.

The odds really are stacked against Labour getting a majority you know.
Gains in Scotland will, at best, be minimal and that leaves the UK.
The boundary changes, to come into effect favour the Tories so (theoretically at least) increase the challenge.

There was a good report in The Observer on this yesterday.
The view was they need an 8% swing to make them the biggest party (then they will have to partner with SNP.
They need something like a 14% swing to get an overall majority,
That hasn’t been seen in my lifetime …… and I;m an auld fella

Not saying it won’t happen but it is in the ‘unlikely’ box.
Then Labour join a coalition with the SNP then. Needs must.
 
The odds really are stacked against Labour getting a majority you know.
Gains in Scotland will, at best, be minimal and that leaves the UK.
The boundary changes, to come into effect favour the Tories so (theoretically at least) increase the challenge.

There was a good report in The Observer on this yesterday.
The view was they need an 8% swing to make them the biggest party (then they will have to partner with SNP.
They need something like a 14% swing to get an overall majority,
That hasn’t been seen in my lifetime …… and I;m an auld fella

Not saying it won’t happen but it is in the ‘unlikely’ box.
Pretty sure I've read that all of Labour's majorities haven't needed Scotland. When Labour are winners they tend to win comfortably. If that is the case then they can get a majority without winning any seats in Scotland.

1997 - 56 of 418. 330 needed for a majority
2001 - 56 of 412. 330 needed for a majority
2005 - 41 of 355. 324 needed for a majority

So just looking at Blair's tenure they wouldn't have had a majority in 2005 but they'd have been very close. Shows that the 1st 2 didn't need Scotland. I'm not sure how big an impact the boundary changes since then will have.

There was a 10% swing to the Tories at the last election which was a single issue election. Blair 97 was a 8.8% increase vs 11.2% Tory decrease. That's a big swing.
 
Pretty sure I've read that all of Labour's majorities haven't needed Scotland. When Labour are winners they tend to win comfortably. If that is the case then they can get a majority without winning any seats in Scotland.

1997 - 56 of 418. 330 needed for a majority
2001 - 56 of 412. 330 needed for a majority
2005 - 41 of 355. 324 needed for a majority

So just looking at Blair's tenure they wouldn't have had a majority in 2005 but they'd have been very close. Shows that the 1st 2 didn't need Scotland. I'm not sure how big an impact the boundary changes since then will have.

There was a 10% swing to the Tories at the last election which was a single issue election. Blair 97 was a 8.8% increase vs 11.2% Tory decrease. That's a big swing.

This was the report I was referring to.
Worth a read (clearly its just a view)

 
Then Labour join a coalition with the SNP then. Needs must.

I agree but there will be a price to pay - Indyref
Personally I think that is fair
But
They have to distance themselves from SNP pre election because it could affect share of vote.

If it is really tight they may also need Lib Dem - that brings PR vote into play

All good fun
 
Given that she didn’t gain the votes of 50% of the Tory members in Parliament.
There are now two factions, hence the Gove and Shapps interventions. Who are both Sunak supporters. There are lots of them who don’t want her there.
Hopefully we can sit back and watch them tear each other apart.
 
OK I will modify to : wealthy living in the UK with non-dom status, and I am sure there a good many.
Depends what you mean by "a good many."

UK-based people with non-domicile tax status – so called “non-doms” – in the 2020-21 financial year totalled 68,300, a fall of 8,200 on the previous year.

One thing to note is that the numbers of non-doms have been declining steadily for several years now.

The number has been on a downward path since 2017, with tax experts also citing Brexit and tighter government controls on who can claim the tax break.

Number of UK non-doms down by 11% after pandemic travel curbs
 
The damage to those politicians and their credibility is done.
A flippin shambles which has already seen people lose money from their pensions, mortgage products removed by the hundreds from Banks and Building Societies and millions on Social Security, including millions in work, fearful of further cuts at a time in the worst cost-of-living crisis in 50 years(n)
 
The odds really are stacked against Labour getting a majority you know.
Gains in Scotland will, at best, be minimal and that leaves the UK.
The boundary changes, to come into effect favour the Tories so (theoretically at least) increase the challenge.

There was a good report in The Observer on this yesterday.
The view was they need an 8% swing to make them the biggest party (then they will have to partner with SNP.
They need something like a 14% swing to get an overall majority,
That hasn’t been seen in my lifetime …… and I;m an auld fella

Not saying it won’t happen but it is in the ‘unlikely’ box.
If we are talking odds, the current odds for a labour majority at the next election are just 2.1 va 4.0 for conservatives.
 
Back
Top