Many people assume elections are won or lost by how many of the other party you "convert" to voting for yours. This is largely a myth.
UK elections are won by winning more swing seats by: 1. Encouraging opposition voters not to vote 2. Encouraging more of your supporters to vote
In UK marginal constituencies (seats with a majority of less than 3%) many seats can change hands simply by one party's voters staying at home more than normal & a few more of another's voters voting more.
In other words govts can change without many people changing their vote.
The way FPTP operates in UK this makes swing voters in swing seats super crucial.
Swing voters are obviously easier to switch to & from voting.
So in theory the next UK election only needs 85 000 Tory voters in certain seats to decide not to vote to wipe out the govt's majority.
This is why I mock those who waffle on about "Labour trying to win back redwall bigots".
The key is getting those who voted Conservative but dont normally...being discouraged to vote Tory in 2024.
You dont need to "win back UKIP vote" just dampen the Tory vote in swing seats.
So quick quiz:
How much did Boris Johnson increase the Tory Vote by in 2019 compared with Theresa May's vote haul?
a. +12%
b. 8-12%
c. 3-8%
d. Less than 3%
Answer is of course "less than 3%" - this despite the voting population increasing.
Yes "super campaigner Boris" raised Tory vote to 13,966,000 from "calamity" May's 13,637,000.
Johnson didnt add that many votes - he simply didnt.
He just won swing seats on reduced Labour vote.
Its a myth that Johnson got in lots of votes.
The difference between a minority govt & a 80 seat majority was Johnson getting just circa 350 000 more votes than utter disaster Theresa May. Thats less than 1% of the electorate.
..& of course Labour votes dropping in swing seats.
So in theory 85 000 Tory voters staying at home in 8% of seats could end the govt. Thats 3% of voters in 50 seats. Or 0.2% of voters.
Of course in reality swings dont tend to be so specific so how best to scoop these voters?
Aim message at swing voters
Encourage tactical voting
Now this is where it gets *interesting*...
Contrary to myth LibDems did really well in 2019 getting 3.7million compared to 2.37m in 2017.
This blew away Johnson's paltry 350 000 gain.
In a normal system this would've led to a social democratic govt with at worst soft Brexit...
Problem was FPTP screwed it while many leftwing remainers split the remain & left vote.
So counterintuitively this might explain why LibDems softpeddaling rejoin......it makes more sense if you want rejoin for LibDems to go after Tory seats than to split remain vote again...
In other words - and hold your horses folks - its starting to dawn on people you are more likely to get a pro EU govt if LibDems get more conservative votes than if LibDems fight over left-remain seats.
Its difficult for more "hot headed remainers" to get but the logic is sound.
I know this'll upset some but look at it coldly:
Here are top 20 LibDem targets - 18 are Tory held.
If LibDems can do this you're a third of the way already to a LibDem/Labour coalition.
If LibDems go full remain they may end up muddying the electoral maths in Labour targets.
In other words what Labour & remainers really need is for LibDems to 100% concentrate on (mainly) southern conservative seats with a soft centerist business friendly message.
Theres enough there to flip the election so long as Labour holds in usual cosntituencies.
Its doable.
This is of course not sexy.
There is nothing remotely politically-sexy about this but it is not just doable, it's - so long as LibDems & Labour dont muddy each others 60 main target seats - easily doable.
You dont need a national alliance.
Just "understandings" in 60 seats.
There wont be a grand progressive electoral alliance.
No matter how much people on twitter campaign for one.
There simply wont for so many reasons - one being that it will be almost impossible to make it work and could backfire.
What there will be is close coop on target seats.
60 seat understandings/coop between LibDem and Labour is more than enough.
If the 2 parties can agree one with PC in 8-9 seats this would clinch it.
But a grand national alliance aint going to happen.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A point that’s often forgotten by remainers is the key role 🏴 plays in the next Labour govt.
The assumption (probably correct) that SNP wins nearly all 🏴 seats if Tories lose…actually makes 🏴 role in next Labour govt even more crucial…not less.
Here’s why…
The key point is Labour are a 🇬🇧union party. Out of conviction & self interest.
They won’t want to “lose” Scotland. No party wants that on their watch.
So the question is what can Labour offer the most anti Brexit part of the UK that will convince them to not go independent..?
Any coalition that is in anyway dependent on 🏴 seats and particularly on cooperation with the SNP can offer only 1 thing that might avoid 🏴 independence ->
A huge softening of Brexit.
It’s the only thing Labour have got it can give - and its of course what Labour members want.
It’s become clear from reports in the last few days that Australia has been deceiving 🇫🇷 for as long as the last 18 months.
Countries can play hard ball on commercials interests - everyone does it, incl. the 🇫🇷.
But such an action by allies on defence pacts is something else.
The upshot of this is the 🇫🇷 will conclude that in foreign policy terms Biden is continuity Trump. But the 🇫🇷 have always been less dewey-eyed about the US anyway.
🇫🇷 will strengthen focus on EU & assume that 🇦🇺 isn’t a serious dependable ally.
What does this mean for 🇬🇧?
The AUKUS stuff will please the anti-EUers but less reported on is how little 🇬🇧 benefits from this. 🇺🇸 will get lion share of any new contract while 🇬🇧, reliant on 🇫🇷 good will for so many things: immigration control, trade flows etc will simply think Britain an reliable sh*t.
Gavin Williamson has informed staff at the Dept for Education that he’s leaving the department.
As part of his demotion he was offered Northern Ireland by Boris Johnson.
The most sensitive job in the most sensitive part of UK at its most sensitive time in its last 2 decades.
I should add this has not been officially confirmed yet - depends if Williamson wants to accept it.
In parliamentary lore “going to Northern Ireland” is not something that usually precedes a stellar rise to the high offices of state. It usually signals the end of a career.
Now hearing that Gavin Williamson turned down Northern Ireland job, which makes Johnson’s reshuffle a bit more complicated.
This could drag on about…perhaps even into tomorrow..
One of the worst debates is the climate change one.
It’s fought on risk/cost but regardless of how bad it turns out much of the cost of going carbon neutral is not really a cost drag but substituting out of resources that make people ill, deform environment & fund awful regimes.
In other words the idea that tackling climate change is a very high cost that’s either worth it or not (depending on your view) is not the whole story.
The benefits of a greener run world are huge even if current climate change projections turn out to be a bit alarmist.
Much of the fraught oil debate resembles people worried about what cutting down on smoking will do to the tobacco industry.
Both tobacco & oil are “deadweight industries” that add little in technological advances & money spent on them could be more productively spent elsewhere.