Labours Lost Voters

D

Doon frae Troon

Ryder Cup Winner
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
19,155
Location
S W Scotland
Visit site
Interesting looking back on Labour's GE voting history and where they lost votes.
Especially Milliband in 2015 compared to Blair in 2005.
Apart from Blair in 1997 [when a kangaroo would have been voted in] Kinnoch had the largest vote and lost.

74 Wilson 11.47m
79 Callachan 11.53m
83 Foot 8.45m
87 Kinnoch 10.02m
92 Kinnoch 11.56m
97 Blair 13.51m
01 Blair 10.72m
05 Blair 9.55m
10 Brown 8.60m
15 Milliband 9.37
 
Those numbers are an almost completely irrelevance!

As, i'm afraid to say, you seem to be!

And the SNP in Westminster certainly is!

How's the rest of the fishing up there?
 
I'm one of the lost, till they get their house in order I think they won't mount a credible opposition for a while. I'm no tory but I think they are going down the right path.
 
Foxholer said:
Those numbers are an almost completely irrelevance!

As, i'm afraid to say, you seem to be!

And the SNP in Westminster certainly is!

How's the rest of the fishing up there?
Click to expand...

Eh! What on earth has this post to do with the SNP ?
Perhaps you are becoming paranoid.

Blair lost nearly 4 million Labour voters in 12 years.
Milliband must have polled more votes in England then many of his predecessors.
 
Labour have 2-3 years to get things right. Choose the correct leader, get a decent back bench team in and then build. Similar to what Blair did. Block by block, get it right. Plenty of time.
 
Doon frae Troon said:
Interesting looking back on Labour's GE voting history and where they lost votes.
Especially Milliband in 2015 compared to Blair in 2005.
Apart from Blair in 1997 [when a kangaroo would have been voted in] Kinnoch had the largest vote and lost.

74 Wilson 11.47m
79 Callachan 11.53m
83 Foot 8.45m
87 Kinnoch 10.02m
92 Kinnoch 11.56m
97 Blair 13.51m
01 Blair 10.72m
05 Blair 9.55m
10 Brown 8.60m
15 Milliband 9.37
Click to expand...

Don't forget that the population of the UK has increased quite significantly during this period (thanks mainly due to Labour's immigration policies), so the percentage of the National vote for the Labour Party would have fallen anyway on these numbers!
 
The Labour Party pandering (because that what it feels like in their desperation) to how the majority of the electorate currently think is not IMO the best way to form principle-based policy. Basically it says that the Labour Parties principles will become those that are the nearest fit to the current proclivities of the largest proportion of the electorate - perhaps excluding the far right.
 
Doon frae Troon said:
Interesting looking back on Labour's GE voting history and where they lost votes.
Especially Milliband in 2015 compared to Blair in 2005.
Apart from Blair in 1997 [when a kangaroo would have been voted in] Kinnoch had the largest vote and lost.

74 Wilson 11.47m
79 Callachan 11.53m
83 Foot 8.45m
87 Kinnoch 10.02m
92 Kinnoch 11.56m
97 Blair 13.51m
01 Blair 10.72m
05 Blair 9.55m
10 Brown 8.60m
15 Milliband 9.37
Click to expand...

Only relevant if you quote as a percentage of the overall casting vote of the GE and that of the other parties.
 
Last edited:
Val said:
Only relevant if you quote as a percentage of the overall casting vote of the GE and that of the otherparties.
Click to expand...

Is it?

Surely if 13.5m people voted for Labour in one year, and only 9.4m in another, then that is a decline of 4.1m, no matter how many other people voted. Whether they voted for someone else, or didn't vote, doesn't matter. The only real difference I would guess is the % of the first number that passed away between the two votes.
 
CheltenhamHacker said:
Is it?

Surely if 13.5m people voted for Labour in one year, and only 9.4m in another, then that is a decline of 4.1m, no matter how many other people voted. Whether they voted for someone else, or didn't vote, doesn't matter. The only real difference I would guess is the % of the first number that passed away between the two votes.
Click to expand...

Yes it's a decline but only relevant if figures show that they are the only party that declined by that %.
 
Val said:
Yes it's a decline but only relevant if figures show that they are the only party that declined by that %.
Click to expand...

Indeed, does the decline represent the electorate's disillusionment with Labour or with politics in general?

Of course that wouldn't suit DFT's agenda. Lies, damned lies and statistics.
 
Nope not my agenda. [on this one anyway;)]

Just curious how the Torisiation of Labour by New Labour seems to have risen up and bit them on the bum.
Amazingly, despite what happened in Scotland, they still seem to be lost down that avenue.

As a party I think they could do worse than elect Corbyn, at least folk will know what they are voting for.
 
The SNP have to be given some credit for removing the faux socialist party as a force in English politics given that Scotland used to be a major labour strong hold and a bucket full of easy seats for them.
 
If they are ever so stupid to put that Jeremy Corbyn as leader then they will seal their death knoll. His policies would put the UK in a similar situation to Greece. Come to think of it just the same as Nicola Sturgeon would!
 
People may agree with Corbyn or hate his views, but at least they can probably agree that he stands for something and his positions and policies are pretty clear. Liz Kendall is also pretty clear too - she is a Tory in Labour clothing, but the other two seem willing to pivot or slide around to what is politically expedient, and illustrate what many hate about modern politicians. They stand for nothing and move according to the wind of public opinion and the main media players.

I joined Labour as a registered supporter purely to vote for Corbyn in the forthcoming election. I see nothing wrong with a candidate who is traditional Labour, supports the NHS, the working classes, a strong welfare state and who seeks to restrain the out of control private companies and big money interests who currently fund the Tory party. The mistake Labour made was to believe that the public supported a move to the centre under Blair. They didn't. They (and initially I) bought into a cult of personality but as soon as he showed his true colours, support started to wane until they reached the depths under Moribund. But they still think that the public wants them to stay in the centre, in a sort of Tory-lite place. I don't believe that, but they have allowed Tories to set the narrative for recent elections, and that narrative is about Europe, immigrants and welfare recipients both being evil and austerity, and they have forgotten small stuff like the NHS, education, and getting more decent well paying jobs. Labour don't even know where they stand on austerity. Pretty much every credible economist in the western world knows where to stand on it - against it, but Labour are frightened and incapable of taking the issue on because they are driven by focus groups, opinion polls and media opinion.

I think they need to hit Ctrl-Alt-Del and start over again. Find some principles and ideals in line with their natural constituency and build a credible narrative around those. Don't let the Tories set the terms of the debate, stick to their principles and it can't possibly take them anyplace worse than where they currently are.

On the voter numbers, in 1979, Thatcher got 13.67 million votes against 11.33 million in 2015. They won both times, obviously. The difference between now and then is that overall turnout is lower, and there are more than 2 parties getting decent shares of the vote. In 1979 only 3 parties got more than 1 million vote, Liberals in 3rd place. In 2015, 6 parties got more than a million votes.
 
Doon frae Troon said:
Interesting looking back on Labour's GE voting history and where they lost votes.
Especially Milliband in 2015 compared to Blair in 2005.
Apart from Blair in 1997 [when a kangaroo would have been voted in] Kinnoch had the largest vote and lost.

74 Wilson 11.47m
79 Callachan 11.53m
83 Foot 8.45m
87 Kinnoch 10.02m
92 Kinnoch 11.56m
97 Blair 13.51m
01 Blair 10.72m
05 Blair 9.55m
10 Brown 8.60m
15 Milliband 9.37
Click to expand...
Neil Kinnock probably would have won if the Labour Party hadn't held that stupid American style triumphal pre-election rally. I wish politicians would stop copying American ideas because the UK is not America. I think most Brits thought they were counting their chicks before they hatched! I still haven't forgiven 'New Labour' for involving us in US led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and for all Gordon Brown's stealth taxes and welfare reforms.. Ed Milliband was a complete no-hoper as a potential Prime Minister and probably dragged Labour's vote down at the last election. They also seemed to take Scotland for granted as a power base and got kicked where it hurts by the SNP!:)
 
Last edited:
A very good summary Ethan but Corbyn will see the end of Labours chances of election. The reason the Tories get/got elected was that Gordon Brown and Ed Balls presided over the collapse of the economy and Ed Milliband was so clearly unelectable and that Cameron had turned the economy around, by enough, that the undecided voters wouldn't be swayed by the quite hopeless Milliband. They needed to move to policies that you call Torylite to even stand a chance of being electable.

Labour, to stand a chance of re election in the future need to have sound policies that won't bankrupt the nation, look after a more modernised, streamlined and waste cutting NHS, properly stop economic migration and look after the businesses that pay all our wages without burdening small businesses with red tape, fines for everything in the tax regime, and, ever increasing benefits that micro businesses can't afford.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top