He's back, but for how long? - British Election Results - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

stevie667 · 05-06-2005, 10:18 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/p...ge/4519863.stm

Blair secures historic third term

BBC TV coverage
Tony Blair has won a historic third term in government for Labour but with a drastically reduced majority.
Mr Blair pledged to respond "sensibly and wisely" to the result, which the BBC predicts will see his majority cut from 167 in 2001 to 66.

The Conservatives have mounted a strong challenge but their overall share of the vote will be similar to 2001.

The Lib Dems have made big inroads into Labour majorities and look set to end up with an estimated 60 seats.

LATEST RESULTS

324 seats needed to win

LAB 355
CON 197
LD 62

638 of 646 seats declared

Mr Blair, who celebrates his 52nd birthday on Friday, said it was clear that "the British people wanted to return a Labour government but with a reduced majority".

He told supporters at a celebration in the National Portrait Gallery in London: "We have got to listen to the people and respond wisely and sensibly."

Mr Blair and his wife Cherie left Downing Street at 1100 BST for a 30 minute audience with the Queen at Buckingham Palace - the private meeting where she asks him to form a new government.

Earlier, Mr Blair told party activists in his Sedgefield constituency that Labour, which looks set to have won 36% of the vote on a 61% turnout, had to "focus on the things that matter" such as the NHS, jobs and law and order.

He added: "I know too that Iraq has been a divisive issue in this country but I hope now that we can unite again and look to the future - there and here."

LABOUR'S VICTORY
Majority between 60 and 70
About 36% of popular vote
Vote down 6% on 2001

The result writes a new chapter in British political history, with Margaret Thatcher the only other post-war prime minister to have won three successive general elections.

Mr Blair is the only Labour leader to have won three elections in a row but his margin of victory is less than half what it was in the Labour landslides of 1997 and 2001 - and he has the lowest share of the vote for a ruling party in modern times.

Conservative leader Michael Howard congratulated Mr Blair on Labour's win but said it was time for him to deliver on his promises.

"I am proud of the campaign we have fought. We have taken a stand on the things that really do matter to the people of this country. We have sent Mr Blair a message," said Mr Howard.

He added the Tories' result was a "significant step towards our recovery".

Well, he's back...again.

To be honest, i did expect labour to win the election as there just wasn't a strong opposition.
I stayed up all night watching the results come in and there were a lot of close calls (<200 votes) for certain seats, along with a huge amount of split voting. It seems that people didn't really like labour, didn't really like the tories, so just went and voted Lib Dem or Independant parties.

Although overall it was a bad result for the country imo, my little constituency, St.Albans, was taken by the Tories from Labour, woo!

I think that unless Gordon Brown does some serious tidy up work after he takes over from Tony, the Tories stand a real chance of getting back in next time. They did take back a fair amount of seats, and although we didn't do particulary well, it's much better than the last two times!

What about the rest of you brits, what do you think of the election results?

Redlemon · 05-06-2005, 10:49 AM

I'm on the other side of the pond, but wanted to chime in. I keep hearing that the results were showing displeasure at Blair for supporting the Gulf war, but that overall you* still wanted to keep Labour in charge. But the results seem completely counter to that argument. If you still generally liked Labour, wouldn't they have kept about the same number of parliment seats? If you didn't like Blair, wouldn't you have kicked him out? Did all of the Labour party support the Gulf War, or was it primarily Blair calling the shots on that?

* where 'you' means the country in general

stevie667 · 05-06-2005, 02:34 PM

The problem with this election is that while people didn't really like labour, they didn't really like anyone else either.
The votes were scattered across several different parties, but due to the way the system works, the Tories (as the opposition) would have had to get something like 60% of the vote to get 50% of the seats.
Us Brits are very fickle, and alot of protest votes (voting for someone else because you don't like a party) were cast, but not, like i said before, in one place, hence labour getting the majority again.

Labour was elected in on around 36% of the popular vote (i.e. only 36% of voters thought he'd be any good), which is a record low. 64% of people don't like Labour, but not many of those decided to vote for the same party, you see the problem?

As for the war...it was Blair calling the shots on that, and he suffered greatly seats wise. Some commentators have said it's what has given labour only a small majority in the commons, as opposed to a much larger one.

Elphaba · 05-06-2005, 04:20 PM

As I understand parlimentary voting in Great Britain, you don't vote for the man, but for a party and that this poor showing for Labour was a referendum that Tony must go.
This opens the door for Brown to step in, who is popular for his handling of the nation's economy.

Hopefully, the chaps across the pond will correct me on my ignorance.

SecretMethod70 · 05-06-2005, 11:36 PM

It's true - the PM is the leader of the majority party in the House of Commons. For those in the US, imagine if we all voted for our Representatives in the House of Representatives like usual and then the leader of the majority party in the House of Representatives becomes the president (very hackish analogy, but it should give you a general idea).

05-06-2005, 10:18 AM	#1 (permalink)
stevie667 Too Awesome for Aardvarks Location: Angloland	He's back, but for how long? - British Election Results http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/p...ge/4519863.stm Blair secures historic third term BBC TV coverage Tony Blair has won a historic third term in government for Labour but with a drastically reduced majority. Mr Blair pledged to respond "sensibly and wisely" to the result, which the BBC predicts will see his majority cut from 167 in 2001 to 66. The Conservatives have mounted a strong challenge but their overall share of the vote will be similar to 2001. The Lib Dems have made big inroads into Labour majorities and look set to end up with an estimated 60 seats. LATEST RESULTS 324 seats needed to win LAB 355 CON 197 LD 62 638 of 646 seats declared Mr Blair, who celebrates his 52nd birthday on Friday, said it was clear that "the British people wanted to return a Labour government but with a reduced majority". He told supporters at a celebration in the National Portrait Gallery in London: "We have got to listen to the people and respond wisely and sensibly." Mr Blair and his wife Cherie left Downing Street at 1100 BST for a 30 minute audience with the Queen at Buckingham Palace - the private meeting where she asks him to form a new government. Earlier, Mr Blair told party activists in his Sedgefield constituency that Labour, which looks set to have won 36% of the vote on a 61% turnout, had to "focus on the things that matter" such as the NHS, jobs and law and order. He added: "I know too that Iraq has been a divisive issue in this country but I hope now that we can unite again and look to the future - there and here." LABOUR'S VICTORY Majority between 60 and 70 About 36% of popular vote Vote down 6% on 2001 The result writes a new chapter in British political history, with Margaret Thatcher the only other post-war prime minister to have won three successive general elections. Mr Blair is the only Labour leader to have won three elections in a row but his margin of victory is less than half what it was in the Labour landslides of 1997 and 2001 - and he has the lowest share of the vote for a ruling party in modern times. Conservative leader Michael Howard congratulated Mr Blair on Labour's win but said it was time for him to deliver on his promises. "I am proud of the campaign we have fought. We have taken a stand on the things that really do matter to the people of this country. We have sent Mr Blair a message," said Mr Howard. He added the Tories' result was a "significant step towards our recovery". Well, he's back...again. To be honest, i did expect labour to win the election as there just wasn't a strong opposition. I stayed up all night watching the results come in and there were a lot of close calls (<200 votes) for certain seats, along with a huge amount of split voting. It seems that people didn't really like labour, didn't really like the tories, so just went and voted Lib Dem or Independant parties. Although overall it was a bad result for the country imo, my little constituency, St.Albans, was taken by the Tories from Labour, woo! I think that unless Gordon Brown does some serious tidy up work after he takes over from Tony, the Tories stand a real chance of getting back in next time. They did take back a fair amount of seats, and although we didn't do particulary well, it's much better than the last two times! What about the rest of you brits, what do you think of the election results? __________________ Office hours have changed. Please call during office hours for more information.

05-06-2005, 10:49 AM	#2 (permalink)
Redlemon Devoted Donor Location: New England	I'm on the other side of the pond, but wanted to chime in. I keep hearing that the results were showing displeasure at Blair for supporting the Gulf war, but that overall you* still wanted to keep Labour in charge. But the results seem completely counter to that argument. If you still generally liked Labour, wouldn't they have kept about the same number of parliment seats? If you didn't like Blair, wouldn't you have kicked him out? Did all of the Labour party support the Gulf War, or was it primarily Blair calling the shots on that? * where 'you' means the country in general __________________ I can't read your signature. Sorry.

05-06-2005, 02:34 PM	#3 (permalink)
stevie667 Too Awesome for Aardvarks Location: Angloland	The problem with this election is that while people didn't really like labour, they didn't really like anyone else either. The votes were scattered across several different parties, but due to the way the system works, the Tories (as the opposition) would have had to get something like 60% of the vote to get 50% of the seats. Us Brits are very fickle, and alot of protest votes (voting for someone else because you don't like a party) were cast, but not, like i said before, in one place, hence labour getting the majority again. Labour was elected in on around 36% of the popular vote (i.e. only 36% of voters thought he'd be any good), which is a record low. 64% of people don't like Labour, but not many of those decided to vote for the same party, you see the problem? As for the war...it was Blair calling the shots on that, and he suffered greatly seats wise. Some commentators have said it's what has given labour only a small majority in the commons, as opposed to a much larger one. __________________ Office hours have changed. Please call during office hours for more information.

05-06-2005, 11:36 PM	#5 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	It's true - the PM is the leader of the majority party in the House of Commons. For those in the US, imagine if we all voted for our Representatives in the House of Representatives like usual and then the leader of the majority party in the House of Representatives becomes the president (very hackish analogy, but it should give you a general idea). __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

05-06-2005, 04:20 PM	#4 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	As I understand parlimentary voting in Great Britain, you don't vote for the man, but for a party and that this poor showing for Labour was a referendum that Tony must go. This opens the door for Brown to step in, who is popular for his handling of the nation's economy. Hopefully, the chaps across the pond will correct me on my ignorance.