Total votes cast under recent leaders

The Conservatives under Mrs May polled 13.667 m votes this time.
This is more than Labour under Tony Blair at his peak in 1997 when he polled 13.518m, and more than he polled in 2001 when he had a landslide in seats – he polled just 10.724 m.votes

Theresa May’s leadership at 13.667 m was well ahead of the Conservatives led by David Cameron who managed 11.34 m in 2015 and just 10.73 m in 2010 despite the banking crash under Labour.
It also is massively better than John Major in 1997 after his ERM European disaster, when he polled just 9.6m.
William Hague took the prize for the worst Conservative performance of the last half century with only 8.357m.votes. Michael Howard lifted it modestly in 2005 to 8.784 m.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

191 Comments

  1. alan jutson
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:08 am | Permalink

    With a rising population surely every election should produce more total votes, even if the same percentage of the population vote each time.

    Corbyn did well because he energised the young and first time voters, with I believe over 2,000,000 people registering in the last 2 weeks before the election, thus he had a record turnout as well, from what I understand.
    The problem you may have in the Conservative Party is that those people who voted for Corbyn may well remain energised, and become traditional Labour voters for years to come.

    Afraid many people appear to have short memories of all of Labours failures over the years.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:43 am | Permalink

      That is a plausible analysis but the vote breakdown shows Corbyn’s vote came disproportionately from the age group around 30, not the younger group.

      • Jerry
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

        @Roy Grainger; There is no data for age breakdown, just opinions.

        • libertarian
          Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

          Jerry
          According to Ashcroft survey data this is the age breakdown

          Age Tory Lab
          18-24 18% 67%
          25-34 22 58
          35-44 30 50
          45-54 40 39
          55-64 47 33
          65 + 59 23

          • Jerry
            Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:18 am | Permalink

            @libertarian; “According to Ashcroft survey data this is the age breakdown”

            Yes Walter, as I said, there are no facts, just opinions, what do you not understand, Lord Ascroft runs an OPINION polling business. Duh!

          • hefner
            Posted June 12, 2017 at 7:17 am | Permalink

            Thanks for this information.

          • libertarian
            Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

            Thanks for that Jerry

            How many times do you expect to walk smack into a brick wall of your own rude, aggressive and wrong posts?

            The DATA was taken from a SAMPLE of 14,000 people who completed a survey of how they voted NOT an opinion on how they might. They are what we in the reality based community call FACTS . An opinion is something that you use to post a lot with and is just what you think ( an oxymoron in your case) .

            Now its a small sample and it may not be entirely accurate a picture but it undoubtably IS DATA Jerry so not for the first time you post has been found to be total cobblers based on YOUR incorrect opinions

            No need to apologise

            I expect Jerry Pollard back with another yeh but, no but, yeh but reply by return

          • Jerry
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 7:22 am | Permalink

            @libertarian; Oh dear. In your rush to troll you didn’t read your comment back to yourself before clicking the “Post Comment” button did you, duh!

            In your own words…

            “The DATA was taken from a SAMPLE of 14,000 people who completed a survey of how they voted”

            …so you admit it is not based on the data, that does not exist, from the electoral register/count then. As I said, you are citing an opinion, based on honesty, and a calculated projection (because it wasn’t a 100% sample of all those who cast a vote), not actual hard facts.

            If the data is wrong, questionable or unreliable then it is not valid data, it is just an opinion, No doubt someone could come up with “data” to show that the moon is likely made of cheese, or that JFK shot himself, but only fools would cite such “data”.

            Stop being so clueless Walter, how many times do you expect to walk smack into a brick wall of your own rude, aggressive and wrong posts? No need to apologise.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

      @alan jutson; On your first point, indeed and that’s what the data shows, is this why our host ‘forgot’ to include reference to the turn out percentages for each election because it shoots much of his propaganda down?… Second point, not just the young. Thirdly, no, what most people have now are not memorises of the 1970s but over riding memories of Tory (or Tory-Lite, the Blair/Brown years) failures over the last 30 to 40 years, only those in their mid to late 50s and older have any clear political memories of the ’70s complete with context.

      What is more, when people Google the 1970s what do they come up with now, not the spun political fibs but the facts, such as why the west (not just the UK) was plunged into economic problems, for example the 1973/4 OPEC oil crisis and the 1973/4 stock market crisis caused by the collapse of the Bretton Woods system.

      Reply On share of the vote she also did very well

      • alan jutson
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:11 pm | Permalink

        Jerry

        Rest assured I have plenty of memories of Conservative failures as well as Labour, but only Labour have left us bust each time they were finished in power.

        Its the usual cycle I am afraid.

        Labour spend all the money and borrow big time, things look great for a while, then it all comes home to roost, then the Conservatives try to pick up the pieces and balance the books, only to be castigated later for trying to manage us back to a sensible financial position.
        Thus they are called the nasty Party with Austerity policies, so Labour get back in, and the cycle continues.

        Rest assured I am not wedded to the Conservatives, I 0nly wish Labour were a more financially sensible Party, and the Conservatives a bit more “small c” Proper Conservative, so that we had rather more long term stability.

        Perhaps someone should spell out clearly how much all the Mr Prudent (we have now abolished Boom and Bust) Brown PFI deals are doing for our Hospital, School, and Prison finances, where it now costs in excess of £300 to change a bloody light bulb.

        My memory goes back a little further, as I guess I am rather older than you.
        The Winter of discontent is still strong in my mind, when piles of rubbish blocked streets, and people could not even bury the dead, and we had emergency refrigerated shipping containers storing bodies because the mortuary were full up to overflowing.
        Callaghans comment at the time, “What Crisis” after returning from (I think) the Caribbean.

        With Corbyn it may be all Milk and honey for a couple of years, then reality would eventually set in, and it would be a financial disaster, and once again someone would have to clear up an even more expensive mess than Mr Brown’s Government left behind.

        Shame we cannot have sensible and responsible politics from all Parties, but then I guess that would not be politics and Politicians who all spend and borrow other peoples money, as the Government has none of its own in reality.

        • Jerry
          Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

          @alan jutson; “Rest assured I am not wedded to the Conservatives, I 0nly wish Labour were a more financially sensible Party, and the Conservatives a bit more “small c” Proper Conservative, so that we had rather more long term stability.”

          That we can agree on. But then what is fiscally sound to one is the highs of irresponsibility to another, for example many might suggest that if the NHS can not fund for care in old age properly, what people thought they had already paid for via their tax & NI, then we can not fund tax cuts to anyone, never mind the 1%. You might agree, or you might not, which wing of the Tory party and their votes are correct though?

          “The Winter of discontent is still strong in my mind, when piles of rubbish blocked streets, and people could not even bury the dead, and we had emergency refrigerated shipping containers storing bodies because the mortuary were full up to overflowing.”

          But the context to those times and thus the miss-management started in 1973, if not slightly before, during Ted Heath’s government here in the UK and a right wing presidency in the USA.

          As for union industrial action, remember that it always takes two to tango, and start an argument.

          With regards Callaghan’s “What Crisis” comments, that a classic example of how the (in this case, right wing) press edit out the actual context and insert their own, whilst somewhat crass (mockingly so, towards the press, might be why he was so badly miss-quoted…) Callaghan’s full comment has a somewhat different context to the now often cited version.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 7:36 am | Permalink

            Might I add, for balance, an example of left-wing media bias; how they reported and inserted their own context, and do so to this day, namely Mrs Thatchers 1987 comment regarding the roll of government, her “Society” comments.

        • miami.mode
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

          alan

          Credit where credit’s due. Jeremy Corbyn saved the country – by losing!

          • Jerry
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 7:27 am | Permalink

            @miami.mode; So did Mrs May!…

      • NickC
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:45 pm | Permalink

        Jerry, Blair was elected as PM whilst leader of Labour, by Labour voters, at the behest of the Labour party and Labour party funders. Blair was toasted by Labour supporters like the BBC (remember the champagne bottles?). No Conservative voter wanted Blair – by definition.

        Blair was Labour with megalomaniac tendencies. Corbyn is Labour with Trotskyist and traitorous (100 examples on Guido) tendencies. He is lying to you just like Blair did. And just like Blair it will take you 15 years to understand. And then you will chirrup: that’s not my kind of socialism, like millions of dupes before you.

        • Jerry
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 8:02 am | Permalink

          @NickC; Taking your abusive second paragraph first, your point is what, the same could be said about the Tory party and Thatcher (1000s of examples, no doubt, to be found on Socialist & Trotskyist websites)….

          “No Conservative voter wanted Blair – by definition.

          Are you seriously suggesting that all those Labour voters had been sitting on their hands since 1974, hence why Labour were not (re)elected until 1997. Those who switched their vote to Labour had been Conservative voters since at least 1979 – by definition. Are you perhaps mixing up Conservative voters and Conservative party members?

          As for that champagne, was that for a Blair victory or for who ever was elected, after a gruelling six week campaign for the media if not the public, was it even BBC Champaign? I can’t remember the choreography of the events off hand, and so much party political spin has been applied over the years I doubt anyone will remember it without revisiting the off-air recordings of the BBC’s election night/morning broadcasts.

    • Hope
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

      JR, with your disastrous manifesto who in their right mind would trust May to negotiate and get anything from the EU? Fox hunting, taking away school meals and steeling old people’s homes because they have dementia. What was she thinking! Come on, she was the one who said people think you are the nasty party. She must have tried to lose the election no one would be so stupid. Her record was always going to come back to bite her and your party. Why did you not stop the manifesto or select a leaver?

      Treacherous Osborne, Heseltine, Soubry and Morgan, clearly identified by the press as such, are being asked for their views. Is anyone really interested other than the left wing to stir up trouble?

      Bernard Jenkins did a good interview stopping Sky’s left wing agenda. Why is he not in the he cabinet? Your party is going to have to change from left wing to centre right if it does not want to lose all support. Those who crowed about UKIP or that May finished them off were also stupid. UKIP took Labour votes. I will write your manifesto for free next time. You got my email address.

      • Jerry
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:47 pm | Permalink

        @Hope; “Treacherous” to who, no one on the moderate side of the Tory party I suspect, nor the vast majority of would be Tory voters. It’s the sort of unthinking claptrap that you keep come out with that is fuelling support for Corbyn & Co., not preventing it, the UK, the world, has moved on since the 1980s.

        • Hope
          Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:51 pm | Permalink

          Drivel as normal Jerry. There are other opinions other than your own. There is nothing moderate going against over 80 percent of the electorate for leaving the EU, the single market and custom union! There is nothing moderate going against the public vote because a small disloyal bunch want to be ruled by a foreign power. Moreover, these people forget Scotland voted for leave by changing their voting pattern, Clegg gone and lib Dumbs outstandingly lost asking for us to remain. Good grief at least look at the facts, not left wing BBC tripe.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:40 am | Permalink

            @Hope; “Drivel as normal Jerry. There are other opinions other than your own.”

            Utter drivel as normal Hope. There are other opinions other than your own, what is more we have just had the largest official ‘opinion poll’ (they called it an election) that rather suggests it is you who is talking the most drivel, not the likes of Treacherous Osborne, Heseltine, Soubry and Morgan, nor myself.

            Mr Portillo, in his 1997 immediate post-defeat speech, did more to rejuvenate the party by publicly eating some humble pie than the Tory party as a whole then did in the next 8+ years of internal bickering. When the electorate tell you that they want something different, something to the left or at least centre, something softer, you don’t regain support by lurching even further to the right or suggest even harder policies.

            Also, it was, at the last count, 51.89% who voted to Leave, not 80%, and that tells us nothing about how the 51.89% wish to leave nor actually when – want to cite those figures @Hope, first we’ll have to hold that second referendum to obtain the figures…

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

      “Energised the young” – you surely mean ‘conned the young’ by promising them no £27K of student fees, no student debt, cheaper rents, free child care, more money for the NHS & state sector workers, an increases minimum wage, four more bank holiday a year ……and all paid for with his rubber cheques.

      The young being young seem largely to have fallen for it. The Tories failed to point out what a complete con trick it all was.

      • hefner
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:23 pm | Permalink

        LL, how much did you pay as fees when studying in Cambridge?

        • a-tracy
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

          Hefner, I had it pointed out to me once that the 10% of Brits that graduated years ago paid lots more tax and thus the tuition fees were recouped that way? I didn’t go to Uni and all three of my children are saddled with eye watering levels of student loan debts that their Scottish cousins don’t have, or their Welsh ones. I’m angry but not for one minute did I think Corbyns plan was a) fair to those graduating with a 9% tax, especially when he’d have to come back to those same grads wanting more tax than the eye watering 41% they already pay over £17k, in order to pay for the following generation coming up behind them for FREE, yippee everything’s FREE again someone else is gonna pay wheee, or b) affordable by the 50% not at Uni. Or were the 10% that didn’t get the high salaries from the ‘olden days’

  2. Peter Martin
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:15 am | Permalink

    The Labour Party are publishing similar figures to show how well they did. However, I’d just make the rather obvious point that the outcome of a football or cricket game match doesn’t just depend on the number or runs or goals scored by one particular side.

    • Terry
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

      The match outcome solely depends upon the number of goals scored. One team scores more than t’other they win. They score the same it’s a draw, neither side scores its a draw. It’s democracy at work something the remainers and the lefties seem to have forgotten. Or now completely ignore because it does not work for them this time..

      • Jerry
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

        @Terry; The analogy is wrong, it’s not a ball game but a marathon, hence the name “FPTP” no party has crossed the winning line. It’s also ‘something the Brexiteers and those on the right seem to have forgotten, Or now completely ignore because it does not work for them this time’…

        • Hope
          Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

          Drivel and incorrect analysis, again.

        • libertarian
          Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:59 pm | Permalink

          Jerry

          au contraire Brexiters oh you mean the winning side in a straight vote contest who scored more than the still whinging remain losers.

          FPTP based on arbitrary constituencies is and always has been a crock

          Not fit for purpose whoever “wins”

          • Jerry
            Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:43 am | Permalink

            @Hope; @libertarian; Thank you both for proving you understand nothing about how elections work on the FPTP system!

          • libertarian
            Posted June 12, 2017 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

            Jerry

            Lol you are so funny. I think the FPTP election system we have is pretty straightforward to understand the point is that like your attitude it doesn’t work

          • Jerry
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 7:45 am | Permalink

            @libertarian; You have basically have admitted to trolling me then, if you really do understand the basic concept of the FPTP system. No party “won”, because no party cross the “winning line” to obtain a majority.

  3. Dame Rita Webb
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:18 am | Permalink

    It would be interesting to know by how much the number of eligible voters increased in the past seven years. Perhaps Mrs May’s lax attitudes to non EU immigration and who also gets a UK passport helped her achieve this? My husband can vote despite being a Commonwealth citizen and also having no intention to take British nationality either.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

      @DRW; Funny how no one on the right ever complained about any of that back in the 1980/90s when the Tory party were relying on support from those from the commonwealth, many the economic migrants of the day.

      • libertarian
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:17 pm | Permalink

        Jerry

        Thats probably because you are wrong and once again show you’re not very good with history

        By 1972, with the passing of the Immigration Act, only holders of work permits, or people with parents or grandparents born in the UK could gain entry – effectively stemming primary immigration from Commonwealth countries. The Act abolished the distinction between Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth entrants.

        In the 1970s, an average of 72,000 immigrants were settling in the UK every year from the Commonwealth; this decreased in the 1980s and early 1990s to around 54,000 per year.

        Hardly likely to win a constituency let alone an election

        • Jerry
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:50 am | Permalink

          @libertarian; Immigration started long before the 1970s Walter, and electoral advantage was gained long before 1970s.

          • libertarian
            Posted June 12, 2017 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

            Oh Jerry one day you will just admit it when you are caught banged to rights with the facts that give the lie to your opinions

            Read your own post again. If you now want to CHANGE your opinion and include people who entered the country before the 1970’s you will have to also take into account the huge number of the population that was lost in the 1940’s Duh!

            However here’s the facts

            Commonwealth immigration, made up largely of economic migrants, rose from 3,000 per year prior to WW2 to 46,800 in 1956. This was encouraged to help fill gaps, caused by losses of manpower during the war, in the UK labour market for both skilled and unskilled jobs, including in public services such as the National Health Service and London Transport

            Come on Jerry Pollard, yeh but, no but, yeh but

          • Jerry
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 7:52 am | Permalink

            @libertarian; Oh for god sake Walter! Immigration to the UK started long before WW2, long before WW1, even before Queen Victoria came to the throne…

  4. Anonymous
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:20 am | Permalink

    This is why it was duplicitous to seek a mandate ( which we already had via the Referendum.)

    The Referendum was one-man-one vote. The General Election was on FPTP. It totally shifted goalposts and was disingenuous.

    This is what the Tories also did to wreck Brexit:

    – Put a Remainer in charge of it
    – Delay the letter so that Miller-Blair could have a go at derailing it legally

    When that failed:

    – Have a general election to – supposedly – secure a mandate (which we already had !)
    – Say “Brexit means Brext”
    – During that general election make offers that the core vote could not accept (punishment beatings, whilst Corbyn made offers the young could not refuse)

    So here we are. The core Tory vote rejected a socialist Tory leader but now such as the Mail on Sunday is saying that the public have rejected “Brexit means Brexit” and so will Miller-Blair and it is too complex to refute without sounding like a nutter.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4592448/The-Prime-Minister-learned-hard-lesson.html

    Any control over Brexit is over. We must now accept what the EU offers. I suggest a second referendum and that we beg to go back in because it is clear that the Tory establishment will not allow us the strong leadership to Leave.

    Then after that may we scrap the UK Parliament and turn Westminster into a museum ?

    It has shown itself to be nothing but an EU accomplice.

    Brexit is over. So is Britain if we are not very careful.

    • bri
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:38 pm | Permalink

      You get your second referendum and the result is a resounding out. The British are not stupid and can tell when they are being manipulated. Then what genius?

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:49 am | Permalink

        They are wishing there had never been a referendum.

        Subsequently we find we are not allowed the right leaders to take us out.

    • Longstone
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

      Yes, I completely agree. It was obvious from the beginning. With May still surrounding herself with Remainers, even after this disastrous election, it is clearly a conspiracy and she threw the election deliberately.

      David Davis campaigned with UKIP. An infiltraitor presumably. It was weird after the referendum when the woman who referred to the ‘nasty party’ knifed Leadsom (although to be fair, she crumbled) with the help of her creepy crew. They can’t have believed TM had become a Brexiteer. TM crowned and only token/fake Leavers in the cabinet.

      Soubry now claiming the nation has voted for a soft Brexit, as if this GE was a second EU referendum or supersedes the one last year? Brexit was barely mentioned in the campaigns and more than 80% of the electorate voted for parties whose manifestos said we would leave the Single Market and there would be an end to Freedom of Movement.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

      Anonymous; “This is why it was duplicitous to seek a mandate ( which we already had via the Referendum.)”

      Except there was only a mandate for leaving, not for how the government appeared to want to leave, hence why the Lords were not restrained by the Salisbury Convention. Those who wanted a, so called, hard (perhaps WTO rules) Brexit have brought this on themselves, their arrogance has cost them and perhaps the country dear, and now we could have real problems with the NI power sharing agreement too.

      #omni-shambles

      • libertarian
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

        Jerry

        You seem blissfully unaware that there is only ONE way to leave the EU, that is by triggering Article 50 which we’ve now done.

        We can negotiate around all kinds of things for the future and those negotiations will never end because countries negotiate all the time as things unfold, new opportunities and threats arise etc

        You also seem unaware that there are at least two sides in a negotiation

        The EU has stated its case, no membership of the internal market or the customs union without also agreeing to free movement of people ( or staying in to keep it simple)

        So we leave. Negotiations centre on a few things that could be resolved. How to handle those people resident in each others territories, how to handle trade in future ( only two options a FTA or WTO ) and how to agree on standards going forward

        The deal options, the EU may try to extract money in exchange for a FTA as our “portion” of what is “owed” to the EU

        We then demand our “share” of the assets

        You must realise that the reason that the EU is so bad at negotiating FTA’s with other countries is that they have to get all 27 countries to agree on the terms , standards and regulations etc. However the UK ALREADY does that, so there is really no need to make a big protracted fuss of that. The 27 either want a FTA or not theres no real detail to negotiate

        • Jerry
          Posted June 13, 2017 at 7:55 am | Permalink

          @libertarian; You did not actually read what I said did you were did I question the need for A50, nowhere, Thanks for your opinion on the issue though…

      • Longstone
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:25 pm | Permalink

        It was the Conservatives who chose the wording of the referendum question.

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:59 am | Permalink

        In any negotiation *walk away* has to be available.

        This has now definitely been ruled out.

        Negotiations are now a charade.

        We will have to take what we are given.

        • a-tracy
          Posted June 14, 2017 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

          Yeah, and if the deal is poor you won’t want to see the backlash from smited Brits!

    • Mark B
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 5:35 am | Permalink

      If we rejoin the EU as you would prefer we would lose all our opt outs and have to join the Euro! We would also have to accept even worse terms as the EU would clearly like to set an example to the others regarding leaving.

      You are a very dangerous individual.

      We are leaving. Get over it!

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:09 am | Permalink

        Mrs May explicitly asked the country for a Brexit means Brexit mandate … and did not get it !

        The EU is watching and we are weak.

        This was sabotage and the first move was to deny us a Eurosceptic leader.

        I am not a dangerous individual. I only articulate what many are feeling. Don’t shoot messengers.

        There is a serious risk of Corbyn being PM now.

        • Anonymous
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:51 am | Permalink

          According to The Observer Juncker told May to have a general election.

      • Jerry
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 8:35 am | Permalink

        @Mark B; “We are leaving. Get over it!”

        We shall see… After all many Brexiteers, mostly europhobes, regard membership of the EEA or EFTA as still being members of the EU, and in some respects they are correct, and it’s an worse place to be in many respect.

        Now that the DUP seem likely to have a veto on Brexit policy it means WTO rules are off the agenda (they want to keep, in effect, membership of the Single Market and Freedom of Movement due to Eire/NI affairs), there is no way the EU will allow the UK to have privileges that other member states and more importantly non members do not – at least not without a proper a formal trade agreement and that will take far longer that two years judging on past form.

        We are leaving, but just not how you, or ‘soft Brexiteers’, might want. Get over it.

        Funny old world though, here is the UK wanting to get out of a Super-State (in the making), whilst Puerto Rico are trying to become the 51st State of the USA, make of that what you want!

  5. acorn
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:37 am | Permalink

    Without the voting population and the turnout conditions, such numbers don’t tell you much.

    • James Matthews
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

      Circa 46, 865, 000 registered to vote (up about 640,000 on 2015). Turnout 68.7% (66.4% in 2015).

    • acorn
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

      While I think of it. Has Mrs May given notice yet to the EEA that we wish to leave (Art 126/127 EEA)? Continental number crunchers are now surmising, post UK General Election and the French Presidency; that Brexit will be soft to squidgy. The lawyer lady reckons that it is not settled, that the UK will be auto-ejected from the EEA, on leaving the EU. Mrs May’s advisors (???) have assumed the latter; so far.

      The consensus among my peer group is that the UK should re-join EFTA on leaving the EU. Mrs May has dismissed this idea. EFTA has some 35 trade agreements; but, is not a customs union and it is not a supranational tariff setter. EFTA States are free to negotiate trade agreements with third countries.

      For the UK’s 99% this will not be as good as being in the EU; but, it is what they have voted for, sadly.

      • acorn
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

        JR, I am disappointed, but not surprised, that you did not publish my reply to Dame Rita about how the “magic money tree” works. You have commenters on this site, who mistakenly believe that the UK Treasury, owes trillions of Pounds Sterling, for this that and the other. Yet, you continue to let them believe it. Sadistic or what?

  6. Timmy
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:42 am | Permalink

    Under our system of Government it is the number of seats in the House of Commons that matters….
    Your party has acted midwife to the rebirth of a Socialism that could lead to the destruction of our economy, our democracy, and our way of life. You need to get your act together. We need to see competent leadership and a clear direction quickly.

  7. Nig l
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:44 am | Permalink

    Amazing considering she neither showed what she believed in or any charisma. At least Corbyn had both. This just shows the anti hard left feeling across the country. Imagine if she had given us a Tory manifesto rather than one that could have been penned by Tony Blair (except Brexit!)

  8. Peter
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:49 am | Permalink

    You can try to put a positive spin on it. However, most acknowledge that a presidential-style campaign for May coupled with a disastrous manifesto has destroyed a comfortable lead.

    There was a bigger turnout that’s all.

    • Hope
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:20 pm | Permalink

      With her appalling record as HS why would you go for a presidential campaign? The two atrocities graphically highlighted she was responsible for security failures in govt! The fact Corbyn cozier up with terrorists is no different from getting and McGuinness to have dinner with the Queen! Come on, her failures were clearly seen whenpeople died and were maimed at Manchester and London.

      Rudd is in an awful position as well, why would anyone keep her as HS! She will be a target for the failings next time around. She claimed she would be scared to get on a bus with Boris, in contrast happily lets terrorists wander in and out the country unchecked! She has no defense.

  9. APL
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:57 am | Permalink

    JR: “The Conservatives under Mrs May polled 13.667 m votes this time.”

    Yes, and think what it could have been if she’s run a sane election campaign. Getting more seats was the goal of the whole farce, No?

    • alan jutson
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 9:24 am | Permalink

      APL

      Interesting that in Scotland where University fees and the Social Care plan were exempt from the equation, (no fees, no charges at present) The Conservatives still did well even though the campaign by Mrs May was poor

      Hence those suggesting it was all about Ruth Davidson being brilliant beware !

      Lesson’s need to be learn’t !!!!!!

      • Bob
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:37 pm | Permalink

        you make a very good point Alan.

      • Longstone
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:57 am | Permalink

        Ruth Davidson is about as much of a Great White Hope as Boris is. The Conservatives have no young, up-and-coming leaders of any worth or validity. Neither do Labour. Nor do any of the parties.

        • Anonymous
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:15 am | Permalink

          Another Remainer.

  10. eeyore
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    And 12,874,985 voted Labour. Voting has become popular – another wonder of this most wondrous of elections. Well over 2m voted Lib Dem and secured them 12 seats. Fewer than a million voted SNP but they got 35. Turnout was high at 69%. The youth turnout, 72%, was even higher. People (like me) who were amused to mock the apathy of the young have our answer.

    There were 49,141 Labour votes per Labour MP, 42,509 per Conservative, 197,647 per Lib Dem, but only 27,930 per SNP member.

    Implementing the Boundaries Review must now be dead for a Parliament. Distortions in representation will continue unabated.

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:45 am | Permalink

      DUP will block boundary change as I believe the projections are they would lose seats.

  11. Richard1
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:14 am | Permalink

    Not as many as John Major in his 1992 triumph over Neil Kinnock though. (Figures are not strictly comparable as the electorate has grown, though 42.5% is a good share and up there with historic wins.) under our system you need a good number of votes but you also need to defeat the opposition in key seats. Managing to lose Kensington, and no doubt 20-30 similar seats, is the fault of the dire tone of this Conservative campaign and its utter failure either to defend the actual record of the Conservatives in government nor to take apart Labour’s absurd electoral bribes. What is frustrating is it wouldn’t have taken very much – a few positive gestures eg over EU residents & students, and obviously proper prior discussion of policy before lumbering into elephant traps.

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

      Kensington is not such a great loss. The further you walk from the museums the rest of the constituency starts to look like something from a J G Ballard novel.

    • Stephen Berry
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

      Richard1 hits the nail on the head with his reference Kensington and it was not just the tone of the campaign that was a problem there. A friend of mine lives in that seat and he commented on the almost total lack of Tory literature which he received. Even in supposedly safe seats, voters want to know that their vote is not being taken for granted.

      I live in the nearby constituency of Putney and it was the same story. I am not sure that I received even one piece of election literature from the Tories. Were these constituencies in south-west London being taken for granted by the Tories? Strange when we remember that the borough of Wandsworth voted 75-25 in favour of Remain in 2016.

      • Dame Rita Webb
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

        I live in a rock solid Labour seat and we got plenty of Tory literature. It followed the cult of personality template and went straight in the recycling bin.

  12. A.Sedgwick
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:24 am | Permalink

    The large majority of Conservative votes were cast in England and this highlights the increasingly obvious problems with the UK. It was England that voted for Brexit, again obvious because England gets the fallout most. Although the SNP have taken a pasting the Scottish Conservative Party is looking like SNP lite. N.Ireland voted clearly to stay in the EU.

  13. Andrew
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:49 am | Permalink

    Lets be honest, John. This election was a disaster for us and we will be wiped out at the next election whether it’s held sooner or later. The DUP alliance is an absolute vote killer and when the Brexit slowdown becomes fully entrenched, we Tories will get all the blame.

    What is the point of your post? To persuade us that the election campaign was a masterstroke? Just when you thought people had forgotten we were the “nasty party” we decided to set dogs on foxes, take kids school meals away and steal the houses from people who had dementia. What sort of world are we living in? Perhaps we should have included badger baiting and witch dunking in our manifesto too? Where were the sunny uplands, the pitch to middle england or even just some old fashioned persuasion?

    Your kind of “la la la” thinking is what got us in this dire situation in the first place. The thought that Theresa is capable of negotiating a settlement with the EU is laughable.

    • Stephen Berry
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 2:47 pm | Permalink

      I do not understand this crazy anti-DUP bias, Andrew.

      It was evidently OK for the DUP to work with Sinn Fein to ensure stability in Northern Ireland, but it is not OK for the DUP to work with the Conservative Party to ensure stability in the whole of the UK.

      The point of John’s post is to show that the Conservatives got a lot of votes. We should not forget that they also got more seats than any other party, though you would not grasp this rather important point from looking at the media.

      • Mark B
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 5:50 am | Permalink

        All true but so are the comments from people here and elsewhere. The PM went to the poles to increase her mandate not to get more votes. She came away with far fewer seats. Not something I am sure she had in mind. Or did she?

      • Anonymous
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:20 am | Permalink

        She asked the country to strengthen her Brexit means Brexit mandate and proved it to be weak.

    • Chris
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

      We included 3 spoons of arsenic, while others were offering apple pie and cream, or some such, according apparently to one senior tory.

  14. JoolsB
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:00 am | Permalink

    But the Labour vote was up even more thanks to them mobilising the youth vote.

    Your Government has singled out England’s young alone for £9,000 tuition fees just as your Government proposes to single out England’s elderly with their dementia tax. May’s Government like Cameron’s before it have taken the English vote and the English for granted. I hope they have learned a lesson from this but I very much doubt it. If not, Corbyn could very well end up being PM, God help us, come the next election whenever that may be.

    Of course you could stop this discrimination now. England’s young deserve a level playing field with the rest of the UK who pay nothing or next to nothing and you could offer this by cutting the aid budget and getting some of the money back from the banks for a start. You could also scrap the skewed Barnett Formula. That’s before we take into account the extra billions we will be better off by when we leave the EU.

    The Tories are feeling smug at gaining seats in Scotland and no doubt their MPs will be rewarded with even more goodies for their constituents. Meanwhile your Government continue to ignore England and treat it’s young and elderly with contempt. If the Tories continue to treat England as nothing more than a milch cow for the benefit of the rest of this so called union, then they shouldn’t be surprised when England rejects them at the ballot box.

  15. wab
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:01 am | Permalink

    All very true, but as with most of what Mr Redwood writes when it comes to numbers, irrelevant. What matters is MPs, not votes. Hillary Clinton got more votes than Trump, but she is not president.

    • Mark B
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 5:53 am | Permalink

      Spot on !

  16. Mark Hodgson
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:07 am | Permalink

    Three responses to this piece of spin:

    1. Our population has increased hugely in recent years, so one would expect the party with most seats to have gained more votes than winning parties in the past.

    2. There was a relatively high turnout this time, so of course the numbers voting were higher.

    3. First past the post causes distortions and is not terribly democratic. But the Tories (and Labour) won’t do anything about FPTP because both have benefited from it in the past and hope to continue benefiting from it in the future.

    • Chris
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

      It kept out pesky UKIP, but that did not prevent UKIP from being instrumental in us having a referendum and winning that campaign.

  17. Tim L
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:22 am | Permalink

    I note that Scotland rejected the SNP because of inyref2. This happened in an election that was expected to bring about Brexit. We were told it would split the UK.

  18. Sarah
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    I also understand that the Tories won 55% of seats in England.

    there is no upside to governing from here. The Tories will not be able to do it properly and are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

    Better to hand over to Corby to form a coalition of chaos and attempt to govern. Meanwhile regroup, find a decent leader and write a decent manifesto ahead of the next election. Those who voted Corbyn should find out what it means.

    Mostly however I cannot see a Tory strategy from here other than damage limitation which will not get them into government for another generation.

  19. Andy Marlot
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    Didn’t win much of a majority did it?

  20. Lifelogic
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:32 am | Permalink

    Well yes, but that is almost entirely due to UKIP voters coming back to the Tories (now that the party finally has returned to sanity over the EU (this against May’s initial judgement).

    The point is that May only got 2% more of the vote than Labour. A labour party under the appalling J Corbyn (whom even most Labour MPs think is totally useless) and who wants to follow Venezuela’s economic agenda.

    Thatcher got 43.9% against Foot’s 36.9% so 7% and Foot and Labour at the time was far, far more electable and sensible than Corbyn! Foot was at least quite bright.

    A punishment manifesto was a completely idiotic idea, as was Hammond’s punishment budget and the attempted NI mugging just before the election.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 12:44 pm | Permalink

      You say:- William Hague took the prize for the worst Conservative performance of the last half century with only 8.357m.votes. Michael Howard lifted it modestly in 2005 to 8.784 m.

      True, but this was really still the legacy of the appalling, socialist, EUphile John Major. He trashed the party’s brand with his ERM fiasco, destroying any credibility for economic competence they once had. Major buried the party for 3+ terms. Cameron tried to do the same and T May seems fairly close to actually doing it again.
      Oh for a conservative to lead the party for a change.

      John Major was Lady Thatchers biggest mistake a man like the Libdims wrong on every issue. Yet the BBC keeps wheeling this dreadful man out, as some sort of font on worldly wisdom.

  21. James Winfield
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:32 am | Permalink

    Erm, the population has increased.

  22. Jumeirah
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:38 am | Permalink

    Doesn’t matter that she won more votes than any previous Conservative PM! What matters is that she allowed herself to be’ managed’ in her decision making by a 30’s something and 44’s something pair of advisors with no practical political experience and did not see through THEIR mistakes but more importantly allowed herself to by-pass those in her Cabinet (it appears)to have shut them out of any sighting or discussion on that crucial document (the Manifesto) prior to publishing it and THAT is a DISGRACE. Her colleagues after all were her TEAM. Why and how she remains is beyond belief! Lame Maime has in this one unbelievably critical error in stupidity damaged our political reputation around the world. What of overseas investors after this – take some time to win back confidence in the market. Salvage this situation now: REMOVE HER.

    • Caterpillar
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

      What I didn’t understand when the election was called and throughout were the slogans. Even a thirty something should have seen this, TM set the bar high for herself – strong and stable, but low for JC – coalition of chaos. Irrespective of any policies this meant the slightest error would bring her down, and the slightest competence would raise him. Expectations vs perceptions … for a month of campaigning, not smart.

    • Chris
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

      Although you put it rather brutally, I believe you are right.

  23. hefner
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    And even better than the 1931 elections? Have you related your figures to the actual UK voting population at the time? I guess not. So my little friend, I’ll give you only a C for such a lapse.

  24. graham1946
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:48 am | Permalink

    And still no majority. That’s the problem with FPTP – about time this antiquated system was overhauled. In safe seats votes other than for the sitting MP are worthless, whereas in marginals they are over-represented.

    Last time UKIP got nearly a quarter of what Mrs. May got and only one seat.

    As regards the earlier polls from 1997 etc. the population has increased by about 4 million I would say.

    Never mind, keep whistling, but its still dark.

    • forthurst
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

      JR defends the FPTP system by claiming that it is better at giving a definitve result and that it gives each constituent his own specific representative in parliament in a smaller constituency area than if there were several in a multimember area. However, the arguments against this system are overwhelming:

      – it does not invariably yield a definitive result so that the main positive argument is weakened leaving parties scrabbling with a situation with which they lack familiarity.
      – in many constituencies, a majority of constituents are represented by someone for whom they didn’t vote; he may not even know the local area because be was parachuted in and may not permanently reside there.
      – many constituencies are bleeding chunks which are arbitrarly drawn to contain a specific population size.
      – many constituencies lack a crucial economic zone which gives the whole area an important raison d’etre.
      – because of population movement, many constituencies are disproportionately large or small calling for another Boundary commission redrawing of the country whereas with multi-member constituencies, the number of representatives could be increased or reduced without redrawing arbitrary lines on maps.
      – it creates gross disparities between the number of votes needed to elect a representative for a political party.
      – it stifles new parties and political thinking leaving us with main parties which do not represent the aspirations of a large proportion of the population but rather the aspirations of unrepresentative claques that hold them captive.

      Look, Tommy is the only soldier in step on the whole parade ground!

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 12:48 pm | Permalink

      FPTP should be retained. We certainly need strong government and not a coalition of chaos. But certainly not one under a daft, out of touch, climate alarmist, PC, economically illiterate, socialist like May.

      • graham1946
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

        So how exactly does FPTP meet that criteria? Look what happened last Thursday to see your argument is totally wrong. We now have a record turnout and the most wobbly cobbled together coalition of chaos you could think of run by 10 fairly extreme MP’s.
        As far as ability is concerned, maybe candidates should be assessed by LL before being allowed to put their names up?

  25. Dave Andrews
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:49 am | Permalink

    Just imagine what vote share a Conservative leader with charisma and inspiration could have commanded in the election just gone.
    it’s not the performance of Theresa May I’m worried about, but the worrying numbers of people in this country who have been beguiled by the deceit of an end to austerity (what austerity?!).

    • Roy Grainger
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:51 am | Permalink

      There’s been austerity in parts of the public sector with years of 1% pay rises, they will all vote Labour obviously. People largely vote in their own self-interest, students will vote for free tuition fees and pensioners will vote against abandoning the triple lock. That’s as it should be. That’s why the May manifesto was such a disaster – I know several long-time Tory voters who voted Labour this time – where I live the incumbent Labour MP massively increased his majority.

      • mike fowle
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

        “That’s as it should be”. Really? That’s the trade union argument – we want our wage increases even if it bankrupts the company (in the private sector) or creates inflation (in the public sector) that renders the increase worthless. Are people so short sighted?

  26. Jason wells
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    A lot more people are voting now so its not quite correct to make comparisons in this way- there are a lot more younger ones registered now than ever before- the brexit shook them all up so whatevr way we think about it now i’m afraid putting our future vis a vis in the hands of a government beholden to the DUP is probably the worst solution. Neither will changing leadership to Boris help either as he’s on a solo run and as i suspect he cares little about the rest of us. What’s going to happen with the brexit talks is now the big question- and there can be no kicking the can down the road on this one- so we better sort ourselves sharply- because spin and bluster is not going to work especially with the EU europeans.

    • Chris
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

      There is an additional simple explanation for the increased voter numbers: the population has gone up very considerably through immigration and this will in turn contribute to a boost in the number of voters. This cannot be continually swept under the carpet.

  27. John S
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    That is putting a gloss on it. She made the “unelectable” electable

  28. formula57
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:59 am | Permalink

    The voting numbers ought to be read in the context of the character of the main Opposition and on that basis 14 million votes standing against Mr. Corbyn’s Labour Party would look poor.

    Not that numbers matter more than confidence and perception and those strongly suggest the chief whip should leave Mrs. May with the traditional bottle of whisky and a revolver. She cannot credibly lead your party into another election and who knows how soon one may be forced? It is time for the people’s Blue Boris whose task above all else is securing Brexit but whose immediate task is to rid us of the maladroit Hammond and Rudd.

    • Chris
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

      You are absolutely right about Hammond and Rudd. However, it seems that Theresa May is strengthening up the Remain brigade, having appointed Damien Green deputy PM if reports are to be believed. I fear the signs are all there and the Brexiteers are going to have to act to salvage the disastrous situation. I understand that if there were an election today, Labour would easily win, if the latest poll has any truth in it.

  29. Jack snell
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 9:04 am | Permalink

    Here we go again..corbyn talking nonsense (on marr BBC) about what he’s willing to accept from europe and what he’s not..dream on jeremy..because they have also been listening to your double speak and along with theresa they have your cards well marked.

  30. formula57
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    (Loath though I am to make multiple comments I recognize I must take my chances whilst your blog is open for business in the intervals between terror incidents.)

    Another thing the government must do is spread the positive messages about Brexit and explain the impossibility and inconsequence of single market membership etc., i.e. all the things you tell your readers here. The Remoaners message has been left to cut through to public awareness without being challenged as the underhand rear-guard action for in effect staying in the Evil Empire that it is. Mrs. May and many of her colleagues are not up to that job, alas.

  31. Bert Young
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 9:27 am | Permalink

    UKIP’s role really finished when the public voted to leave . They had nothing in their bag to offer the public to attract support so it was understandable that their supporters mainly switched to the Conservatives . The turn out was bigger , the population has increased and more younger voters responded .

    There is a different mood afoot now with the public and the political establishment has been rocked . Future representation has to absorb these changes and re-design their make up in order to be successful .

    • bri
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:48 pm | Permalink

      UKIP’s policies represented, generally, fairly sensibly old-fashioned conservative values. I think you will see them gradually adopted by Conservatives, this may be main future role for UKIP, a conservative think tank.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:28 am | Permalink

      Farage should have stayed.

  32. Sakara Gold
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    Whichever way that you try and spin it, this election result is a disaster for the Tory party and for Theresa May personally. Why on earth she thought the country would vote for a flip-flopping PM, promoting policies such as the dementia tax, killing off the pensioners this winter and scrapping the triple lock defeats me.

    It shows a lack of political acumen and instincts, coupled with complacency and a patronising approach to ordinary folk. She also exhibited cowardice in refusing to debate the issues with other party leaders…..we need a strong wartime leader who will take the fight to the terrorists

    One thing is obvious, the nation voted decisively for the Union to the extent that the Ulster Unionists will now enter government. The lady should do the honourable thing and resign, even if that means that the dreadful Boris Johnson will lead us into the Brexit negotiations – Buller Buller, what?

  33. cosmic
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    This comes close to putting lipstick on a pig.

    It was a abysmal result, produced by an atrocious, misconceived campaign. It changed the slender Conservative majority into a precarious situation, which came within a hair’s breadth of disaster. It’s particularly bad when you consider the lead in the polls with which the Tories started and the comic turn quality of the opposition.

    Lessons to be learned and so on, but nothing good to say about the result.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

      Indeed. A disaster that was totally avoidable.

  34. Antisthenes
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    The size of the vote for the Conservatives only underscores the poor performance of the party machine being lead by Theresa May in that it did not translate into seats won. A better lead party with competent aids at the helm would have turned that impressive voting number into a credible and comfortable majority of seats. She and they did not because they were not up to the job.

  35. NotaMayFan
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    Mrs May has never considered the concept that “People vote with their Wallets”.

    Jeremy obviously does, and was in a position to make unrealistic and impossible promises, knowing he would never, ever, have to deliver on his ‘scam economics’. Jeremy shored up the young vote, by appealing directly to their financial needs.

    Meanwhile, back on Planet Zog (where the Conservative policymakers live), there is now a complete lack of ‘nous’ about people, money, and aspirations. The Manifesto conversations, unbelievably, goes in the opposite direction! Because Conservative older voters seemed to want Brexit so badly, May took this ‘distraction’ to strip some of their ‘wealth’…disrespecting her own, core, older voters…and offering them no financial benefits to encourage them to vote Conservative .
    It was always going to end in tears for May.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:12 pm | Permalink

      Exactly – the youth especially fell for Corbyn’s ‘scam economics’. May’s grim reaper and tax grabber act was not such a good a plan.

  36. Kenneth
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    Mr Corbyn was right to identify that people will vote for a proposition that makes them richer/less poor.

    He was offering to do the eu trick of taking our money and then giving some of it back.

    The Conservatives should have made a better offer: not taking the money in the first place.

    They did not.

    The Conservatives seem to be happy with current socialist levels of taxation and I don’t have a clue why except the thought that they are not Conservatives at all.

    • Ken Moore
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:41 pm | Permalink

      That was lesson one that should have been learned – don’t try to out socialist the socialists. The second is that uncontrolled immigration is unpopular with voters….oh wait Gavin Barwell and Damien Green the two biggest pro immigration members of the party have just been promoted…

      I note that operation blame the brexiteers is in full swing. I hope that Dr Redwood et al. are not going to take the blame for May’s nest of vipers that adviser her so badly.

  37. Advisor to the Gods.
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:38 am | Permalink

    The numbers indicate an excess of population only.

  38. E.S Tablishment
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    Mr Corbyn is emboldened. So much pressure now on anti-Corbyn MPs in the Labour Party with trout’s chance of surviving in a home for wayward pussy-cats.

    • Mark B
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:31 am | Permalink

      Yep !

      I think a lot of them, like Lord Mandelson, will be keeping a very low profile for the time being.

  39. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    I think that using the total votes cast for your party (not for your leader btw) is misleading as there are many more voters than before.

    The real issue is that your party’s polling stayed at around the same level throughout the campaign while Labour’s rose 20%. This may be down to tactical voting, it may be down to the youth buying in to Corbyn’s fantasy economics (I nearly voted for Labour so that my children do not have to pay university fees) or it may be because it was a safe protest vote akin to UKIP in previous elections.

    The most important point to keep making is that Labour lost and their attempts to claim a mandate for a minority government is tantamount to trying to stage a bloodless coup.

  40. John Finn
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 11:14 am | Permalink

    John

    You are absolutely correct. Despite the dire campaign, May still won a huge number of votes and a share of the vote that was comparable to the share won by Blair and Thatcher in the 1997 and 1983 landslide victories.

    Let’s face it, if the Conservatives were guaranteed a 42.4% share of the vote (5.5% up on 2015) they’d have called an election 6 months ago. The problem was that Labour picked up 40% of the vote – something that would have been inconceivable just a couple of months ago.

    Now is the time for calm not knee-jerk reactions. Large parts of the electorate have been seduced by Corbyn’s promises of free tuition fees, £10 minimum wage and more holidays. While I’m not fond of negative politics, the Tories need to put some effort into dismantling the spending plans in Labour’s manifesto over the coming months.

    Start with the Labour claim that increasing Corporation Tax rate (from 19% to 26%) will increase CT receipts by £19 billion. If true, then logic tells us there should have a similar relative FALL in CT receipts between 2010 and 2017 when the CT rate fell from 28% to 20%.

  41. British Spy
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 11:15 am | Permalink

    I managed to find one or two elected politicians on the Marr Show and Sunday Politics for I have a keen eye.
    They did not lend credibilty to the Tory Party. The honest thing to do is resign for Mrs May. Get a successor in place.
    Mrs May would not be negotiating in any case with the EU. She is not qualified in regard to trade deals nor does she possess legal training. Let’s drop the fascade. There is a gaping hole, a vacuum, in political leadership in the Tory Party and for the country. Pompous talk by the few MPs with the courage to appear on TV of maintaining g stabilty reeks of the pre-election Strong and Stable mantra. The Country is grossly unstable and weak with Mrs May ruthlessly suckering herself to a position she has in spirit already vacated and does not now deserve. The parrot is dead. She should resign by Monday morning if not by the 10 o’clock news tonight so our people can sleep in peace. It is a hard day at work tomorrow! We have had quite enough of her…and that is just as far as Tory voters are concerned.

    • bri
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:53 pm | Permalink

      On reflection, have been struggling to see how May is qualified in any way to be PM. Poor judgment, inadequate communication skills, no empathy, little guile or political acumen and no leadership skills.

  42. Ken Moore
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 11:18 am | Permalink

    Sorry JR for the negative feedback but your not fooling anyone using the yardstick of total votes. Corbyn only grew in stature and credibility because the Conservatives allowed him to and offered little resistance. Why?. Because your own party has moved so far to the left they have little disagreement with Labour so essentially have nothing to say.

    Everyone knows that the population has gone up rapidly since 1997!.
    This just makes you appear deluded and in denial over the gravity of your party’s failure at this pivotal moment in history. Have you any idea how angry people are ?

    Here we are with the socialists braying on the door, immigration out of control and radical Islam on the march and the Conservative party have let us down once again.

    There are people in your party that must really really despise this country…no Theresa May I don’t believe out best days are ahead of us’. You and your kind have set about our destruction.

    There was nothing to stop you and like minded colleagues going to Mrs May and demanding she changed course before it was too late. Will you never learn true loyalty is protecting those around you from themselves.

    • Chris
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

      I feel those Brexiteers within the Conservative Party spend a lot of time looking on and wavering, not wanting to upset the apple cart any more. It gives them an excuse for inaction. However, if the Cons Party wants to save itself, but more importantly, the country then the Brexiteers have to act, and very swiftly indeed. I think as each hour goes by, the possibilities for them drain away.

    • Ready
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

      Ken Moore
      Don’t be too hash on JR. True, the Tory Party has laid the red carpet down for immigrants. Of course Labour has taken advantage of immigrant fears. Its only concern in terms of legitimising migrant labour is that foreigners will be OK here. They do not give a jot about British people living abroad. Labour is foreign.
      Mrs May and her nearest and dearest colleagues are brainwashed by an ideology of “diversity” which is best placed in the Young Communist League but NOT in the Communist Party proper ( they are grown -ups and like the kids to have daft spirit-full naive ideas ). Unfortunately Mrs May will not grow up to attain her full Communist Party membership. She is stuck up, at the Head of the Tory Party and won’t do the decent thing and resign to an adult.

    • John Finn
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:30 pm | Permalink

      Everyone knows that the population has gone up rapidly since 1997!.

      But at 42.4% May did well on vote share.

  43. Doh!
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 11:42 am | Permalink

    Mrs May has done alot for the Labour Party
    Tories are marching through the streets boldly holding aloft pictures of her and chanting “Four more Days! “Four More Days! Four More Days!

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

      what as long as that?

  44. lojolondon
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 11:56 am | Permalink

    Thanks for the interesting numbers, John. It is a huge pity that we do not see these facts on the state broadcaster, especially given their obsession with the ‘popular vote’ during the American elections!
    One of the DUP’s key policies in their manifesto is to defund the BBC, I hope they will prove as influential with Mrs May as the LibDems were in forcing their policies on (a willing?) Mr Cameron…..

    • anon
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:40 pm | Permalink

      Exiting the EU & defunding the BBC now that would be a start.

  45. fedupsoutherner
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    John, it doesn’t matter about the figures. May lost it big time. She has gone from a good majority to nothing and now needs to bow and scrape to another party to get anywhere. For goodness sake, even the public could see that her manifesto was political suicide. Just where were all her political friends? Nowhere to be seen when they allowed this manifesto to ruin her chances and that of the UK in negotiations with the EU. We are now seen as a ridiculous country in the EU and a walkover. I am very angry to think that I and others from UKIP put our trust in the Conservatives and have been well and truly let down. Unless she and the party get their act together, shut Soubrey up and get on with putting a truly strong case for us with Brexit the Tory party are toast. Thanks for nothing. Is it any wonder we are all despairing of the politics in the UK today?

    • Oggy
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

      I agree with everything you said, especially the bit about shutting Soubry up.
      I and all my family voted UKIP in 2015 and last Thursday we all put our trust in the Tories. Now we are all very angry.
      (Whatever happened to Brexit means Brexit)

      • Chris
        Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

        You echo precisely what we feel. We too lent our votes to Theresa May, and had to trust her. It seems we are about to be completely betrayed. Yes, we too are extremely angry.

    • John Finn
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:35 pm | Permalink

      John, it doesn’t matter about the figures.

      Of course the figures matter. At 42.4% May’s vote held up reasonably well compared to poll figures. The poor campaign might have some affect but not as much as is being claimed. It was Corbyn’s popularity which attracted the young, the usual non-voters and the tactical voters. That needs to be addressed.

  46. oldtimer
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 12:20 pm | Permalink

    OT but speaking of votes it appears that Mrs Merkel is having difficulty getting support from other G20 members for her stance on the Paris climate accord at the next G20 summit which she will host soon. See the Spiegel article here:
    http://m.spiegel.de/international/germany/a-1151439.html

    Such is the way in politics. Vital interests will trump nice to have interests.

  47. John E
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

    And your point is??

  48. adam
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 1:01 pm | Permalink

    Im not convinced most people saw this as about Brexit. Possibly young people.

    I still think most people see the referendum as settling Brexit.

    • Longstone
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 10:45 am | Permalink

      Quite!:
      1. The referendum was about Brexit. In the GE, both Conservatives and Labour avoided campaigning on this topic, for their own reasons.
      2. The GE does not supersede the referendum, which was a ‘once-in-a-generation’ vote (that phrase is sounding more credible after the Tory gains in Scotland.)
      3. The referendum was truly democratic – one person, one vote – unlike the FPTP system we use for GEs. If the GE last week proved anything, it is that FPTP seriously, and undemocratically, skews voting patterns and is now not fit for purpose.
      4. The Lib-Dems were the only party that claimed the GE was about Brexit and the only party promising a second referendum – and hardly anyone voted for them.
      5. Over 80% of people voted for parties with manifestos committed to ending Freedom of Movement and/or leaving the Single Market (=same thing = leaving the EU, according to the EU themselves).
      6. …………………………

  49. fedupsoutherner
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

    Ha, ha, ha. Gavin Barwell!!??

    Is someone having a laugh? Same old, same old. This is frightening. It is the prelude to the statement “We are having another EU referendum”. The British public will be treated the same as other countries when their vote did not go the way of the EU or the establishment at home. Clearly some MP’s are never going to be happy until we vote the “right” way. This has been one very clever move on behalf of most of the politicians in the country. They have managed to twist the whole thing around to make it look as though the public don’t want Brexit and so nobody will have to implement it.

    We have been screwed over once again. Still nothing changes.

  50. Iain Gill
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

    Missing the growth in population from out of control immigration in these figures.

    • hefner
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 9:46 pm | Permalink

      But not if this immigration not being British cannot register for voting.

      • Narrow Shoulders
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 7:11 am | Permalink

        Have you not seen the turnout at each council’s weekly nationalisation ceremonies?

  51. Derek Henry
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 1:24 pm | Permalink

    The budget deficit = the non goverment sector sterling savings to the penny.

    This is not ideological or political but accounting fact. Unless you start telling the truth then fiscal Conservatism is finished.

  52. Terry
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

    Truly astounding numbers which beggar the question, “Why wasn’t there a majority?
    The post election map depicted the lay of the land by Party colour shows an enormous blue area with blood clots laid on it.
    These are the cities where there are far too many MPs and far too many of them serving the concentration of benefits communities who will always vote for the party that promises the most for them.
    Too late now but they should have been a law introduced that excluded certain people drawing State benefits from voting to remove the temptation for any Party to try to buy their votes with tax payers money.

  53. MickN
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 2:12 pm | Permalink

    I did wonder what had happened to the goto MPs of choice for the BBC when they needed a “Conservative” opinion. It seems during the campaign that Mrs Soubry was so conspicuous by her absence that I wondered if she might not be smitten with the same bug that poor Ms Abbot succumbed to.
    I have watched her regain what she sees as her rightful place since the results were in. I find it hard to believe that she is not campaigning for a cabinet post in a future Corbyn government if it all goes pear shaped.

  54. Terry
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    What else can and must Mrs May do to repair her damaged credibility and bad judgement?
    Why did she appoint another deluded and offensive (His statement of Brexit the politics and hate and division) Remainer,as her new Chief of Staff?

    Does she no longer trust our faithful Brexiteers? Is she really pursuing an Brexit agenda? Even Dave Davis looks wobbly and less confident there.

    I feel her latest alarming decision, the CoS appointment, merely puts another nail in her political coffin as she should have learned from her past errors of judgement and her lack of real connection with both her Cabinet AND with her back benchers. Mrs T knew what she was doing and won.
    Mrs May, unfortunately, is not following that lead and the result is too obvious.

  55. Chris
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    Seems that Theresa May is strengthening the had of the Remainers round her with apparent appointment of Damien Green as deputy PM. See Coffeehouse blog. Not a good sign I fear, and almost provocative to the Leavers, I feel. I feel more and more inclined to support a leadership challenge from Boris Johnson, as I think things are not developing well and the Cons are losing more and more momentum. I see that John McDonnell has also stolen a march on the Cons by publicly declaring again that they would interpret Brexit as leaving the single market as he feels that is what the people knew they were voting for, but Labour would do X, Y and Z to protect jobs and so on. A far more positive message than Theresa May seemed to permit in the election campaign. All she offered were rather meaningless soundbites, the repeating ad nauseam about “stability”.

  56. James neill
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think it matters much now about going over the old count- with ukip leaving the stage and the younger people becoming energised the goal posts have dramatically changed. Corbyn has a certain momentum now and if another election were held in say the next few months or so he would probably sail through – so until then better get on with making the best deal we can with the EU.

    We also hear that Boris is waiting in the wings – and that could just be rumour, but if it were true, could also be a problem for us at this time- for one important thing he is not taken very seriously by some major political players in Europe.. in my opinion if we have to make a change then Amber Rudd might be a better choice- with saying that i acknowledge that mrs may is a lame duck now and will have to go probably before christmas. Am afraid i don’t see it any other way

    • bri
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:56 pm | Permalink

      Johnson PM frontman with Gove running things would suit me.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 8:59 am | Permalink

      The reports of UKIP’s death have been greatly exaggerated.

  57. margaret
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

    As a single women, living on her own and working with non English speaking patients daily it is important I connect with others would understand English , not just ‘yes’ ‘no’ and’ No speak English’ therefore social media has become helpful. I joined ‘Twitter’ , but there are no serious exchange of views and even though there is more space on ‘Facebook’ and opportunity for conversation it doesn’t happen. I used to read Jon Snows blog . He is an excellent writer however he attracted those with fiery unbalanced views and was overloaded with responses and it stopped on a regular basis. I am telling of this as I appreciate this blog site John and know that readers can interpret figures see them as the truth and factual ,but put them into context .

    • Dame Rita Webb
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

      Margaret I was speaking to a nurse’s mother the other day. Her daughter is bi-lingual but she said she is not allowed to talk to the patients in their native tongue. Is this true and does everything have to be done through one of the £50 per hour interpreters?

  58. Paul wills
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

    Where is iain duncan smith and michael gove? They are usually straight out to the media on every occasion.. so am a little worried as i havn’t heard a peep
    from them for a while.. was just hoping to get some explanation or enlightenment.
    I also remember michael gove said that everything would work out well provided we made the right decisions- i suppose we mustn’t have made the right decisions this time- anyway i hope michael and iain will be there to guide us when it comes to the EU talks so that we make the right decisions.

  59. hefner
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    Wolfgang Munchau in the FT thinks that wrt the actual Brexit negotiations for the EU27 the UK elections will be “Much ado about nothing”. Interesting comment.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 8:55 am | Permalink

      There is a lot of sense in that article:

      https://www.ft.com/content/524127e6-4d2d-11e7-919a-1e14ce4af89b

      “Do not exaggerate the effect the election will have on Brexit”

      Previously May had a small Commons majority from MPs elected in GB plus some spare net support available from the MPs elected in NI, now she has to rely on that net support available from the MPs elected in NI to even get a majority, but provided she can do that for crucial issues where she is actively opposed by Labour then she can carry on in the Commons pretty much as before.

  60. Chris
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    I am sorry, Mr Redwood, but I feel we have been utterly betrayed by Theresa May. I am more than seething, and this apparent move by May would plunge the reputation of politicians and politics, particularly the Conservative Party, into the abyss. How can she go against the referendum result and now go for a soft Brexit?

  61. Denis Cooper
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:05 pm | Permalink

    I am absolutely staggered to read here:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/10/election-nicky-morgan-theresa-hard-brexit

    that May called the election on the advice of Juncker.

    “The Observer has learned that May took the fateful decision to call the election having been urged to do so by commission president Jean-Claude Juncker.

    It is understood that Juncker had advised May to call an early general election as a result of his concerns that the 17-seat majority she had inherited from David Cameron would not be enough during the pinch points of the negotiations, including over the issue of the UK’s divorce bill, estimated to be as much as €100bn.

    “During bilaterals, in the margins of summits, Juncker repeatedly told her he thought she should do it,” one EU source said. A second European diplomat added: “People don’t understand. We want a deal more than anyone. We are professionals, we have a mandate to get a deal and we want to be successful in that.”

    That would be so utterly stupid so that it is close to being unbelievable, but then it would not have been the first time that May swallowed bad advice from an EU supporter.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

      @Denis Cooper, Don’t be so gullible! The Guardian called for Corbyn, very late but called non the less, with another election perhaps weeks or months away it is hardly surprising that they are still trying to politically destroy Mrs May, and the problems that would cause, knowing how the europhobes enter a blind rage when ever Mr Juncker’s name is mentioned.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 8:06 am | Permalink

        Where do you see the gullibility? In taking a report in the Observer as being an accurate account of events? Either it is true that Juncker gave that advice to May or it is not true, it is an invention, and either it is true that any such advice had a major influence over May’s decision to call an early general election or it is not true, it is an invention; either way that is nothing at all to do with the Guardian calling for Corbyn at any point. So what do you think? Do you believe the report in the Observer, or do you disbelieve it?

        • Jerry
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 10:28 am | Permalink

          @Denis cooper; “Where do you see the gullibility? In taking a report in the Observer as being an accurate account of events?”

          Exactly! As I said, take everything with that pinch of salt at this stage, even more so if it ‘damages’ Mrs May or indeed Mr Corbyn, if we talking about the right wing press. I suspect if there was any truth in the story what might have been suggested, true to past EU form, was a second referendum – which Mrs May had rejected anyway by her “Brexit means Brexit” speech upon taking office. Of course if one wants to extrapolate one could claim a link but it would be a very weak one.

          Denis, you cite many URLs, that if printed would decimate a forest or two, but you never read between the lines, stop taking everything on face value alone.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 9:24 am | Permalink

            “Exactly” what? Mere pointless verbiage, Jerry, as per usual.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

            @Denis Cooper; The truth obviously hurts!

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted June 13, 2017 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

            What truth? Just more of your timewasting nonsense.

          • Jerry
            Posted June 14, 2017 at 8:06 pm | Permalink

            @Denis Cooper; “What truth?”

            I was hoping I would not need to spell it out but as you insist, the truth that you are gullible! The media publish or broadcast, what they want people to believe, not only what is true.

            “Just more of your timewasting nonsense.”

            That’s rich coming from you Denis, considering you not only post reams of text but then also post URLs that our host has to check.

            Have a nice day….

    • Tabulazero
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 8:35 pm | Permalink

      Oh please, do not blame it on Juncker. It’s not his fault if your protegé managed to blow a lead which was bigger than Labour’s total share of the vote.

      Showing up to debate Labour on national television is a good start.

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted June 12, 2017 at 8:15 am | Permalink

        Oh please, read what I wrote before jumping in to claim that I am blaming it on Juncker. If Juncker did actually give that advice to May and she was stupid enough to take it then it’s clear where the blame lies. It is a cast iron rule that you do not take advice from your opponents, no matter how it may be dressed up as friendly or well-intentioned advice. Of course it is quite possible that May’s long trusted advisers recommended it but in fact acting as part of the pro-EU fifth column which runs through UK society.

        Reply Why on earth would Mrs May accept Juncker’s advice? There were plenty of domestic voices urging an election, though not mine.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted June 12, 2017 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

          Why should she accept Juncker’s advice? A very good question, and I’m sure that different people will have their own different answers. I just note that she seems rather prone to accepting bad advice from various quarters, while ignoring better advice from others.

    • Oggy
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:20 pm | Permalink

      So the EU even dictates when we have elections – I wonder if she has since sent him a note – ‘et Tu Brute’.

    • Chris
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

      Yes, this is staggering Denis. It lends credence to a commenter who wrote “Who is May taking orders from?” when discussing these latest appointments to her cabinet. Certainly food for thought.

    • Anonymous
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 6:43 am | Permalink

      The smoking gun.

      I knew it !

  62. libertarian
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    Due to the ridiculously archaic, broken and not fit for purpose anti democratic voting system we have in this country The Tory Party would have had a working majority if just 75 people voted differently

    Kensington margin 11 votes
    Perth margin 11 votes
    Dudley North 12 votes
    Newcastle U Lyme 16 votes
    Crewe 25 votes

    If those voters had switched their votes from the party they voted for to the Tories, then you would have had a majority

    That is why the total number of votes for anything is POINTLESS

    That is why we do not have a good democratic system

    That is why we continue with this insane nonsense

    That is why nothing changes

    • hefner
      Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:15 pm | Permalink

      Seconded.

    • Jerry
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 7:10 am | Permalink

      @libertarian;The Greens, the LDs and many other centre or leftist parties would welcome PR, that is why people like you Walter only ever complain when you loose. If those voters has switched their votes you would not be suggesting that had they switched their vote another way we could have a progressive alliance coalition or what ever, would you?…

  63. JackG
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

    So theresa may has surprisingly recruited michael gove and put him up in the front line so that he can have a good view i suppose for when the talks begin-well we should now expect that he’ll have some good ideas and input as well to push things along. On the other hand boris has reappeared with his old bull and spin..well as regards boris – i’m not buying

  64. Kev
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 7:49 pm | Permalink

    I know Mr Redwood, it is hard to stay positive when your party had such a disastrous result. Another election and the tories will be out of the political landscape for a very long time.
    PS
    UK is not a republic like France where total number of votes count, I wish it was!

  65. Turboterrier.
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 9:34 pm | Permalink

    New forward thinking fresh ideas cabinet?

    Not on your life. The woman is incapable of thinking outside the box. We need the next generation of tories to be invited to step upto the mark and make things happen.

    She is just building a defence wall of remainers around her to watch her back with a few leavers as a token response. Three fifths of naff all will change. She is all but handed the keys to No 10 to Corbyn.

    Will all these dedicated remainers give their all for leaving the EU?

    Dream On

  66. David L
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:16 pm | Permalink

    May said the most important issue is Brexit. But for me the most important issue at every election is how we as a society treat our most vulnerable. That is the bell-weather for how the whole ship of state is being navigated, if we can’t get that right then nothing else matters!

  67. Mr Crossperson
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

    The Tories did not stand a chance. The Labour Party Front Line was formidable wasn’t it.
    Popeye, Mickey Mouse and Dopey,

    The next Election, the Labour Party Front Line will have one or two non-cartoon characters in it. Career polticians who look and sound normal.
    Here’s hoping Mrs May crosses the floor and joins Labour or is she already a member?

  68. Hoarder
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 10:53 pm | Permalink

    Corbyn got it right about the timing of the Election. He says October or the beginning of 2018 for thr next one. He is sure to win with Mrs May at the helm and her “soft” Brexit idea.
    Anyway, I’m stocking up on salt, toilet paper and canned foods. You can’t hope your deep freeze will have electricity. So I’m glad I didn’t sell my camping stoves. No wonder Mr Corbyn has an allotment. Forward planning! Lenin enjoyed putting stuff in the ground too.

    • Mitchel
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

      Red October!If he could manage it for this year it would be exactly 100 years.How neat!

  69. Just asking
    Posted June 11, 2017 at 11:29 pm | Permalink

    So why is JR not in the Cabinet?

    • alan jutson
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 7:22 am | Permalink

      Just asking

      So why is JR not in the Cabinet ?

      Probably because Mrs May thinks others suit “her requirements” better.

      The same can be said of many of her other appointments, which perhaps some of us find a little odd, given the talent available.

  70. rose
    Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:23 am | Permalink

    I am horrified at the Barwell and Green appointments. This is Bourbon behaviour.

  71. Peter Parsons
    Posted June 12, 2017 at 12:33 am | Permalink

    I can only echo many of the other comments made both about the failings of the UK electoral system where the outcome (elected representatives) doesn’t correlate with the input (votes cast), and the selective nature of the analysis in the original post.

    The Conservatives secured the votes of 29.402% of those eligible to participate. As a share of the electorate this ranks 14th in the 20 elections held since 1945. To compare, Labour secured 30.924% of the electorate in 1997 (which was the last time a single party government topped 30% of the electorate).

    There hasn’t been a single occasion in my lifetime when a single party government secured the support of more than 34% of the electorate. How anyone can defend FPTP as fair or representative is beyond me.

    • NA
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 7:43 am | Permalink

      If true, only 75 votes in marginal seats cost a majority I start getting worried about possible rigging. The Jesuits got their perfect result. Their puppet just about remains in power but now she can push a soft Brexit which will be no exit at all.

    • hefner
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 9:19 am | Permalink

      PP, You seem to forget that we live in “The Mother of Democracy”.
      The FPTP system helps keep parties other than Conservatives and Labour on the very margins (to the point of inexistence). The other effect is that within each of the two big ones, there can be very large variations, from centrist positions to rather extreme ones.
      For an illustration, look at TheyWorkForYou, choose a couple of well known Labour and/or Conservatives past or current MPs and see how on various topics they have voted over he years. Very instructive (and at times frightening).

    • Peter Parsons
      Posted June 12, 2017 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

      hefner, I’m aware of what we’re told about UK democracy, but the rhetoric doesn’t match the reality.

      Our “wonderful democracy “consists of the largest unelected legislature in the entire western world (globally, second only to the Chinese politburo), and an elected chamber where the government of the day is consistently at, or towards the bottom, of the OECD rankings when it comes to share of vote (the previous administration ranked dead last on that score).

      The Conservative and Labour parties are both, to coin a phrase, coalitions of chaos at times. They exist as they do solely due to FPTP. A move to STV (retains the principles of both constituency representation and voting for individuals rather than parties while delivering much more representative outcomes) could see the emergence of a new, more honest party structure where the obvious divisions that have been apparent in both the Conservatives and Labour over recent times would be less likely to occur as the likelihood is that the current factional elements would end in different, more focussed parties.

      Yes, we’d be more likely to have coalitions, but coalition means collaboration, compromise and working together, adult behaviour not typically displayed by politicians in a FPTP system designed to pander to those who want it all their own way. (I was amused by the Monster Raving Loony Party’s proposal to lower the voting age to 5 as acting like 5 year olds is how MPs behave at PMQs.)

  72. Mike Wilson
    Posted June 12, 2017 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    Whichever way you look at it, our political system is at best absurd and, at worst, downright undemocratic.

    How can a party claim a mandate when 42.3% voted for them but 40% voted Labour.

    Party | Percentage of seats | percentage of vote
    Tory_____ | 48.8 | 42.3
    Labour___ | 40.3 | 40.0
    Liberal___ | 1.8 | 7.4
    Green ___ | 0.2 | 1.6
    UKIP ____ | 0.0 | 1.8
    SNP _____ | 5.4 | 3.0
    DUP _____ | 1.5 | 0.9

    Based on share of the vote, the Tories, DUP and SNP are over-represented in parliament.
    Lib Dems, Green and UKIP are under represented.

    Add up Labour, SNP, Green and Lib Dem and you get considerably more votes than were cast for the Tories.

    Our system is useless. High time for PR (and not the useless and over complicated AV offered in 2014 in an attempt to bury the issue.)

  73. Ken Moore
    Posted June 12, 2017 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

    85% of votes went to pro Brexit parties. The lib dems and greens lost ground.
    So why has the cabinet been stuffed with remainers??

  74. NA
    Posted June 13, 2017 at 7:21 am | Permalink

    We may need another EU referendum just to prove tp Mrs May we were voting as we dont want her, not because we dont want Brexit.

3 Trackbacks

  • By agen judi bola euro on June 14, 2017 at 6:03 am

    agen judi bola euro

    Total votes cast under recent leaders

  • By bandar judi bola terpercaya on June 14, 2017 at 6:22 am

    bandar judi bola terpercaya

    Total votes cast under recent leaders

  • By agen sbobet on June 14, 2017 at 3:57 pm

    agen sbobet

    Total votes cast under recent leaders

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page