Twitter feed pushing the Net Zero Watch grid, claiming it's why the Tories did so badly. Muted the arsehole.

[tabascoboy]

Continued list of woes for the Tories with more losses although they did gain Slough - which seems to have been very much contested on local issues after some serious Labour mismanagement. However the Tories have all the same managed very slightly better than in 2013 so no certainty the results would be reflected in a GE defeat since there is no longer UKIP to take votes on the right to the extent of 2015.

Not a time yet for any complacency by the looks of it, and I can see some sort of informal pact in key seats being needed for a new government.

[Paddington Bear]

Continued list of woes for the Tories with more losses although they did gain Slough - which seems to have been very much contested on local issues after some serious Labour mismanagement. However the Tories have all the same managed very slightly better than in 2013 so no certainty the results would be reflected in a GE defeat since there is no longer UKIP to take votes on the right to the extent of 2015.

Not a time yet for any complacency by the looks of it, and I can see some sort of informal pact in key seats being needed for a new government.

There's also an increasing Indian/Tory, Pakistani/Labour thing going on, it's why the Tories seem to be pretty strong in large parts of NW London as well.

[GogLais]

Continued list of woes for the Tories with more losses although they did gain Slough - which seems to have been very much contested on local issues after some serious Labour mismanagement. However the Tories have all the same managed very slightly better than in 2013 so no certainty the results would be reflected in a GE defeat since there is no longer UKIP to take votes on the right to the extent of 2015.

Not a time yet for any complacency by the looks of it, and I can see some sort of informal pact in key seats being needed for a new government.

I’m guessing that’ll happen. Contrarily will it be likelier if Labour aren’t seen as a sure bet for an overall majority? I feel a bit sorry for Starmer with all this stuff about Labour not being on course for an overall majority. All the talk after 2019 was it would take them a couple of GE’s to get back into touching distance. Notwithstanding the Tories’ cockups.

[tabascoboy]

Tories have lost control of East Staffordshire, Staffordshire Moorlands and Stoke on Trent. The GULLIS effect?

Looking at some local results starting to come in and turnout is around 44%. The informal pacts for the wards has seen more Greens winning seats from Tories, though can't imagine it will be enough to dislodge them from overall control.

Where there doesn't seem to be a pact here the Tories are holding on

[SaintK]

Tories have lost control of East Staffordshire, Staffordshire Moorlands and Stoke on Trent. The GULLIS effect?

[Tichtheid]

The leader of the Tory group on Brighton & Hove Council has lost his seat to Labour, which is nice.

[Hal Jordan]

Continued list of woes for the Tories with more losses although they did gain Slough - which seems to have been very much contested on local issues after some serious Labour mismanagement. However the Tories have all the same managed very slightly better than in 2013 so no certainty the results would be reflected in a GE defeat since there is no longer UKIP to take votes on the right to the extent of 2015.

Not a time yet for any complacency by the looks of it, and I can see some sort of informal pact in key seats being needed for a new government.

There's also an increasing Indian/Tory, Pakistani/Labour thing going on, it's why the Tories seem to be pretty strong in large parts of NW London as well.

The Tories and the BJP are travelling companions, so unsurprising that they get the Hindu vote.

[Hal Jordan]

Continued list of woes for the Tories with more losses although they did gain Slough - which seems to have been very much contested on local issues after some serious Labour mismanagement. However the Tories have all the same managed very slightly better than in 2013 so no certainty the results would be reflected in a GE defeat since there is no longer UKIP to take votes on the right to the extent of 2015.

Not a time yet for any complacency by the looks of it, and I can see some sort of informal pact in key seats being needed for a new government.

I’m guessing that’ll happen. Contrarily will it be likelier if Labour aren’t seen as a sure bet for an overall majority? I feel a bit sorry for Starmer with all this stuff about Labour not being on course for an overall majority. All the talk after 2019 was it would take them a couple of GE’s to get back into touching distance. Notwithstanding the Tories’ cockups.

Lib Dems and, latterly, the Greens always do well in local elections if the Tories are suffering, but that doesn't translate into GE seats.

[tc27]

In a sense I wonder if a Labour/LD coalition or confidence agreement could be the best outcome - I am pretty much convinced we need electoral reform to stop another FPTP elected government headed by a leader who thinks they are a President.

I hope the LDs just insist of Electoral Reform as a condition of any agreement - no referendum or watered down proposal like in 2011.

[I like neeps]

In a sense I wonder if a Labour/LD coalition or confidence agreement could be the best outcome - I am pretty much convinced we need electoral reform to stop another FPTP elected government headed by a leader who thinks they are a President.

I hope the LDs just insist of Electoral Reform as a condition of any agreement - no referendum or watered down proposal like in 2011.

Don't really think they should go into coalition, should be a confidence agreement I think.

Also, the parties would have to run on electoral reform (one of the many Starmer has dropped) as it's a significant constitutional change - I suspect we'd need another referendum on it like 10 years ago. So I can't see it happening really, even though it's for the best.

[_Os_]

Continued list of woes for the Tories with more losses although they did gain Slough - which seems to have been very much contested on local issues after some serious Labour mismanagement. However the Tories have all the same managed very slightly better than in 2013 so no certainty the results would be reflected in a GE defeat since there is no longer UKIP to take votes on the right to the extent of 2015.

Not a time yet for any complacency by the looks of it, and I can see some sort of informal pact in key seats being needed for a new government.

Nah, it looks really bad for the Tories. These are 2019 seats, May was still PM and the Brexit Wars were ongoing, the Tories were hammered in the locals in 2019. They've now taken that 2019 election result and have been hammered again from that position. They usually perform better in local elections because Tory voters are older on average and turn out more. The whole "local elections don't mean anything for a general election", starts breaking down if multiple councils start switching in a similar ways over multiple local elections. As an extreme hypothetical if the Tories were literally wiped out and had no councillors at all, would that say nothing about a future general election? At some point it does start saying something about a general election.

Unless the Tories can find someone able to con as many people as Johnson did, an issue they can attach as many promises to as Brexit, and a Labour candidate as discredited as Corbyn ... then they're not going to win. The danger for the Tories was their more liberal leaning voters in the south of England would abandon them if they went too far right, at the same time as their new voters in the north of England worked out it was all lies and went back to Labour. There's been massive focus on Labour losing the white working class (red wall, blah blah), but precisely none on what would happen if the Tories failed so hard those voters returned to Labour and in addition the Tories lost chunks of the English middle class and lost business (the Tory base).

The way FPTP works, means it can produce large swings in terms of seats and big majorities, if a small amount of voters (compared to the total amount of voters) are in the right places. The difference between 2017 and 2019, was the Tories added 300k votes almost all in the right places, Labour lost 2.5m votes spread everywhere, Lib Dems added 1.4m all in the wrong places. Vote swings in a concentrated area are what's important. All 2019 took was the Tories adding a small amount where it mattered, Labour losing some where it mattered (mostly to apathy probably), in a relatively small amount of constituencies mostly in the north of England.

It looks like a Labour majority to me, all these should have the Tories shitting themselves ...





















(there's an error Tories should be -10)