Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: More voted Remain than Leave?
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
ItchyandScratchy |
It is a big political scandal dressed up as a democracy. The rest of the world must be laughing its tits off.
Business is in huge risk of damage now.
So much for all of the agencies who are supposed to know what they were doing. Not one of them spoke out, when they did they blamed Russia.
They are all fighting for their job survival now and an email has been sent to Home Office which will put the cat amongst the pigeons.
The only use for the UK now will likely be target practice. |
|
Blue Boy |
hedda wrote:
So really Boris didn't win a mandate to "Get Brexit Done"..[b]
The mandate fot getting Brexit done was given in 2016 when on a single issue referendum the UK voted for Brexit. Between 2016 and 2019 it was the Parlimentary arithmetic that prevented it.The Parlimentary arithmic will now get it done.
If any remainers tried to start some sort of campaign based on the assumption they got more votes in the recent election they would quite rightly be ridiculed. There may be a move to rejoin the EU but it won't be for another year or so |
|
hedda |
Jo wrote:
hedda wrote:
I'm not sure of the figures but it seems the overall average for numbers means Tories won seats on about 40K vores each..Labour on 50K and the SNP on something like 30K.
But there's hardly any red on the map. 
www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50770798
I can't find these figures anywhere.
Wikipedia is always good for figures if you want the actual tally.
Cons got nearly 14M on "let's get Brexit done" ..simple slogan that does not explain the sheer complexity or that the UK won't "leave" the EU in January, rather begin some vast complicated process.
Lab, SNP & LD ..remain or 'have another Referendum" parties got over 15M (without including NI).
But while Labour lost about 2.6M votes Boris only picked up 300K on Theresa May so the Labour voters fled elsewhere.
So it is NOT a ringing endorsement for Boris's "Lets Get Brexit" done in numbers.. but it is in seats. It is however in the eyes of Britain's Broken Media which, if you don't see it's highly prejudicial right wing "reporting" there is no hope (the Nazis had to seize power before they got Germany's media singing from the same song sheet..in the UK now they do it by choice).
# Of course you can never be sure of why people vote for whichever party. But I've seen too many interviews of people since 2016, particularly in the the depressed parts of the UK who really do believe that Brexit will solve all their problems.
The Tories obviously did some great polling which is why they offered simple solutions (and very little else) and concentrated on Brexit. It looks like it worked.
However it will be interesting to see over the next 5 years how all those teens who reach voting age react.
People under 40 largely voted Labour. There will be 10roughly 6M entering the work force in the next 5 years who can vote..who will find no matter what happens under Brexit, the economy is not going to rapidly perform miracles (except for the 1%) who will face all the same problems ..finding a job that pays a reasonable wage (that has not become a 'zero hours contract") and then either renting or buying a home..the most basic things.
Especially with a PM who will say anything, who will blatantly lie and who has a proven racist track record..all things that in the past would never have got him elected...who appears to be an opportunist whose raison d'etre is whatever benefits him personally.
## One thing that stood out for me..New Labourites like Blair etc saying "Boris isn't fit to be PM" along with old Conservatives like John Major & Michael Hestletine saying exactly the same thing.  |
|
Barney |
Good and accurate post Jo.
Hedda should concentrate on down under - Pell, bushfires, Murdoch etc.
Boris had an enormous win by all measures - with the prevailing/legal electoral system.
Proportional representation has done more harm than good, in the places it operates.
Technically, it's probably fairer in the end - but pedantic and slower.
Speed - an accurate result (exit), within 30 seconds - has distinct and real advantages.
Making skulduggery and malpractices rare...
 |
|
Jo |
hedda wrote:
you may as well say Corbyn got the biggest ever votes Labour has got bar Blair's first win (and more than Blair's subsequent wins) which indicates he is a hugely successful Labour leader and as Johnson got only about 300,000 more votes than Theresa May it's not the stunning victory it's painted as seeing the combined British media parroted that May's win was a disaster.
Labour won 203 seats last week and 10,295,607 votes (according to BBC and dpa-info.com). According to Wikipedia, Labour won 418 seats in 1997 (13,518,167 votes), 413 in 2001 (10,724,953 votes) and 355 in 2005 (9,552,436 votes) under Tony Blair and (Wikipedia again) 269 seats in 1983 (11,512,877 votes) under Michael Foot.
So Corbyn's Labour won fewer seats than Labour under Blair and Foot on all four occasions and only exceeded the number of votes for Blair/Foot on one occasion (Blair's last GE). I don't see how that translates into Corbyn being more successful than Blair or Foot. |
|
|
|
