• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Tetchy Rish! at it again

Solid start by the Beeb with a tweet from Laura the Tory stating Labour need a bigger swing than 1997 to get any sort of majority but ignoring the point that everything suggests they will smash that.

Plus excessive coverage of zero seats reform (well one of you count 30p u suppose)
 
Standard comparing apples with oranges there. Major was running a minority Government from 1996 onwards, of course you need a bigger swing.

They'll get it too.
 
Solid start by the Beeb with a tweet from Laura the Tory stating Labour need a bigger swing than 1997 to get any sort of majority but ignoring the point that everything suggests they will smash that.

Plus excessive coverage of zero seats reform (well one of you count 30p u suppose)
Forgets what the 2019 election was all about, even Boris knows those votes were lent for Brexit. I do wonder what it'd look like compared to 2015 or 2017 data.

Weirdly, assuming the outcome you want, you'd rather Reform get the coverage over say the Greens. Whose votes are going to either of them..!
 
Forgets what the 2019 election was all about, even Boris knows those votes were lent for Brexit. I do wonder what it'd look like compared to 2015 or 2017 data.
IIRC, in 2019 the Tories won a lot of seats by small margins. Their victory could easily have been smaller than it was.
 
Quote check, ‘so are you looking forward to the football’, Barry South Wales.
 
IIRC, in 2019 the Tories won a lot of seats by small margins. Their victory could easily have been smaller than it was.
I have long been frustrated by the description of 2019 as a "landslide victory" for this and other reasons. It was a fragile victory in a lot of ways, but most importantly "4/10 voters chose Party 1, 3/10 voters chose Party 2" is not an overwhelming difference in popular opinion. The way we tend to draw narratives from seat totals instead of vote totals under FPTP is really disruptive to any kind of sensible understanding of this country's political nature, and plays a big part in the mistaken idea that the UK is fundamentally conservative (or, well, fundamentally anything).

More generally, 365 seats is the kind of win that's initially stable, but still vulnerable to the kinds of natural attrition you can get over the course of a normal parliamentary term (by-elections, deaths, defections, etc), as indeed we've now seen with the 2019 parliament.
 
Last edited:
Confirmed Rwanda planes won't be going before election and Labour will repeal, what a waste of fucking money just for a culture war
Gutting for Rishi, this has cost him £1000
 
Apparently Sunak is refusing to honour that bet anyway.
 
He claims the person that took the money to go to Rwanda on a different scheme, having already had his asylum claim and appeals rejected, counts.
Because he's a dishonest POS.
 
He claims the person that took the money to go to Rwanda on a different scheme, having already had his asylum claim and appeals rejected, counts.
Because he's a dishonest POS.
He's done well to make himself look weaker today than yesterday.
 
Back
Top