Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Do you think the next leader of the Conservative party should call a General Election Watch

  • View Poll Results: Do you think the next leader of the Conservative party should call a General Election
    Yes.
    820
    64.41%
    No.
    323
    25.37%
    I don't know.
    130
    10.21%

    Offline

    8
    Only if Mr Corbyn wins. hahaha
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    What a silly poll result. Just because people want soap opera does not mean we need an election. For God's sake think of the country, we do not need a party political *****fight, we have important things in the national interest to deal with. Would be totally irresponsible.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think it's a good time to call a General Election.

    Party funds will be run down from campaigning and maybe the public's appetite for constant politics will be being stretched.

    But also there's a practical issue about manifestos. Government's main priority now is going to be to negotiate and organise the practicalities of Brexit. This will be possibly the biggest programme of work Parliament, the Civil Service and the government's lawyers have ever done in history. Due to the small majority Cameron's government was working full speed ahead to get things through in the first couple of years of the Parliament, worrying that post-referendum (planning on a win where there may be some angry Brexit Tory rebels causing mischief) to ram through manifesto commitments before the small majority exposed them to defeats. Maybe there are going to be some things that now won't get done, they will drop off the agenda, due to needing the time and resource for Brexit issues.

    But now is definitely not the time where you can come up with a new manifesto of new commitments and promise to deliver them over 5 years.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I would say so if I wasn't extremely concerned that UKIP will gain Labour seats post Brexit. Because it's so soon after the referendum.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It does show you that the best thing is indeed another election.Why would a BREXIT voter want REMAIN MPs to do half hearted negotiations for them that will almost certainly end up in another referendum or election anyway at the end of it all???Surely the best thing all round would be another ELECTION where BREXIT could pick their own MPs to do their own renegotiating right up front, and REMAINERS could pick their own MPs to do their "official" opposition thing?An ELECTION would clear the air and stop people feeling a bit cheated or robbed (as that is what is happening on both sides).We need to get rid of the feeling that we have either been cheated or robbed or lied to...There is no way out, as far as I can see that does not end up as an ELECTION on the issue - with MPs declaring where they really stand so everyone knows what they are voting for and what will DEFINITELY happen at the end of it.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Labour will lose seats to UKIP if an election is called now. I don't think that is what you and they want.
    Whilst this is a risk, I think this has been exaggerated. In the first past the post system it is difficult for UKIP to gain seats and after they were the largest part in the 2014 European elections people were predicting them to win numerous seats in 2015 but they ended up with a net of minus one.

    Now that Brexit is going ahead that will also have taken the sting out of some of the UKIP protest vote. Labour have now said Brexit should involve the end of free movement, and the Conservative leader will likely also say that, so whilst UKIP will still likely do well, it's harder for them to actually advance on their current position much now that Brexit is going ahead - had there been a narrow win for Remain, UKIP would have been better placed to take seats off a Labour party committed to the EU that they could say was out of touch with their traditional voters.

    If the left secures control of the Labour party, and they are free to oppose free movement and be more old Labour, which will be natural to Corbyn/McDonnell who were seemingly unenthusiastic remainers, then they might be in a better place to bid for their traditional voters.

    The bigger question for Labour I think is that 60 per cent of Labour voters voted Remain, and a lot of them will find the Corbyn/McDonnell axis unpalatable especially as outside the EU rules certain old Labour tools will come back in to play - exchange controls, protectionist tariffs/quotas, nationalisation, industrial policy. I expect most of these Labour Remainers would be more natural voters of a centre-left party than the hard left, so will there be a split where a new party tags off to the centre-left ground? With a credible leader and 16 million Remain voters, many of whom will be anxious and upset at the referendum result...there are a lot of votes to bid for and many of them will be Labour voters who McDonnell may struggle to get.

    The Lib Dems have stolen a march by pitching themselves as the Britain in Europe party. This is interesting because on the face of it they could hoover up huge numbers of votes but they may be starting from too low a base. Had they not gone in to Coalition, and were still polling the 21-24% they used to a few years ago, then these circumstances could have given them the chance for electoral breakthrough.
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    By the way, under the FTPA it requires the support of 67% of all MPs to call an early election. And that's 67% of ALL MPs, not just the ones who happen to be in the Chamber when the vote is taken.

    One could contend that is not a major socio-political change, and yet it only requires 50%+1 of voters in a non-binding Referendum to remove us from the EU... just 50% of the turnout, not 50% of the total electorate, never mind 67%.

    And yet apparently this is democracy.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, because so much has changed an a new prime minister doesn't have an election mandate. Of course the will only do this if they judge they are on track to win. This dithering really ****ed Gordon Brown up though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    By the way, under the FTPA it requires the support of 67% of all MPs to call an early election. And that's 67% of ALL MPs, not just the ones who happen to be in the Chamber when the vote is taken.

    One could contend that is not a major socio-political change, and yet it only requires 50%+1 of voters in a non-binding Referendum to remove us from the EU... just 50% of the turnout, not 50% of the total electorate, never mind 67%.

    And yet apparently this is democracy.
    I got the PDF in front of me its 2/3s MPs

    OR

    No confidence vote in new pm (gove?) passes and no one attempts to be a new pm for 14 days..
    • Section Leader
    • Clearing and Applications Advisor
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Section Leader
    Clearing and Applications Advisor
    (Original post by FredOrJohn)
    I got the PDF in front of me its 2/3s MPs

    OR

    No confidence vote in new pm (gove?) passes and no one attempts to be a new pm for 14 days..
    Interesting.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jneill)
    Interesting.
    From pdf:

    Section 2 of the Act provides for early general elections when either of the following conditions is met: • if a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least two-thirds of the whole House (including vacant seats), i.e. 434 Members out of 650, or without division; or • if a motion of no confidence is passed and no alternative government is confirmed by the Commons within 14 days by means of a confidence motion. There were detailed discussions about the constitutional implications of these triggers during the passage of the Bill. Some commentators and Members of both Houses questioned whether both options were necessary, and argued that the legislation would allow for constructive votes of no confidence (where an incumbent government triggers an early election through tabling a motion of no confidence in itself
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, I do think there should be a general election at some point, the sooner the better. I also think at least one party, if not more, should be running with manifesto commitments to significant electoral reform.

    (Original post by SaucissonSecCy)
    What a silly poll result. Just because people want soap opera does not mean we need an election. For God's sake think of the country, we do not need a party political *****fight, we have important things in the national interest to deal with. Would be totally irresponsible.
    It's inconvenient yes, but what is the alternative, 4 years of a government operating on an entirely different manifesto than the one they were elected on? I thought a Brexit was all about increasing our level of democratic control.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    It sounds the right thing to do in theory but I think it would be a very, very bad idea under the circumstances. It would destabilise the country even further.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MagicNMedicine)
    Whilst this is a risk, I think this has been exaggerated. In the first past the post system it is difficult for UKIP to gain seats and after they were the largest part in the 2014 European elections people were predicting them to win numerous seats in 2015 but they ended up with a net of minus one.

    Now that Brexit is going ahead that will also have taken the sting out of some of the UKIP protest vote. Labour have now said Brexit should involve the end of free movement, and the Conservative leader will likely also say that, so whilst UKIP will still likely do well, it's harder for them to actually advance on their current position much now that Brexit is going ahead - had there been a narrow win for Remain, UKIP would have been better placed to take seats off a Labour party committed to the EU that they could say was out of touch with their traditional voters.

    If the left secures control of the Labour party, and they are free to oppose free movement and be more old Labour, which will be natural to Corbyn/McDonnell who were seemingly unenthusiastic remainers, then they might be in a better place to bid for their traditional voters.

    The bigger question for Labour I think is that 60 per cent of Labour voters voted Remain, and a lot of them will find the Corbyn/McDonnell axis unpalatable especially as outside the EU rules certain old Labour tools will come back in to play - exchange controls, protectionist tariffs/quotas, nationalisation, industrial policy. I expect most of these Labour Remainers would be more natural voters of a centre-left party than the hard left, so will there be a split where a new party tags off to the centre-left ground? With a credible leader and 16 million Remain voters, many of whom will be anxious and upset at the referendum result...there are a lot of votes to bid for and many of them will be Labour voters who McDonnell may struggle to get.

    The Lib Dems have stolen a march by pitching themselves as the Britain in Europe party. This is interesting because on the face of it they could hoover up huge numbers of votes but they may be starting from too low a base. Had they not gone in to Coalition, and were still polling the 21-24% they used to a few years ago, then these circumstances could have given them the chance for electoral breakthrough.
    Yes, but if elections were held this year, the Lib Dems would split the opposition vote. Many Remainers would vote for them instead of Labour, whose core supporters largely backed Brexit in the north; moreover, Corbyn is not seen as a firm Remainer. UKIP would win several seats there as a result.

    For example in Hartlepool, Labour scored 35.6% in 2015, UKIP 28% and the Lib Dems 1.9% (down from 15.2% in 2010). UKIP would win there now.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/politics/con...cies/E14000733

    They would be in good position to win Heywood & Middleton too: http://www.bbc.com/news/politics/con...cies/E14000747

    The Labour has no interest in new elections this year as they don't have a leader (and a project); they would lose again. UKIP don't need a project yet, but they have to reinvent themselves for the 2020 elections.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    lol no thanks.

    It's not surprising that this forum wants the Tories to call an election, to give them a chance to lose, but the last election was a year ago and the Tory party has every right to choose its own leader, so suck it up. You don't get an election every time you're unhappy with anything that members of parliament are doing.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    lol no thanks.

    It's not surprising that this forum wants the Tories to call an election, to give them a chance to lose, but the last election was a year ago and the Tory party has every right to choose its own leader, so suck it up. You don't get an election every time you're unhappy with anything that members of parliament are doing.
    Moreover, the Tories wouldn't lose that one.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mojojojo101)
    Yes, I do think there should be a general election at some point, the sooner the better. I also think at least one party, if not more, should be running with manifesto commitments to significant electoral reform.



    It's inconvenient yes, but what is the alternative, 4 years of a government operating on an entirely different manifesto than the one they were elected on? I thought a Brexit was all about increasing our level of democratic control.
    Err a conservative government that is stable, people electng a Tory government, and I'm pretty sure the referendum was in the manifesto, so people knew what they were voting for. it's about the only time in my life I wanted a Tory government, just to get that referendum. You are a biased remainer, I bet and want an election and then a remain government. you are being irresponsible, the government and country needs stability and to secure Brexit, there is a general election in lony four years time where people have a fresh choice.They elected Tories, on a pledge of a referendum, so why should we do something unconstitutional now? i'm sick of hearing silly arguments from remain that make a farce of our country, including petitions and ovethrowing referendums. Stop wanting this country to fail to prove a point, why don't we just pull together as a country...
    • Community Assistant
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by doctorwhofan98)
    Conservatives were elected on their manifesto commitments - if the next PM wants to deviate, and I'm sure they will, then they should call an election, offering to the public what they want to do as PM. Yes, we elect our MPs, but people generally don't vote based on their individual MP - if they did, then the Lib Dems who abstained/voted against the tuition fee raise would surely have stayed, and the Ed Miliband fiasco of the bacon sandwich would only have impacted those in his constituency. The party leader, and their manifesto policies, is one of the largest factors that influences voting, not the MP.
    But it's "OK" when they do something outside their manifestos you believe to be good - such as gay "marriage"?

    That wasn't in the last Parliament's manifesto at the election - technically therefore no approval from the people to do that. There should have been an election for that as well by such logic.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I think the next Conservative Party leader should go for a General Election in October. Gordon Brown's failure to go to the country in 2007 compromised his authority and i believe he could have won an early election, gaining a mandate, seeing off David Cameron and giving Labour another 5 years in government.
    Of the three unelected postwar PMs (Douglas-Home, Callaghan and Brown) I believe all three would have won snap elections. Alec Douglas-Home would've won a snap election in 1963, James Callaghan would've won a snap election in 1976 and Gordon Brown would've won a snap election in 2007, in my view.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    lol no thanks.

    It's not surprising that this forum wants the Tories to call an election, to give them a chance to lose, but the last election was a year ago and the Tory party has every right to choose its own leader, so suck it up. You don't get an election every time you're unhappy with anything that members of parliament are doing.
    I do not think the Conservatives would lose an early election to Corbyn.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.