General Election Prediction

[* ORM *]

I have exercised my democratic right of abstention so that I can be part of the party with the largest vote.  

That doesn't mean I'm not interested in the outcome.

Enter a range of 5 votes for your predictions please.

I'm going for Labour (or should I say New Tories) with an overall majority of 72-77 seats.

 

[Wessex Blue]

I think Tony's new labour liars will win by approximately 50 seats.

I have to say that I don't believe the polls, in that they're indicating a v large msjority for Labour. I think that given the amount of time & resources poured into the key marginals by all parties as well as the general disatisfaction with the Iraq war this will be a hard fought and very interesting election.

Expect I'll be up till 3.00am watching the first results being declared.

 

[W4 Shrimper]

I've had a few election punts:

Labour majority 81 or over.................................4/5
Tories to win Putney.........................................5/6
Plaid Cymru to win Ynys Mon..............................4/5
Lib Dems to win between 61 and 63 seats ............5/1
Tories to win between 181 and 190 seats..............4/1

Reckon I'll be up until about 4am, I love election night!

 

[Hong Kong Blue]

I'm going for a Labour majority of around 100. I think the polls are somewhat meaningless as it will be decided on the marginals. However I can't see too many seats changing hands as there aren't that many marginals.

ps First results should be in about 10:45 I reckon, and will be somewhere like Sunderland South. I too will be up until the early hours to watch the action though.

 

[Mad Cyril]

Labour to win with a majority of 90 seats.

Castle Point to swing to Labour.

 

[West Country Shrimper]

I think Basildon will stay Labour, unfortunately and Cheltenham will go with the Tories.

 

[BILLERICAY BLUE]

Labour 78-83

Billericay to stay staunchly Conservative.

I also love election night, so I'll be up until about 2 at least.

 

[southend4ever]

Quote[/b] (West Country Shrimper @ May 05 2005,10:07)]I think Basildon will stay Labour, unfortunately and Cheltenham will go with the Tories.

basildon no longer concerns u

well my one vote to conservative should have a big say as i have never voted before.

 

[Westcliff Shrimper]

Quote[/b] (Mad Cyril @ May 05 2005,09:59)]Castle Point to swing to Labour.

I bloody hope not ! !

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Labour victory with a majority of 104-109. Tony will call it "an historic mandate, an historic third term".

If only the Tories had someone less vile than Howard at its helm, or the Lib Dems someone more dynamic than Kennedy, it might have been a more interesting election, since this current lot (Tony's mob) are sh*te.

My mandate has been exercised - as usual, at my local polling booth, the missus and I were the only two voters there when we cast our votes at c. 7.30 a.m.. Probably only saw a further half-dozen people voting in the whole time I was there (c. 15 minutes)... trying to inflate my bloody bike tyre...

Ho hum.

Matt

 

[Hong Kong Blue]

Again, my theory is that the big losers in this election will be the Lib Dems - despite the gains they will undoubtably make.

If the Lib Dems are going to be taken seriously they need to become the official opposition party this election. The Tories are still a shambles (Howard is unelectable as a leader - remember even bloody Anne Widecombe said there was 'something of the night' about him in '97) and if Lib Dems can't capitalise on this now, when will they?

There are a lot of deeply resented Labour policies - the war, tuition fees etc and on these areas Lib Dems should in theory be the party to capitalise on this discontent. But despite all this it looks like yet again they will be the Conservatives' poor relations in Parliament. Until they can win more seats than the Conservatives, the Lib Dems won't be taken seriously.

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (Hong Kong Blue @ May 05 2005,12:22)]Until they can win more seats than the Conservatives, the Lib Dems won't be taken seriously.

Are you implying that the Conservatives CAN be taken seriously?

 

[The General]

I'll be up till 2am but the TV wont be on ...

 

[Firestorm]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ May 05 2005,11:58)]If only the Tories had someone less vile than Howard at its helm, or the Lib Dems someone more dynamic than Kennedy, it might have been a more interesting election, since this current lot (Tony's mob) are sh*te.

Sorry Matt

Low Interest Rates , Low Inflation, Low Unemployment not good enough.......

If you were not over working age during the Thatcher years you (lucky bastids) have no idea what living under a s**t government is like..........

 

[Napster]

low interest rates are due to the government letting the bank of england set its monetary policy, and the devolution of the finance industry, so there are more banks and building societies- to get more customers they have to offer better deals!

low unemployment is because the government are spending money on public service bureaucracy jobs and the figures are massaged by the government

low inflation is probably affected by the low interest rates.

ho hum

 

[Firestorm]

Thanks Naps I've got it now...

High Unemployment, Inflation and Interest rates are all the fault of c**p governmental policy so someone else should be given a go ( ie Labour isn't working campaign 1979, a campaign I might add , that the miners look back on with immense fondness)

However Low unemployment, Interest rates and Inflation are nothing to do with the Government.

 

[CANV]

labour inherited an economy set fair for good times..  brown didnt touch much and didnt have to..  since then he has pretty much destroyed the best pension system in europe, ****ed ludicrous amounts of money up the wall on the nhs education etc n achieved very little..
i still remember prescott with his 10 yr transport plans and asking us to judge him on results.. mm  ..
lots of lovely new tax and lots of lovely non productive govmnt employees..
inflation is low thanks to global inflation being low, which i suppose you should thank the chinese for, seeing as they now make nearly anything for nothing, and the fact that oil prices have also remained stable and low.. hardly something labour can claim credit for ..
unemployment is down and govmnt jobs and incapacity benefit have gone through the roof, its all numbers juggling ..
most economic shifts in this country are affected by the global scene..
they did bring in the minimum wage mind you which i do agree with..
they have also bought in enough red tape for industry to decorate an orient league chamionship street parade..  
as for sh*t govmnts , fk thatchers, go back one more for some real entertainment...
im votingtory not that david amess will be that bothered with his 10k plus cushion from last time..  any betterthan labour? not really.. any different? not much  but at least itd a change and it will keep the thieving bastards on their toes..  the best im hoping for is a labour win but with a majority of less than 50 to keep em under control a bit

 

[Napster]

Quote[/b] (Firestorm @ May 05 2005,14:19)]Thanks Naps I've got it now...

High Unemployment, Inflation and Interest rates are all the fault of c**p governmental policy so someone else should be given a go ( ie Labour isn't working campaign 1979, a campaign  I might add , that the miners look back on with immense fondness)

However Low unemployment, Interest rates and Inflation are nothing to do with the Government.

oooh, I never said the original point!

ps the high interest rates of the Lamontesque Black wednesday were more than likely caused by the Germans putting up their interest rates to pay for the reunification of germany. traders started trading against the pound, so interest rates went up.

high inflation was always a Labour Keynesian problem- see the stagflation of 73 e.g. the Tories tried to counter this with a monetarist solution but ran into problems with money supply.

of course, one of Labour's main tenets has always been full employment, whereas the Tories preached self-employment etc etc.

ps re the miners- what else was the government supposed to do to an ailing industry which was expensive to maintain and was expected to run out in the near future?

 

[Hong Kong Blue]

Quote[/b] (CANV @ May 05 2005,14:24)]labour inherited an economy set fair for good times..  brown didnt touch much and didnt have to..  since then he has pretty much destroyed the best pension system in europe, ****ed ludicrous amounts of money up the wall on the nhs education etc n achieved very little..
i still remember prescott with his 10 yr transport plans and asking us to judge him on results.. mm  ..
lots of lovely new tax and lots of lovely non productive govmnt employees..
inflation is low thanks to global inflation being low, which i suppose you should thank the chinese for, seeing as they now make nearly anything for nothing, and the fact that oil prices have also remained stable and low.. hardly something labour can claim credit for ..
unemployment is down and govmnt jobs and incapacity benefit have gone through the roof, its all numbers juggling ..
most economic shifts in this country are affected by the global scene..
they did bring in the minimum wage mind you which i do agree with..
they have also bought in enough red tape for industry to decorate an orient league chamionship street parade..  

Hmm, agree with most of that but low oil prices?

And if we had the best pension system in Europe - are the others really that bad? Pensions have needed to be addressed in this country for some time, although I agree Brown has done little about it.

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

Quote[/b] (Firestorm @ May 05 2005,14:01)]

Quote[/b] (Matt the Shrimp @ May 05 2005,11:58)]since this current lot (Tony's mob) are sh*te.

Sorry Matt

Apology accepted.

Seriously, I'm a rather too busy now to discuss the hugely different states of the world and national economy now and when Thatcher took over in 1979.

Perhaps I should have clarified "sh*te". I meant:

*Lied to the nation over Iraq
*Used an atmosphere of fear over terrorism to table some of the most draconian anti-civil liberty legislation seen in a supposed free democracy (detention without charge - something which, thankfully, the Law Lords had the good sense to see was illegal).
*Also used that atmosphere to promote their pernicious ID Cards legislation - another penalty and tax on the law-abiding
*Wasted hundreds of hours of legislation time in pushing through an Act banning Hunting when 95% of the country didn't give a sh*t, so that the old Left could get their revenge on the Tories for the Miners' Strike.
*Totally back-tracked on a previous manifesto pledge not to charge students for tuition fees
*Focussed on hospital waiting lists whilst failing to deal with real problems such as MRSA

As for the economy... well, let's see what Gordy does about the pensions black hole he's created for himself, together with the fact that the high street has already significantly slowed down in Q1&2 of 2005.

When Tony came into power in 1997, it was an incredibly exciting time. Here was a young, new PM who would change things... change the self-serving culture of government, change the problems in the Health service, change the new-yobbish culture of petty violence and criminality in our cities, improve hospitals and schools...

So why has it been such a disappointment? Schools may be better - but that's about it, isn't it? Hospitals are MRSA-riddled, ABSOs are handed out like sticking-plasters over the deep wounds in our society, it's still jobs for the boys with Mandelson now a Euro commissioner.

I reckon ORM was right when he called this lot the new Tories. Nothing has changed. Brown has steered the economy well - but through a period of pretty damn sunny waters. The major restructuring of the world's economies had already taken place - in the 70s and 80s.

Don't get me wrong - I don't think either the Tories or Lib Dems are electable (albeit for wholly different reasons). But it's not much of a positive mandate for Labour when the only reason they'll get in is because neither of the other parties are up to the job.

Matt