United Kingdom General Election: July 4, 2024

[MillennialModerate]

https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1796633753931907396

This is a massive majority. How are they going to govern with 500 or so MPs? Will they seek some revolutionary policies or rather try to brand themselves as the new natural party of governance?

I still say 370-380 is the sweet spot but holy moly. A poll like that could mean even with a decent margin of error you’re STILL in Blair territory

[JimJamUK]

😂😂

https://twitter.com/politicsmoments/status/1796852156978315494?s=61&t=I1DE8_...

[Helsinkian]

How would the seating practicalities even work if the goverment has 500 MPs? Would they be permitted to spread out to the opposition benches from one side?

I know the Commons does not have seats for all 650 anyway. At least the opposition will have some legroom...

[oldtimer]

How would the seating practicalities even work if the goverment has 500 MPs? Would they be permitted to spread out to the opposition benches from one side?

I know the Commons does not have seats for all 650 anyway. At least the opposition will have some legroom...

The House already has more MP's than seating places, in practice not all MP's sit at once, some are crammed or left standing if there is a crucial debate where everyone has to be present.

So probably they do the same.

[oldtimer]

One matter that might complicate Starmer's government is he will have around 500 MP's, but he's personally quite unpopular for an incoming PM:

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/rishi-sunaks-satisfaction-falls-equal-worst-ever-ipsos-rating-conservative-or-labour-leader

"Keir Starmer’s ratings have also fallen since February. 25% are satisfied with his performance as Labour leader (-4) and 56% are dissatisfied (+1). His net score of -31 is his worst as Labour leader since he recorded a -29 in May 2021.  Among Labour supporters, satisfaction with his performance has also dropped from 58% to 51%."

It's a recipe for massive party rebellions and splits, in extreme theory 180 MP's could leave Labour and form a new official opposition without even toppling Starmer.

[afleitch]

What's going to cause him trouble is less the numbers and more the makeup. He expects that his authority will be challenged from the left, who when in office are historically loyal (see 1981) but if anything a whole swathe of potential MP's are potential Lee Andersons or people who are incredibly 'online' and will be 'just asking questions' about whatever brain rot is served up by the algorithm.

Could have been worse if the election was later; parachuting in union suits tempers this somewhat.

[Duke of York]

One matter that might complicate Starmer's government is he will have around 500 MP's, but he's personally quite unpopular for an incoming PM:

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/rishi-sunaks-satisfaction-falls-equal-worst-ever-ipsos-rating-conservative-or-labour-leader

"Keir Starmer’s ratings have also fallen since February. 25% are satisfied with his performance as Labour leader (-4) and 56% are dissatisfied (+1). His net score of -31 is his worst as Labour leader since he recorded a -29 in May 2021.  Among Labour supporters, satisfaction with his performance has also dropped from 58% to 51%."

It's a recipe for massive party rebellions and splits, in extreme theory 180 MP's could leave Labour and form a new official opposition without even toppling Starmer.

Couldn’t there simply be a vote of no confidence and a new leader chosen?

[oldtimer]

One matter that might complicate Starmer's government is he will have around 500 MP's, but he's personally quite unpopular for an incoming PM:

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/rishi-sunaks-satisfaction-falls-equal-worst-ever-ipsos-rating-conservative-or-labour-leader

"Keir Starmer’s ratings have also fallen since February. 25% are satisfied with his performance as Labour leader (-4) and 56% are dissatisfied (+1). His net score of -31 is his worst as Labour leader since he recorded a -29 in May 2021.  Among Labour supporters, satisfaction with his performance has also dropped from 58% to 51%."

It's a recipe for massive party rebellions and splits, in extreme theory 180 MP's could leave Labour and form a new official opposition without even toppling Starmer.

Couldn’t there simply be a vote of no confidence and a new leader chosen?

Different rules than the Conservatives.

[Duke of York]

One matter that might complicate Starmer's government is he will have around 500 MP's, but he's personally quite unpopular for an incoming PM:

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/rishi-sunaks-satisfaction-falls-equal-worst-ever-ipsos-rating-conservative-or-labour-leader

"Keir Starmer’s ratings have also fallen since February. 25% are satisfied with his performance as Labour leader (-4) and 56% are dissatisfied (+1). His net score of -31 is his worst as Labour leader since he recorded a -29 in May 2021.  Among Labour supporters, satisfaction with his performance has also dropped from 58% to 51%."

It's a recipe for massive party rebellions and splits, in extreme theory 180 MP's could leave Labour and form a new official opposition without even toppling Starmer.

Couldn’t there simply be a vote of no confidence and a new leader chosen?

Different rules than the Conservatives.

That’s ridiculous to not have a way to oust the leader.

[oldtimer]

One matter that might complicate Starmer's government is he will have around 500 MP's, but he's personally quite unpopular for an incoming PM:

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/rishi-sunaks-satisfaction-falls-equal-worst-ever-ipsos-rating-conservative-or-labour-leader

"Keir Starmer’s ratings have also fallen since February. 25% are satisfied with his performance as Labour leader (-4) and 56% are dissatisfied (+1). His net score of -31 is his worst as Labour leader since he recorded a -29 in May 2021.  Among Labour supporters, satisfaction with his performance has also dropped from 58% to 51%."

It's a recipe for massive party rebellions and splits, in extreme theory 180 MP's could leave Labour and form a new official opposition without even toppling Starmer.

Couldn’t there simply be a vote of no confidence and a new leader chosen?

Different rules than the Conservatives.

That’s ridiculous to not have a way to oust the leader.

In practice (as found from all the leadership challenges and elections) it's all about control of the NEC, just like the Conservatives is all about the 1922.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Parliamentary Labour Party is whipped in a very different way to the Conservatives. There is a particular system, which we might as well call Mellish-Harrison after its creators, that has existed since 1969 and which is very effective.^* Attempts have sometimes been made to try something new, but these always fail. The system is based around extensive intelligence gathering and a sort of robust pastoral care ('call them bleedin' idiots but then be nice to them') backed up by the usual threats, bollockings and so on. Generally the attitude is that someone who rebels on a particular vote for a reason of genuine principle or serious constituency interest will be left alone so long as they inform the whips in advance. People who do not show up when expected or who rebel without notification or without what is seen as a good excuse get into trouble. This is all a long way of saying that every MP and their peculiarities will be 'known' within a few months of the first sitting of the new Parliament: a situation comparable to the Conservative parliamentary party of 2019-24 (in which the whips clearly knew very little of the 2019 intake and never got round to sorting matters out) is completely unthinkable.

_{*Prior to 1966 the PLP was whipped in a frankly militaristic fashion, with the Chief Whip behaving more like a Regimental Sergeant Major than a Deputy Headteacher. Will Whiteley, Attlee's Chief Whip from 1943 onwards, was particularly feared. The changing composition of the PLP - its members became better educated and more assertive with each intake - meant that Harold Wilson became convinced that a new approach was needed or there would be trouble. An initial attempt at a fully liberalized approach complete with extensive liaisons with various Party committees was tried from 1966 until 1969 but was a bit of a fiasco and melted down completely during the row over In Place of Strife.}

[xelas81]

It makes sense for new elected Labour MP for Ruralshire West to be very moderate if they want to keep their seat beyond one election.

However to balance it you need Labour MP for Innercity Central to be on the left where hypothetical challenger will be from Labour's left.

[oldtimer]

It makes sense for new elected Labour MP for Ruralshire West to be very moderate if they want to keep their seat beyond one election.

However to balance it you need Labour MP for Innercity Central to be on the left where hypothetical challenger will be from Labour's left.

It would be a more extreme version of 1997.

The Labour outsiders (Galloway ect) would be happy, since it's obvious that the challenge to satisfy everyone would be enormous.

Here is a potencial list of factions that post-election Labour would have to represent:

Farmers
Property owners
Renters
Global Finance Capitalists
Left wing Trade Unionists
Right wing Trade Unionists
Muslims
Non-Muslim minorities
Intelligence Agents
Left Intellectuals
Centrist Intellectuals
Non-union White Working Class
University Faculties
Students
Public Sector Workers
Senior Civil Service

[TheTide]

It makes sense for new elected Labour MP for Ruralshire West to be very moderate if they want to keep their seat beyond one election.

However to balance it you need Labour MP for Innercity Central to be on the left where hypothetical challenger will be from Labour's left.

Not such much the case nowadays, but there used to be plenty of Socialist Campaign Group MPs in marginal seats. Bigger in proportion, I think, not just numbers.     

[Arson Plus]

😂😂

https://twitter.com/politicsmoments/status/1796852156978315494?s=61&t=I1DE8_...

I’m not trolling. My friend Tyrone, who is British Black, is a life long Labour voter, but just told me that he’s not voting for Labour but for his Conservative MP Robert Largan. Also, he said there are tons of others like him who are not voting for Labour but for Largan. We discussed this all today at our local bagel shop. (Good bagels by the way, I recommend the poppy seed bagels)

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1796814651394490546?t=H6mwtggmPAOPo9mB5qY...
Fascinating. Myself, an uneducated pleb in these matters, thought the Tory campaign making an endless string of constant gaffes and widely mocked moves was bad for them, but in fact this was part of their cunning tactic to win the "air war". They're basically Arthur Harris, if Harris only bombed his own side by mistake.

[oldtimer]

It makes sense for new elected Labour MP for Ruralshire West to be very moderate if they want to keep their seat beyond one election.

However to balance it you need Labour MP for Innercity Central to be on the left where hypothetical challenger will be from Labour's left.

Not such much the case nowadays, but there used to be plenty of Socialist Campaign Group MPs in marginal seats. Bigger in proportion, I think, not just numbers.     

A factional disconnect between MP's and their local voters is always a pain.

For example I recall that all Stoke Labour MP's where all centrist Blairites, and where all ousted from their safe seats after repeatedly fighing against their local voters, who where not centrists at all.

There's a similar record of parachuting wrong candidates in wrong areas for the Conservatives too.

[LabourJersey]

I saw a conversation elsewhere in which a Labour majority of 73 was predicted and one of the participants (who seemed to be pro-Labour or at least anti-Tory) was dismissive that it could be that high. I don't think most people and certainly not most of the media have clocked onto what a bloodbath this might be.

Good, honestly. Don't want voters to get complacent. It's to the interest of both Labour and frankly, civic health, that people think the election is competitive even if it isn't.

Definitely agree with this.

[JimJamUK]

It makes sense for new elected Labour MP for Ruralshire West to be very moderate if they want to keep their seat beyond one election.

However to balance it you need Labour MP for Innercity Central to be on the left where hypothetical challenger will be from Labour's left.

This doesn’t really occur in practice. Some people elected in very marginal seats (aka usually Conservative ones) would have limited vetting and often be quite ideological given they joined a party that doesn’t usually win their area. Conversely, safe seats, while of course having many left wingers, are also popular for right wing factionalists who want a safe seat and have the means to get it (see many of Labour’s recent selections).

Our MPs pay next to no heed to the views or interests of their constituents when it comes to voting in the House of Commons. They might make some strongly worded statements or the like, but that’s their limits. Only a very small proportion of the electorate will intend to vote for one party but switch to the other because their MP opposed their party a few times.

[Lief 🗽]

When you’re winning the air war
https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/status/1796977355266597015?s=46&t=o2RmfeV...

[WD]

One of the more rosy pollsters for the Tories. Not good.

[JimJamUK]

One of the more rosy pollsters for the Tories. Not good.

It’s one of the pollsters which places emphasis on modelling the future result rather just giving current public opinion, so a widening gap suggests maybe all those presumptions about undecideds voters being closet Tories was premature.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

https://twitter.com/Telegraph/status/1796597811749814687

ah well

[Torrain]

Oh, the editorials have been a trip so far. The Times’ columnists are fairly sanguine.

The Telegraph… less so.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The Telegraph… less so.

...what in God's name is that even supposed to mean