FT General Election Poll 2019

[Alf Bentley]

34 minutes ago, twoleftfeet said:

Is it bonkers, those under 24 have had much more recent contact with the socialist education system. Have nothing to get taken away by socialism. 

 

I'm not looking to get into a political argument about it - though I do find it mystifying that we apparently have a "socialist education system" when we've had a Tory Govt for the last 9.5 years and 27 of the last 40 years....

 

It's the polarisation I'm more interested in. When I've got more time, I'll try to find some data on voting by age-group at elections a couple of decades ago.

 

There has always been a disparity, with the young more inclined to vote Left and the old more inclined to vote Right.. But, from memory, I don't recall it ever being remotely as polarised as this.....and that doesn't seem healthy, particularly if controversial policies or economic outcomes cause increasing resentment between generations (big "if", I know, but there are already issues like the difficulty the young face in buying a home).

[twoleftfeet]

This was posted by the president of Canterbury Christchurch University the day after the election.

"

One of the main aims of the students’ union is to help and support every one of our members in anyway we can. 

We realise that, for some of you, this mornings election results would not have been the result you would have wanted and the result you may have feared. 

We would like to open up our doors to all of you. If you need to talk to anyone about how you are feeling, how this election has gone, what your future looks like, anything at all then please come down and speak to us today. 

We want to help support you in anyway we can."

[Nick]

2 hours ago, twoleftfeet said:

This was posted by the president of Canterbury Christchurch University the day after the election.

"

One of the main aims of the students’ union is to help and support every one of our members in anyway we can. 

We realise that, for some of you, this mornings election results would not have been the result you would have wanted and the result you may have feared. 

We would like to open up our doors to all of you. If you need to talk to anyone about how you are feeling, how this election has gone, what your future looks like, anything at all then please come down and speak to us today. 

We want to help support you in anyway we can."

Fair enough.

[Alf Bentley]

10 hours ago, twoleftfeet said:

This was posted by the president of Canterbury Christchurch University the day after the election.

"

One of the main aims of the students’ union is to help and support every one of our members in anyway we can. 

We realise that, for some of you, this mornings election results would not have been the result you would have wanted and the result you may have feared. 

We would like to open up our doors to all of you. If you need to talk to anyone about how you are feeling, how this election has gone, what your future looks like, anything at all then please come down and speak to us today. 

We want to help support you in anyway we can."

 

A university doesn't usually have a president. The senior bod in a university is the Vice-Chancellor (Chancellor is mainly a ceremonial role).

 

As this person is talking about the students' union, I assume it's the students' union president - a student elected by other students to spend a year representing them & overseeing students' union services?

 

One such service is always a welfare service: offering students advice & support if they have personal issues, financial problems, mental health concerns etc. That's clearly what this post is about. It might seem ridiculous to you for students to need support due to the election result - and most didn't, I'm sure. Some students won't have given a shit about the result or will have been delighted with it (as indicated by the reference to "some of you" in the post) so obviously won't have needed support. Most of those who were unhappy about the result will just have felt pissed off and got on with life. But some might have had genuine concerns - perhaps students concerned about how they'll fund their studies or foreign students concerned they'll lose their right to study here or students with fragile mental health anxious about what will happen to the country. Remember that a lot of those students are 18-19 and living away from home for the first time. Most will cope, some will struggle, so SU welfare can be valuable.

 

Anyway, if despite mainly having Tory Govts for decades we've somehow ended up with a "socialist education system", I don't think it's being run by a student representative at the smaller Canterbury university advertising a welfare service. 

[WigstonWanderer]

11 hours ago, twoleftfeet said:

This was posted by the president of Canterbury Christchurch University the day after the election.

"

One of the main aims of the students’ union is to help and support every one of our members in anyway we can. 

We realise that, for some of you, this mornings election results would not have been the result you would have wanted and the result you may have feared. 

We would like to open up our doors to all of you. If you need to talk to anyone about how you are feeling, how this election has gone, what your future looks like, anything at all then please come down and speak to us today. 

We want to help support you in anyway we can."

A bit snowflakey for my taste but nothing otherwise wrong with it.

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

A university doesn't usually have a president. The senior bod in a university is the Vice-Chancellor (Chancellor is mainly a ceremonial role).

 

As this person is talking about the students' union, I assume it's the students' union president - a student elected by other students to spend a year representing them & overseeing students' union services?

 

One such service is always a welfare service: offering students advice & support if they have personal issues, financial problems, mental health concerns etc. That's clearly what this post is about. It might seem ridiculous to you for students to need support due to the election result - and most didn't, I'm sure. Some students won't have given a shit about the result or will have been delighted with it (as indicated by the reference to "some of you" in the post) so obviously won't have needed support. Most of those who were unhappy about the result will just have felt pissed off and got on with life. But some might have had genuine concerns - perhaps students concerned about how they'll fund their studies or foreign students concerned they'll lose their right to study here or students with fragile mental health anxious about what will happen to the country. Remember that a lot of those students are 18-19 and living away from home for the first time. Most will cope, some will struggle, so SU welfare can be valuable.

 

Anyway, if despite mainly having Tory Govts for decades we've somehow ended up with a "socialist education system", I don't think it's being run by a student representative at the smaller Canterbury university advertising a welfare service. 

 

40 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

A bit snowflakey for my taste but nothing otherwise wrong with it.

I think tbh it just comes down to a difference in thinking - some folks think welfare and support when the source of concern is concern for something out of one's line of sight is unnecessary because the concern itself is needless.

[Guest MattP]

14 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

Absolutely bonkers, the polarisation by age group now, if Mail figures are correct: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7839977/Youthquake-vote-won-Election-Labour-18-24-year-olds-voters.html

 

- If only 18-24-year-olds had voted: Labour majority of 438, 58 SNP MPs & only 4 Tory MPs

- If only those aged 65+ had voted: Tory majority of 474 & only 51 Labour MPs

- Those aged under 50 voted to put Corbyn in No. 10; those aged over 50 voted for a Tory landslide of 192-474

Is it really that bonkers though?

 

I voted Lib Dem in 2001 and would have voted Labour in 1997 - people just become more Tory as they get older.

[Rain King]

15 minutes ago, MattP said:

Is it really that bonkers though?

 

I voted Lib Dem in 2001 and would have voted Labour in 1997 - people just become tossers as they get older.

Agreed.

[Alf Bentley]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

Is it really that bonkers though?

 

I voted Lib Dem in 2001 and would have voted Labour in 1997 - people just become more Tory as they get older.

 

As I said before, there's nothing bonkers about more people voting Left when they're young & moving Right as they get older. That's always happened, as far as I know. 

 

What IS bonkers is the much greater scale of the polarisation now:

- 56% Lab v. 21% Con among 18-24-year-olds

- 64% Con v. 17% Lab among those aged 65+

 

You've got me off my arse to find some historic stats to justify my view. 

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-october-1974

 

Just for starters.....

- A majority of 18-24-year-olds (42%) voted Tory in 1979 & 1983 (only slightly lower than the figure for all age-groups)

- 27% of 18-24-year-olds voted Tory in 1997 & 2001 (only slightly lower than the overall figure)

- 41% of those aged 65+ voted Labour in 1997 (only slightly lower than the overall figure)

- 31% of those aged 65+ voted Labour in 2010 (slightly HIGHER than the overall figure)

 

There has been a massive polarisation of voting by age.

Also a massive polarisation by gender (men much likelier to vote Tory than years gone by, women likelier to vote Labour - another big disparity that used to be small).

[Heathrow fox]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

As I said before, there's nothing bonkers about more people voting Left when they're young & moving Right as they get older. That's always happened, as far as I know. 

 

What IS bonkers is the much greater scale of the polarisation now:

- 56% Lab v. 21% Con among 18-24-year-olds

- 64% Con v. 17% Lab among those aged 65+

 

You've got me off my arse to find some historic stats to justify my view. 

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-october-1974

 

Just for starters.....

- A majority of 18-24-year-olds (42%) voted Tory in 1979 & 1983 (only slightly lower than the figure for all age-groups)

- 27% of 18-24-year-olds voted Tory in 1997 & 2001 (only slightly lower than the overall figure)

- 41% of those aged 65+ voted Labour in 1997 (only slightly lower than the overall figure)

- 31% of those aged 65+ voted Labour in 2010 (slightly HIGHER than the overall figure)

 

There has been a massive polarisation of voting by age.

Also a massive polarisation by gender (men much likelier to vote Tory than years gone by, women likelier to vote Labour - another big disparity that used to be small).

No link to much higher no’s going to uni then?Might be nothing in it,but certainly something that’s different from the eighties.

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, Heathrow fox said:

No link to much higher no’s going to uni then?Might be nothing in it,but certainly something that’s different from the eighties.

 

That might be a factor. But I suspect that there are multiple factors - and it would require some proper research to pin it down.

 

But higher numbers were attending uni about 20 years ago, so that wouldn't explain:

- 31% of youth & 31% of OAPs backing Brown in 2010 (30% across all ages), but...

- 56% of youth & 17% of OAPs backing Corbyn in 2019 (32% across all ages)

 

Nor would it explain 38% of those aged 55+ voting Labour in 1979, when Thatcher won a majority after the Winter of Discontent....and even 27% aged 55+ voting for Foot in 1983 (28% across all ages)

Yet just 17% of those aged 50+ voting Labour in 2019 (32% across all ages)

 

Possible other factors?

- Greater polarisation of wealth & opportunity between old & young (more from older generations were able to buy a home & secure a decent pension)?

- Linked to the above, older generations having more accrued wealth to lose from a radical Labour Govt & younger generations less to lose?

- Brexit (big young/old split over Brexit) polarising the election vote?

- Social media more influential with young, traditional media (press/TV/word of mouth) with old? So, young influenced by Leftie conformism of social media & old influenced by right-wing messages of trad media (e.g. Corbyn's dubious past connections)?

- Loss of the tradition of lots of people voting for the same party all their lives?

 

 

 

[urban.spaceman]

 

[Mike Oxlong]

On 31/12/2019 at 22:08, Alf Bentley said:

Absolutely bonkers, the polarisation by age group now, if Mail figures are correct: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7839977/Youthquake-vote-won-Election-Labour-18-24-year-olds-voters.html

 

- If only 18-24-year-olds had voted: Labour majority of 438, 58 SNP MPs & only 4 Tory MPs

- If only those aged 65+ had voted: Tory majority of 474 & only 51 Labour MPs

- Those aged under 50 voted to put Corbyn in No. 10; those aged over 50 voted for a Tory landslide of 192-474

 

 

It’s just dawned on me why Boris is so keen to invest in the NHS 

[Guest MattP]

Keep going Jeremy

 

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-corbyn-proposes-two-year-delay-to-prevent-no-deal-11900001

[ealingfox]

17 minutes ago, MattP said:

Keep going Jeremy

 

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-corbyn-proposes-two-year-delay-to-prevent-no-deal-11900001

 

So Brexit will apparently be 'done' at the end of January, but extending something that happens after that is delaying Brexit?

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

So Brexit will apparently be 'done' at the end of January, but extending something that happens after that is delaying Brexit?

Getting Brexit "done" is the act of leaving which will happen at the end of January. I think everyone knows we then move onto trade talks.

 

Although my point here is what the hell are you doing? Its a vote you cant win in the house and one that just confirms to many of your ex-voters exactly why they were right not to vote for you.

[ealingfox]

 

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

Getting Brexit "done" is the act of leaving which will happen at the end of January. I think everyone knows we then move onto trade talks.

 

Although my point here is what the hell are you doing? Its a vote you cant win in the house and one that just confirms to many of your ex-voters exactly why they were right not to vote for you.

 

Labour is to attempt to delay leaving the EU by two years to prevent a no-deal Brexit

 

Literally the first line of the article. Which one is it? Are you suggesting this is wilfully misleading said ex-voters?

 

If a no-deal scenario was to occur, and it did turn out to be disastrous, I dont think previous efforts to protect against it will be vilified, no matter how cult-like Brexit support has become.

[ithuriel]

50 minutes ago, MattP said:

Keep going Jeremy

 

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-corbyn-proposes-two-year-delay-to-prevent-no-deal-11900001

Corbyn and his cronies are now pretty much irrelevant, though the longer he hangs around and ties his party to him, the longer Labour is a dead duck.

[Strokes]

8 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

So Brexit will apparently be 'done' at the end of January, but extending something that happens after that is delaying Brexit?

 

8 hours ago, ealingfox said:

 

 

Labour is to attempt to delay leaving the EU by two years to prevent a no-deal Brexit

 

Literally the first line of the article. Which one is it? Are you suggesting this is wilfully misleading said ex-voters?

 

If a no-deal scenario was to occur, and it did turn out to be disastrous, I dont think previous efforts to protect against it will be vilified, no matter how cult-like Brexit support has become.

[bovril]

It's debatable how much domestic legislation really affects the Brexit process anyway, and debatable how in control of the process the UK is. 

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, bovril said:

It's debatable how much domestic legislation really affects the Brexit process anyway, and debatable how in control of the process the UK is. 

Our parliament is now fully in control of all legislation. The executive can withdraw at any point without a bent speaker given the opposition the chance to take control of the process.

 

Which is something we did warn you about. But they went ahead with concocting it anyway, mental how they thought this would play out.

[bovril]

28 minutes ago, MattP said:

Our parliament is now fully in control of all legislation. The executive can withdraw at any point without a bent speaker given the opposition the chance to take control of the process.

 

Which is something we did warn you about. But they went ahead with concocting it anyway, mental how they thought this would play out.

Sorry what did you warn me about?

 

When I wrote the 'Brexit process' I meant the fact we need a trade deal, and want it by the end of 2020. No domestic legislation really changes that. So it is debatable that the UK has a great deal of control over what happens next. 

Edited 3 January 2020 by bovril

[somebum]

37%?, hahaha 

Edited 3 January 2020 by somebum

[The Guvnor]

21 hours ago, MattP said:

Keep going Jeremy

 

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-corbyn-proposes-two-year-delay-to-prevent-no-deal-11900001

He's persistent, but in the same way as the Black Knight in the Holy Grail.

[Guest MattP]

On 30/10/2019 at 09:43, Finnegan said:

Doesn't matter because Kendall will walk in with about 65+%

 

I'll do what I always do and vote for whichever generic leftist party is running in Leicester West this year. 

 

Might chuck on the Lib Dems just to be a statistic as an anti Brexit vote but eh. 

 

On 30/10/2019 at 11:26, Alf Bentley said:

 

You're probably right about Kendall, but I wouldn't be so sure.

 

She only won by 4000 in 2010, while in 2015 the combined Tory/UKIP vote was only slightly less than her vote. If the result reflects the polls, Leicester West could yet be in play.

 

On 30/10/2019 at 12:06, MattP said:

@Alf Bentley has already touched on this but she was only about 1,000 ahead of the combined Tory and UKIP vote in 2015, I expect her to hold but she'll have pissed a hell of a lot of voters off in places like Braunstone and New Parks with her going into thelast election backing Brexit and within a year standing up calling for a second referendum.

 

Had there been a Brexit Party/Tory pact and one stood down I would now think Leicester West would be a 50/50 seat between the two. If the Tories can take seats like Stoke and Mansfield it's not beyond possible they grab a seat like this one eventually as the white working class vote contnues to shift towards them in the same way it's not impossible a shire seat ends up going to Labour or the Lib Dems.

This could be the election that finally redraws the "class map" of British politics.

Thought I'd bump this as I was told last night under the boundary review Glenfield could actually join Leicester West from Charnwood.

 

If that happens and the trend continues of Labour losing its WWC vote we have a genuine swing seat for the next election.

Results

1. LABLabour

   Liz Kendall
   • Votes:17,291
   • Vote share %:49.7
   • Vote share change:-11.1
2. CONConservative

   Amanda Wright
   • Votes:13,079
   • Vote share %:37.6
   • Vote share change:+6.3
3. LDLiberal Democrat

   Ian Bradwell
   • Votes:1,808
   • Vote share %:5.2
   • Vote share change:+3.1
4. BRXThe Brexit Party

   Jack Collier
   • Votes:1,620
   • Vote share %:4.7
   • Vote share change:+4.7
5. GRNGreen

   Ani Goddard
   • Votes:977
   • Vote share %:2.8
   • Vote share change:+1.2