Topic: UK General Election - July 4th, here we go folks.

[oldfordie]

I disagree that is a strong argument for saying we don't have voter fraud.
Look how few rape \ sexual assault cases lead to conviction.  And they are the strongest cases they can muster.

Inherently I agree that I don't believe that there is anwhere near a significant amount of voter fraud.  Manipulation of voters by the owners of the major media outlets is a far bigger problem.

I suppose too, it's unlikely any newly elected government is going to prioritise making sure that all the votes for them were legitimate either

So how does someone commit voter fraud, I think we can safely assume they must have voted themselves if they are prepared to vote using someone elses vote, I would also assume they live with the person whose vote they intend to steal. walking back into the same polling station and telling those same election officials your somebody else is rather stupid so they would more likely to ask them to apply for a postal vote, afaik. this legislation wont stop postal voting fraud.   they could be stealing someone elses vote in another polling station, that would mean a older parent I imagine, if they intend to do this then why take the chance, why not just ask them to apply for a postal vote. same thing again, why take the risk.
I can see some nasty gammon registering all his family for a postal vote and filling them in himself but they aren't going to stop it with voter ID laws.

[red_Mark1980]

I disagree that is a strong argument for saying we don't have voter fraud.
Look how few rape \ sexual assault cases lead to conviction.  And they are the strongest cases they can muster.

Inherently I agree that I don't believe that there is anwhere near a significant amount of voter fraud.  Manipulation of voters by the owners of the major media outlets is a far bigger problem.

I suppose too, it's unlikely any newly elected government is going to prioritise making sure that all the votes for them were legitimate either

It would have to be so organised on a huge scale., in a seat that can swing either way.

It's just not a problem to worry about. I take the point that we don't know, what we don't know.

But come on. If this was being done on a scale to make a material difference then we'd have more than one conviction..just from the amount of people needed.

[LuverlyRita]

It makes very little sense either way.

May will be an absolute bloodbath for the Tories, they already know that and Sunak is just putting a Summer election out there as a possibility to stop a challenge from coming in because there is nothing in it for him to bring the election forward and end his time as PM sooner rather then later.

He's delaying as long as possible so that he can continuue lining the pockets of his backers, his mates and his family, continue selling off the UK PLC (freeports etc) and continue running The NHS into the ground. In the case of the latter, the cuts in funding and replacement of trained medical professionals with "associates" (i.e. anyone with a degree who's done a 2 year basic course) should just about finish it off.

[Statto Red]

Looking at the dates, latest possible date for the general election is 28th January, however that date in 2025 falls on a Tuesday, last general election held on a Tuesday was in 1931, latest date for the general election on a Thursday is 23rd January, the general election would have to be called no later than 12th December, that's if the Tories try & cling on that long.

I don't think anyone fancies the prospect of campaigning in the build up & over the festive season, plus most voters won't be paying much attention to the campaigning too, far too busy preparing for, then celebrating over the festive season.

[killer-heels]

Looking at the dates, latest possible date for the general election is 28th January, however that date in 2025 falls on a Tuesday, last general election held on a Tuesday was in 1931, latest date for the general election on a Thursday is 23rd January, the general election would have to be called no later than 12th December, that's if the Tories try & cling on that long.

I don't think anyone fancies the prospect of campaigning in the build up & over the festive season, plus most voters won't be paying much attention to the campaigning too, far too busy preparing for, then celebrating over the festive season.

Yep absolutely. People have said the Tories will wait it out until January but campaigning over Christmas is going to be non-existent and thats not factoring the possibility of awful weather over the winter. The absolute latest the Tories will have an election date is December. Basically the election is 100% happening this year.

[west_london_red]

I disagree that is a strong argument for saying we don't have voter fraud.
Look how few rape \ sexual assault cases lead to conviction.  And they are the strongest cases they can muster.

Inherently I agree that I don't believe that there is anwhere near a significant amount of voter fraud.  Manipulation of voters by the owners of the major media outlets is a far bigger problem.

I suppose too, it's unlikely any newly elected government is going to prioritise making sure that all the votes for them were legitimate either

Voter ID in itself isn’t the worst idea in the world, as usual it’s the way it’s been implemented. In almost every other country that has it people have national ID cards so no one has to do anything special, everyone that can vote already has ID. The issue is we don’t have national ID cards, and the list of acceptable IDs specifically disenfranchises specific groups unlikely to vote Tory.

[west_london_red]

Looking at the dates, latest possible date for the general election is 28th January, however that date in 2025 falls on a Tuesday, last general election held on a Tuesday was in 1931, latest date for the general election on a Thursday is 23rd January, the general election would have to be called no later than 12th December, that's if the Tories try & cling on that long.

I don't think anyone fancies the prospect of campaigning in the build up & over the festive season, plus most voters won't be paying much attention to the campaigning too, far too busy preparing for, then celebrating over the festive season.

They won’t hold an election in January as everyone is skint after Christmas.

[Red Beret]

Voter ID in itself isn’t the worst idea in the world, as usual it’s the way it’s been implemented. In almost every other country that has it people have national ID cards so no one has to do anything special, everyone that can vote already has ID. The issue is we don’t have national ID cards, and the list of acceptable IDs specifically disenfranchises specific groups unlikely to vote Tory.

I remain opposed to ID cards. I still think it is far too "Big Brother" and future governments would seek to manipulate them to their own advantage. And I've yet to hear of any tangible evidence of realistic voter fraud in this country, so I don't see the need for photo ID in order to vote. (Although doubtless claims of voter fraud will be rife after the Tories are utterly battered at the next election - and probably come most loudly from Reform.)

Labour under Blair floated the idea of ID cards and I thought it was a bad idea even then. Mostly because I know how the civil service in this country is run: overstretched and under funded. I joked at the time that you would probably be able to get a fake ID card before the real ones were ready, and it would probably cost you less money (because yes, they government were going to charge people for their own ID cards). I think the initial cost estimate to introduce ID cards was something like £6bn; we all know it likely would have cost at least double that, and likely been at least two years late. And that would have been under a Labour government, which we would consider relatively reliable.

Can you imagine a scheme like that under the fricking Tories? You saw what they did with PPE. A national ID scheme in this country is pointless because it would be hugely expensive, take forever and handled incompetently by departments ill equipped to do what's being asked of them. Frankly, there are more important things in this country that need that kind of money right now.

[Red Beret]

Looking at the dates, latest possible date for the general election is 28th January, however that date in 2025 falls on a Tuesday, last general election held on a Tuesday was in 1931, latest date for the general election on a Thursday is 23rd January, the general election would have to be called no later than 12th December, that's if the Tories try & cling on that long.

I don't think anyone fancies the prospect of campaigning in the build up & over the festive season, plus most voters won't be paying much attention to the campaigning too, far too busy preparing for, then celebrating over the festive season.

I just want interviewers to start calling Sunak out. I want them to start calling him a coward. I want them to say to him, "you know you're not going to win - you're not going to even lessen the scale of the defeat. You're just clinging on for the sake of it, a lame duck PM, leading a lame duck government. You're a coward. The people want change, call the election. The people of this country think you look pathetic and you're only making things worse."

[Dr. Beaker]

Labour under Blair floated the idea of ID cards and I thought it was a bad idea even then. Mostly because I know how the civil service in this country is run: overstretched and under funded. I joked at the time that you would probably be able to get a fake ID card before the real ones were ready, and it would probably cost you less money (because yes, they government were going to charge people for their own ID cards). I think the initial cost estimate to introduce ID cards was something like £6bn; we all know it likely would have cost at least double that, and likely been at least two years late. And that would have been under a Labour government, which we would consider relatively reliable.

 

If they put Dido Harding in charge of it, it will cost a lot more than 6bn but at least it will all go to their mates.

Historically, having a winter election is thought to deter Labour's vote 'getting out', not sure if that would be the case this time though, could work the other way around.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Voter ID in itself isn’t the worst idea in the world, as usual it’s the way it’s been implemented. In almost every other country that has it people have national ID cards so no one has to do anything special, everyone that can vote already has ID. The issue is we don’t have national ID cards, and the list of acceptable IDs specifically disenfranchises specific groups unlikely to vote Tory.

This.

It is a disgrace. Due to how voter ID is implemented (and FPTP), the UK hardly qualifies as a democracy.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I remain opposed to ID cards. I still think it is far too "Big Brother" and future governments would seek to manipulate them to their own advantage. And I've yet to hear of any tangible evidence of realistic voter fraud in this country, so I don't see the need for photo ID in order to vote. (Although doubtless claims of voter fraud will be rife after the Tories are utterly battered at the next election - and probably come most loudly from Reform.)

Labour under Blair floated the idea of ID cards and I thought it was a bad idea even then. Mostly because I know how the civil service in this country is run: overstretched and under funded. I joked at the time that you would probably be able to get a fake ID card before the real ones were ready, and it would probably cost you less money (because yes, they government were going to charge people for their own ID cards). I think the initial cost estimate to introduce ID cards was something like £6bn; we all know it likely would have cost at least double that, and likely been at least two years late. And that would have been under a Labour government, which we would consider relatively reliable.

Can you imagine a scheme like that under the fricking Tories? You saw what they did with PPE. A national ID scheme in this country is pointless because it would be hugely expensive, take forever and handled incompetently by departments ill equipped to do what's being asked of them. Frankly, there are more important things in this country that need that kind of money right now.

I was against them too during the Blair Government. But having had them elsewhere, I am more relaxed about them too. Further, they do better ensure that various groups are not nefariously disenfranchised from the vote.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I just want interviewers to start calling Sunak out. I want them to start calling him a coward. I want them to say to him, "you know you're not going to win - you're not going to even lessen the scale of the defeat. You're just clinging on for the sake of it, a lame duck PM, leading a lame duck government. You're a coward. The people want change, call the election. The people of this country think you look pathetic and you're only making things worse."

How about an interviewer telling Sunak: 'You are always telling us what voters want - well, I'm telling you, the voters want you to call an election and to get out. So, why will you not obey the will of the people'?

[Red Beret]

I was against them too during the Blair Government. But having had them elsewhere, I am more relaxed about them too. Further, they do better ensure that various groups are not nefariously disenfranchised from the vote.

this is the point. The Tories introduced voter ID laws specifically to disenfranchise voters. It had nothing to do with voter fraud. So either ditch the ID law or bring in Voter ID cards.

[Riquende]

How about an interviewer telling Sunak: 'You are always telling us what voters want - well, I'm telling you, the voters what you to call an election and to get out. So, why will you not obey the will of the people'?

Can we hire that Scottish weirdo from the GB News 'forum' to follow him round saying this?

[Red Beret]

Electoral Calculus has released their latest MRP poll, and it's absolutely brutal for the Tories. They're now predicting 90 seats - down from 113 back in February, and something like 123 prior to that.

[oldfordie]

this is the point. The Tories introduced voter ID laws specifically to disenfranchise voters. It had nothing to do with voter fraud. So either ditch the ID law or bring in Voter ID cards.

Yes, I think it's also about putting a obstacle in the way of Labour voters.
Who is less likely to have a driving licence/Passport? logic must say it's people on low income who can't afford a car, cant afford to go on foreign holidays.

It's also about deterring the man in the street from voting, many people aren't that bothered about voting, they don't follow politics, I doubt if they understand the ID laws on voting. this is a reason for them not too bother, how they may not be allowed to vote anyway so why bother.
This is 100% about trying to stop Labour leaning supporters voting. it's called Voter suppression for a reason, the intention is to suppress the vote.

[Elmo!]

Can we hire that Scottish weirdo from the GB News 'forum' to follow him round saying this?

Initially assumed you were talking about Neil Oliver here.

[Statto Red]

this is the point. The Tories introduced voter ID laws specifically to disenfranchise voters. It had nothing to do with voter fraud. So either ditch the ID law or bring in Voter ID cards.

Exactly voter ID was only brought in for the Tories to gerrymander elections [the Tories admitted this after last years local elections], it had nothing to do with voter fraud, guess what over 60s most likely group to vote Tory can use their bus pass for ID, but i can't use my disabled bus pass, i have to use a driving licence or passport.

I'm against ID cards too not just because of cost of introducing them, but the sort of stuff that's going to be stored on them, guarantee every government will manipulate the laws, to give a wider scope of what can be stored on such cards, i do remember the Labour government proposing ID card scheme they ended thrown out as too costly & what could be stored on them, imagine what draconian new laws this government would force on ID cards had they been introduced.

As for voter fraud, i can only ever remember a couple of cases of voter fraud in the UK, one of which when you could only vote by post [2003 local elections], that was ripe for fraud as you had to have someone with you to confirm you voted.

[PaulF]

The bus pass thing is mad / a pointer to true intent.
Don't under 25s pretty much have to have I'd to get into pubs? Campaign to get that accepted and it's fairer.
Is it also one of those look over there things?

[west_london_red]

The bus pass thing is mad / a pointer to true intent.
Don't under 25s pretty much have to have I'd to get into pubs? Campaign to get that accepted and it's fairer.
Is it also one of those look over there things?

No, it is what it is, just an attempt at suppressing the votes of people unlikely to vote Tory. As I said before, either add in a load of additional IDs that younger people have (NUS card for example) or just scrap it altogether, and then let’s get our own back and reduce the voting age to 16, I’d also like to see how Labour can starve the Tories of funds as the Tories have tried doing to Labour.

[Riquende]

YouGov's MRP has updated and is also still sliding away from the Tories. From 169 Tory seats (behind Labour's 385) in January they're now down a further 32 seats against a hypothetical Starmer government , on 155 to Labour's 403.

I don't think anyone would expect a poll at the moment to buck the trend, but I'm still happy to see things reinforced by multiple sources. This time next month the local election results may result in yet more carnage.

[Red Beret]

The local elections will provide the most solid and wide ranging evidence of what to expect at the GE. I think Labour support has essentially peaked, and now it's all about Reform eating away at the Tories core support.

[CornerFlag]

YouGov poll here has the Tories polling better, but still going to get a kicking:

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49061-yougov-mrp-labour-now-projected-to-win-over-400-seats

Labour - 403 (202 in 2019)
Conservatives - 155 (365 in 2019)
Lib Dems - 49 (11 in 2019)
SNP - 19 (48 in 2019)
Plaid - 4 (same)
Greens - 1 (same)

YouGov's MRP has updated and is also still sliding away from the Tories. From 169 Tory seats (behind Labour's 385) in January they're now down a further 32 seats against a hypothetical Starmer government , on 155 to Labour's 403

Ah, sorry mate, just saw this after I posted it!

[Riquende]

Ah, sorry mate, just saw this after I posted it!

No need, it's always good to have the full picture with the other parties involved. I'm just more interested at this point in how the figures are moving within each specific poll. It's one thing to get excited about 155 seats but if the last Yougov poll had them at about 140 then it's going in the wrong direction.

[Libertine]

Reform suspend two candidates for posting racist comments (yes, I know).

Their supporters do not take the news well....

https://twitter.com/reformparty_uk/status/1775532359430840702

[CornerFlag]

No need, it's always good to have the full picture with the other parties involved. I'm just more interested at this point in how the figures are moving within each specific poll. It's one thing to get excited about 155 seats but if the last Yougov poll had them at about 140 then it's going in the wrong direction.

Yeah, I've reviewed polls of polls and the overall trend is great, but there's fluctuation in them enough to be a little on edge.  I don't think the prediction of a Labour win will be wrong, but I suspect that by the time the GE is announced, it'll be a little tighter, and I think those that would nominally vote for Reform but have a history of voting Tory will regress back to the latter.

I've looked through the raw data from that YouGov survey and it shows just how tactical voting could really sway certain constituencies:

Frome and East Somerset
Conservative 27.54%
Labour 27.24%
Lib Dem 23.43%
Green 8.59%
Reform 12.09%
Other 1.11%

Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe
Conservative 29.08%
Labour 21.38%
Lib Dem 25.76%
Green 2.15%
Reform 11.40%
Plaid 9.27%
Other 0.98%

These are two where the third-best parties could easily decide to not campaign or campaign less and push those Tory votes away.  This will likely be a unique opportunity to use Reform to destroy the Conservatives at a microscopic level.  Other Tory holds with close votes are Bridgwater, Runnymede and Weybridge, Chelmsford, South Devon, Sutton and Cheam, St. Neots and Mid-Cambridgeshire, Aylesbury, Ely and East Cambridgeshire, North Shropshire, Bicester and Woodstock, Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr, Newton Abbott, Aldershot, South West Hertfordshire, Tewkesbury, Chicester, Isle of Wight East, Horsham and a fair few others...

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Not going to get my hopes up, still bitter over Europe and Trump 

[oldfordie]

YouGov poll here has the Tories polling better, but still going to get a kicking:

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49061-yougov-mrp-labour-now-projected-to-win-over-400-seats

Labour - 403 (202 in 2019)
Conservatives - 155 (365 in 2019)
Lib Dems - 49 (11 in 2019)
SNP - 19 (48 in 2019)
Plaid - 4 (same)
Greens - 1 (same)

Ah, sorry mate, just saw this after I posted it!

Wonder if it has anything to do with the latest child care giveaway. imagine some will find it tempting. we will have to see how it works out in practice.

[TSC]

Always thought (hoped) the Tories may implode after the purge by Cummings & Johnson.  That episode ultimately binned all those Tories not willing to join the band of ‘Brexit’ sycophants.  In doing so those with experience of governing were replaced by a load of inexperienced folk, many of whom were loons as well.

[Riquende]

Wonder if it has anything to do with the latest child care giveaway

It's not a polling improvement, because the same poll had them higher previously. Yes it's more seats that the poll the other day, but that was a different pollster so different methodology & model to take into consideration.

[oldfordie]

It's not a polling improvement, because the same poll had them higher previously. Yes it's more seats that the poll the other day, but that was a different pollster so different methodology & model to take into consideration.

I see, thanks.

[Red Beret]

Yeah, as I mentioned earlier, Labour could stay stuck on around 45% (for example) from now till the election. But if the Tories continue to lose support to Reform, then Labour's seats could still go up, despite them not budging from that 45%.

It's less now about the gap between Labour and the Tories and more about the gap between Tories and Reform. Plus, Labour and Lib-Dem voters know how to tactically vote; they've done it before.

[Wabaloolah]

YouGov poll here has the Tories polling better, but still going to get a kicking:

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49061-yougov-mrp-labour-now-projected-to-win-over-400-seats

Labour - 403 (202 in 2019)
Conservatives - 155 (365 in 2019)
Lib Dems - 49 (11 in 2019)
SNP - 19 (48 in 2019)
Plaid - 4 (same)
Greens - 1 (same)

Ah, sorry mate, just saw this after I posted it!

even though that poll brings in a smaller majority than Electoral Calculus, it's encouraging that it's still a huge landslide with a 17 point lead which is lower than most of the polls are showing and with Labour only on 41% of the vote.

I suspect tactical voting is in play on these larger polls but also not entirely sure they necessarily get the don't knows and might not votes completely right.

I suspect this poll is at the upper edge of the Tory number of seats too and even more tactical voting will push more seats away from them.

It's all very good still

[Wabaloolah]

I also think the Tories will struggle to hold those two seats in mid-Wales

[Riquende]

Reform suspend two candidates for posting racist comments (yes, I know).

Their supporters do not take the news well....

https://twitter.com/reformparty_uk/status/1775532359430840702

Today I've learned that Reform is being outflanked on their own Right by the... checks notes Homeland Party?

Next week we'll learn about some new schism and that the Homelanders are being outflanked by the... I dunno... Spitfires, Crusaders and a Golliwog in every Toybox Party?

[PaulF]

Today I've learned that Reform is being outflanked on their own Right by the... checks notes Homeland Party?

Next week we'll learn about some new schism and that the Homelanders are being outflanked by the... I dunno... Spitfires, Crusaders and a Golliwog in every Toybox Party?

I don't think there are enough George crosses and not woke logos left for all those people.
God I love the safety of RAWK. Not having to mingle with these anti woke, not left crusaders.
Was mildly interested that being anti woke was such a bad thing, though I think it may just be a thin disguise for racist c*nt.

Edit. I mean big thing. Not bad thing.

[Riquende]

Was mildly interested that being anti woke was such a bad thing

Just once, ever, I'd love to see one of these raging anti-woke activists provide any sort of rationale for why 'woke' is even vaguely negative. You'd think they might have an answer by now, having fought against it for years now and gone on TV many times to warn about the dangers of the 'woke menace'.

But instead you have this. Notorious online provocateur Chaya Raichik (who runs and is "LibsofTikTok") up in front of a class of students.



So there you go. Anything that's not normal (because our 'normalicy' has been destroyed) and ends our lives is Woke. These people make their careers off this. If she was in the UK she'd have 3 hours daily on GB News by now to yammer on about any old guff that involved rainbows and Meghan Markle. When did such towering non-entities demand so much public oxygen?

[ChrisLFCKOP]

Just once, ever, I'd love to see one of these raging anti-woke activists provide any sort of rationale for why 'woke' is even vaguely negative. You'd think they might have an answer by now, having fought against it for years now and gone on TV many times to warn about the dangers of the 'woke menace'.

But instead you have this. Notorious online provocateur Chaya Raichik (who runs and is "LibsofTikTok") up in front of a class of students.



So there you go. Anything that's not normal (because our 'normalicy' has been destroyed) and ends our lives is Woke. These people make their careers off this. If she was in the UK she'd have 3 hours daily on GB News by now to yammer on about any old guff that involved rainbows and Meghan Markle. When did such towering non-entities demand so much public oxygen?

Did you see the interview she did where she turned up in a shirt with the interviewer on it and then at one point just decided to show her porn?....I mean by her definition she is woke because that is not normal.

[FlashGordon]

I don't believe people like her are genuine. I feel they are some sort of pseudo-entrepreneur who has spotted a gap in the market and will do anything to exploit it for money and fame.