Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Highland Call

Lib Dem Goverment

Recommended Posts

That's just silly. PM4E is a great game, but it can come out with these ridicoulous results. Obviously there is no way the Tories would only win one seat and the Lib Dems winning 447 is a little implausible to say the least! What did Kennedy do, offer to abolish all taxation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's just silly. PM4E is a great game, but it can come out with these ridicoulous results. Obviously there is no way the Tories would only win one seat and the Lib Dems winning 447 is a little implausible to say the least! What did Kennedy do, offer to abolish all taxation?

The maximum/minimum I can see for different parties realistically is:

Labour - 35% to 45% (they are so low now because theyre incumbent, it'll go back up when Blair goes)

Tories - 25% to 40%

Lib Dems - 15% to 25%

The biggest potential for increase right now is the Tories. LibDems don't have any real support. I think 40% of their vote is either tactical or protest voting of some kind. There is a huge difference in voter base between different constituencies/regions. It doesn't matter too much now because they are not taken seriously but if they're in position to make decisions there are going to be fireworks.

Southwestern LibDems are small government moderates, SouthEast are Centrist previously leaning Conservative and in the North yhou have ethnic urban votes. If the LibDems start getting over 150 seats they'll split.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know, thats the problem :( .  The Map was red with a bit of blue and then, this <_< .  Funny, isnt it :lol:

LibDems even took Rutland ... amazing!

I guess in reality its pretty unlikely, but mathematically its another matter. The LibDems are there or thereabouts in so many seats that the total collapse of one party - especially the Tories, would have this effect, as seats would switch to the LibDems more than to Labour.

The BBC's swingometer is still working so you can play. Your result would seem to require a 22% swing against both opposition parties - huge but not impossible. Effectively it would be a nationwide Orpington (which co-incidentally was 22%).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seat cal numbers

YOUR FORECAST

LD overall majority: 112

SEATS WON

LAB 239

CON 0

LIB DEM 379

OTH 28

RESULTS TABLE

Party Seats + - Net

LAB 239 0 164 -164

CON 0 0 165 -165

LIB DEM 379 328 0 +328

OTH 28 4 3 +1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Labour - 35% to 45% (they are so low now because theyre incumbent, it'll go back up when Blair goes)

Tories - 25% to 40%

Lib Dems - 15% to 25%

your figures for the libdems are about right.

The Labour figure is high, think more 27% to 40% They did well due to a combination of an intellectually dead tory party by 1997 and Blair. Blair's appeal is gone, and the tories look ready to start improving. A few years of Brown will hurt them, not help them, and there are too many unreconstructed socialists in there.

The tory figure is low. By 1997 we had exhausted the promise of the 80s and had nothing new to offer. We were also up against an electoral genius at the height of his powers. We still got 30% of the vote. The upper limit is a bit low. While we are not there yet, it is quite conceivable that a revitalised Tory party could get 45%, especially if we offer the voters a reasoned, logical alternative to the tax and spend policies of the present government which are failing and increasingly visibly so. I'd say the realistic range for the Tories is 30% to 45%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
your figures for the libdems are about right.

The Labour figure is high, think more 27% to 40% They did well due to a combination of an intellectually dead tory party by 1997 and Blair. Blair's appeal is gone, and the tories look ready to start improving. A few years of Brown will hurt them, not help them, and there are too many unreconstructed socialists in there.

The tory figure is low. By 1997 we had exhausted the promise of the 80s and had nothing new to offer. We were also up against an electoral genius at the height of his powers. We still got 30% of the vote. The upper limit is a bit low. While we are not there yet, it is quite conceivable that a revitalised Tory party could get 45%, especially if we offer the voters a reasoned, logical alternative to the tax and spend policies of the present government which are failing and increasingly visibly so. I'd say the realistic range for the Tories is 30% to 45%

So you just want to switch my figures? :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you just want to switch my figures?  :lol:

25%-35% is more realistic for the Tories, 45% is wishful thinking and they might get 40% at a push. The disappearing Referendum on Europe MIGHT be a blessing for them in seeing off UKIP, Veritas and the BNP. UKIP looks like imploding which might swing back 1-2% to the Tories. Veritas is a joke and the BNP, well, the less said about them the better.....

Lib Dems could, with a decent policy review start to look at 25-30% too. 15% is way too low now. Bottom figure is probably 18%. The Tories are in third with younger voters and not doing well amonst women either. Could change if they get the right leader but their track record since Thatcher has not been overwhelming!

Agree with wasspj that Labour are likely to decline now. I think they were lucky to get 36% to be honest but with their scare tactics about voting Lib Dem and letting in the Tories in the last few days of the last General Election I think they recovered about 2% vote share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what the biggest party with the most potential is? Maybe you can guess.

It's the party that hasn't been created yet. :huh:

Yeah 40-45% of people don't bother to vote because they're so disgusted at politics and politicians. Of the ones that do I'd say at least 50% do so out of duty or some stupid partisan loyalty but don't feel really represented.

Labour and the Tories are becoming anachronisms. Labour 'cos they don't even represent labour and the Trade Unions have given up on them, Tories because they don't represent anyone except the party members.

I think some time soon there's going to be a big shift and all the electoral calculations people are relying on will go crazy. A small new centrist party representing real issues and a real alternative (not the Lib Dems) could really sweep the board.

[say 50% of the current non-voters and 25% of the voters. That's 35% already. But I think apathy is going to go up even further, probably past 50%]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You know what the biggest party with the most potential is? Maybe you can guess.

It's the party that hasn't been created yet.  :huh:

Yeah 40-45% of people don't bother to vote because they're so disgusted at politics and politicians. Of the ones that do I'd say at least 50% do so out of duty or some stupid partisan loyalty but don't feel really represented.

Labour and the Tories are becoming anachronisms. Labour 'cos they don't even represent labour and the Trade Unions have given up on them, Tories because they don't represent anyone except the party members.

I think some time soon there's going to be a big shift and all the electoral calculations people are relying on will go crazy. A small new centrist party representing real issues and a real alternative (not the Lib Dems) could really sweep the board.

[say 50% of the current non-voters and 25% of the voters. That's 35% already. But I think apathy is going to go up even further, probably past 50%]

Now it's the Canuck's turn to bring up their own politics! :D

Two words: Reform Party. The west got freaking sick of voting for the Centrist PC's, social democratic NDP, or "Eastern" Liberals. Mr. Manning filled the void.

Soon, to get more mainstream Progressive Conservatives, they changed their name to the Canadian Alliance and had a logo with a bunch of green and purple squiggles. Then, they kicked Manning, the man who built them from nothing, to the curb, and got a good looking, hardcore Christian leader named Stockwell Day to try and appeal to Ontario, and well, he sucked. Big time. Had more gaffes then an Elementary school play. The Party even split in 2001, came back together when they kicked Dorris out, then took over the Progressive Conservatives and became an institutional party. The end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Canadian experience is unlikely to happen here though as there aren't any prospective challengers to the tories from the right, nor is there any great appetite for them to emerge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Canadian experience is unlikely to happen here though as there aren't any prospective challengers to the tories from the right, nor is there any great appetite for them to emerge.

Yes. That's why I think the challenge is going to emerge from the center. Most people I know don't like the Tories or Labour. They like some things about each but dislike more and are pissed off at having to make the 'lesser of two evils' choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Canadian experience is unlikely to happen here though as there aren't any prospective challengers to the tories from the right, nor is there any great appetite for them to emerge.

That's not completely true now is it wasspj? Let's be frank. The Tories were shitting themselves a bit about UKIP, Veritas (a.k.a as the Kilroy-Sick Party) and the BNP during the last General Election and that is why there was this nasty preoccupation with Dog Whistle politics in playing the immigration card.

The far right did cost you votes and your candidate in Durham was behind the Veritas candidate in a few of the boxes.

The fact that the EU Constitution referendum is off the agenda has been a blessing in disguise for yourselves.

dr abc isn't completely barking. There was a rumour doing the rounds that Al Fayed was talking about funding a Reform Party which would be centrist but it never materialised.

Don't write off the Lib Dems though. British Liberalism hasn't had its day by any means. I used to get loads of crap for being a Liberal Democrat in the early 1990s when we had the fiasco of the Owenite SDP tick brigade making mischief. At one point we were down to just 2% but we still survived and came back to a respectable total.

So, wasspj you can bait me all you like but when I survey where my party stands today it doesn't look so bad at all and we can build on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not completely true now is it wasspj?  Let's be frank.  The Tories were shitting themselves a bit about UKIP, Veritas (a.k.a as the Kilroy-Sick Party) and the BNP during the last General Election and that is why there was this nasty preoccupation with Dog Whistle politics in playing the immigration card. 

The far right did cost you votes and your candidate in Durham was behind the Veritas candidate in a few of the boxes.

The fact that the EU Constitution referendum is off the agenda has been a blessing in disguise for yourselves.

dr abc isn't completely barking.  There was a rumour doing the rounds that Al Fayed was talking about funding a Reform Party which would be centrist but it never materialised.

Don't write off the Lib Dems though.  British Liberalism hasn't had its day by any means.  I used to get loads of crap for being a Liberal Democrat in the early 1990s when we had the fiasco of the Owenite SDP tick brigade making mischief.  At one point we were down to just 2% but we still survived and came back to a respectable total.

So, wasspj you can bait me all you like but when I survey where my party stands today it doesn't look so bad at all and we can build on it.

You may well be right CLD. I don't like the Lib Dem as a party though I could agree with some of its policies. I don't like the people and your leader is a bit of a weakling. If you get rid of Kennedy you could do pretty well maybe into the 30% range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You may well be right CLD. I don't like the Lib Dem as a party though I could agree with some of its policies. I don't like the people and your leader is a bit of a weakling. If you get rid of Kennedy you could do pretty well maybe into the 30% range.

What precisely don't you like about "the people"? I'm just curious as to what you, as it seems a natural centrist, find disagreeable about us?

Do you really think that Kennedy is a weakling? I mean, he really went out on a limb over Iraq and took a lot of crap on it. There are some who have questioned the leadership at times but I personally having seen him in action a few times think he is quite personable and more of an asset than a liability.

I'm not doing a cheerleader job here I am just curious to discover what it is precisely you dislike about the Lib Dems and welcome your views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What precisely don't you like about "the people"?  I'm just curious as to what you, as it seems a natural centrist, find disagreeable about us?

I don't know, of the handful of Lib MPs I've seen they're just not convincing and not inspiring. Based on how they look and talk I just can't imagine them in a cabinet. I don't like most Tory or Labour politicians (politicians full stop) either so I suppose it doesn't make much difference. The Labour and Tory ones tend to have been in parliamentary politics longer.

Do you really think that Kennedy is a weakling?  I mean, he really went out on a limb over Iraq and took a lot of crap on it.  There are some who have questioned the leadership at times but I personally having seen him in action a few times think he is quite personable and more of an asset than a liability.

I'm not doing a cheerleader job here I am just curious to discover what it is precisely you dislike about the Lib Dems and welcome your views.

Apart from Iraq I haven't seen him take a really radical principled stand on anything. Most of the time he positions himself between the Tories and Labour and makes himself just sufficiently different to attract attention.

I think a leader of a party (especially a small party) should have a vision of what he wants to do that he can communicate to people. So far Kennedy has never shown any of that - he cobble together policies. He talks about liberalism then says he'll raise taxes to 50% on the wealthy. Or is he a social democrat?

When you get down to it all the Lib Dem platform consists of a slightly different budget. Conservatives take the health budget and give spend it on more cleaners, while Labour would build a couple more hospitals and the Lib Dems would use the money to give everyone free glasses.

Again the Tories and Labour are the same. It comes down to which party has the most experience or at least the perception of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I read during the British elections (I actually followed it this year), I would have voted for R.E.S.P.E.C.T. because I like George Galloway so much (Not that I agree with him on all things...) and because the Conservatives were too right, Labour became a pack of theives, and the LibDems were just....everywhere at once.

Or, if in Scotland, I'd vote SNP. Scottish from all sides here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I read during the British elections (I actually followed it this year), I would have voted for R.E.S.P.E.C.T. because I like George Galloway so much (Not that I agree with him on all things...) and because the Conservatives were too right, Labour became a pack of theives, and the LibDems were just....everywhere at once.

Or, if in Scotland, I'd vote SNP.  Scottish from all sides here.

I would vote SNP in Scotland too actually.

In Wales I don't know. Plaid Cymru are a bit too socialist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topics kinda dead, but I think I figured out why this map produces such screwy results - the regions are all messed. When you click on some area's in Scotland it's counted as Wales and and when you click on someplaces in Wales its counted as England (These are just examples, its actually quite random.) I think this screws up game calculations, computer ad controls, and screws PC and the SNP. Not sure how to change it, but thats the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...