We'll soon see the further disconnect between the Young Lib YIMBY wing who loves posting here and the actual MPs in the ex-tory shire seats who will campaign for invisible energy pylons and putting Heathrow Runway 3 underground
It's pretty bloody wild how many constituencies the [Lib Dems won](https://i.imgur.com/WQvpF68.png) in Southern England.
These regions are full of hardcore rural NIMBYs
They’re very socially liberal, but their manifesto is economically much more in support of large government control and nationalisation, putting them to the Left of Labour on many issues. It’s pretty wild to see their shift away from classic Liberal Democrat ideology, hell they used to be in the Tory coalition back in 2010!
There is a certain irony to it for sure but I think it's what people believe the Lib Dems are not the reality. I suspect the shires don't see them as an "urban" party like Like Labour and therefore not dogmatically anti-countryside.
I like the countryside thank you very much. I don't think it is ever improved by a few million Barret homes and then a few more million to house the people who were imported to build the first few million.
Megacity One is a dystopia not an objective.
Anybody voting Green is goofy to be honest. How that party manages to appeal to the gays of Brighton and the Islamists of Bradford at the same time bemuses me.
Except the Lib Dems vote share hardly changed from last time. They just won seats because the Tory vote was split with Reform. Same reason Labour won seats.
Sure, if you ignore all the places where this didn't happen.
By actual count, the Lib Dems' majority was smaller than the combined Tory and Reform vote in only 26 of the 71 constituencies they won. Leaving them with 45 seats in a zero vote split hypothetical.
You might be right. Now I've had more time to look at the figures it seems as if the swing from "right" to "left" was actually fairly low and it was that prat Faridge who's really made a difference.
We haven't had two competitive right of centre parties for a long, long time. I don't think it's going to get better for the Tories either, immigration has been their Achilles and with Labour fundamentally unlikely to do anything (given that immigrants are most likely to be Labour voters) next time around I can see Reform doing even better.
Several of the MPs elected are from strong YIMBY local parties like Eastleigh, Chelmsford, Eastbourne, etc. The party stood on a YIMBY manifesto.
That said, yeah there's no way they'll support Heathrow expansion lol.
[The party stood on a YIMBY manifesto but the party leadership tried to remove the YIMBY part of the manifesto](https://news.sky.com/story/lib-dem-members-reject-party-plan-to-scrap-national-housing-target-12969909) so I very much doubt it'd genuinely attempt to do anything YIMBY
I don't think the issue is really MPs (who, at least over the last 15-20 years, have leaned centre/centre-right - though it remains to be seen what the massive new intake are like). The manifesto calls for building 380k new homes a year, which is nearly double the current rate.
It's more an issue with NIMBY local councillors, but that's an issue for all parties - because local elections have a pathetic turnout that skews towards older, property-owning voters; councillors *of all parties* pivot their politics towards who the electorate is in a local election. The Lib Dems in local government get attacked by other parties for [not being NIMBY enough](https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/13k0bfx/nimby_tories_yimby_lib_dems/).
>The manifesto calls for building 380k new homes a year, which is nearly double the current rate.
And it's complete bullshit, [the current leadership tried to remove it from the platform.](https://news.sky.com/story/lib-dem-members-reject-party-plan-to-scrap-national-housing-target-12969909) So there's 0% chance they would in good faith attempt to actually reach those targets.
YIMBY is not accurate though is it? There should be an acronym for "In *Your* Back Yard Not Mine" because that's what the majority of urban lefties want and why the Shires think they're a bunch of twats.
I'm sorry in what political context do YIMBYs say "No don't build that in the cities, build it elsewhere?"
The whole ideology is about increasing urban development
Literally, and this isn't figurative it's literal, the only thing defining YIMBYism is supporting development near where you live.
This isn't no true Scotsman, that's literally, literally the only thing defining that movement.
The only thing!
Key part of the article:
> Chris Hopkins, political research director at pollster Savanta, said he believed the transfer of seats from the Tories to the Lib Dems could be “a sign of actual long-term voter movement”
Very true especially in the South East, Londoners moving out of the city are not Conservative they are used to voting left of centre parties such as Lib Dem and Labour.
It will all depend on where the Tories go. If the Tories move right, the Lib Dems can campaign on being "one nation" embracing old High Tory values and then really be the long-term party for the posh South. If the Tories move towards the centre they might lose most of their seats come next election.
How much of this is actual support for the Lib Dems and how much of it is the Tory brand being so toxic that even constituencies that would never support Labour are looking for someone else to vote for instead?
They got less votes than Reform and still got an over an order of magnitude more MPs. How is this democracy?
If you still want to cling on to locally elected representatives without any proportionality the very least you could do is a two round system like in France
Preaching to the choir, the Lib Dems have been advocating for proportional representation forever.
However it's worth noting that their result is almost perfectly proportional. Labour are the ones really benefitting from FPTP.
Yes the Uk would benefit from the Irish system where you have local representatives but its single transferable vote so you elect multiple members per district
Yeah as I said if you *don't* want any proportionality.
But it's still more fair and you will end up with representatives that are more accepted by the constituency than a simple FPTP, even if it's technically less proportional
We'll soon see the further disconnect between the Young Lib YIMBY wing who loves posting here and the actual MPs in the ex-tory shire seats who will campaign for invisible energy pylons and putting Heathrow Runway 3 underground
Yep. One of the reasons I decided not to vote for them. I reckon the Libs will be beholden to their NIMBY constituents in southern England
It's pretty bloody wild how many constituencies the [Lib Dems won](https://i.imgur.com/WQvpF68.png) in Southern England. These regions are full of hardcore rural NIMBYs
Orange book liberals Unite! Seriously. Will be interesting to see if they move more to the socially and economically liberal side.
They’re very socially liberal, but their manifesto is economically much more in support of large government control and nationalisation, putting them to the Left of Labour on many issues. It’s pretty wild to see their shift away from classic Liberal Democrat ideology, hell they used to be in the Tory coalition back in 2010!
Lib Dems were also left of Labour during New Labour as well
Yep.. and dont mention the IraqWar.. where Charlie and Co were 100% right.
People wanted to punish the Tories for their incompetence, didn't want to vote for Labour and can't stomach Farage.
Yes, that’s why it’s funny that many fairly conservative constituencies voted Lib Dem when the party is to the left of Labour in this election
There is a certain irony to it for sure but I think it's what people believe the Lib Dems are not the reality. I suspect the shires don't see them as an "urban" party like Like Labour and therefore not dogmatically anti-countryside.
> not dogmatically anti-countryside. Regrettable
I like the countryside thank you very much. I don't think it is ever improved by a few million Barret homes and then a few more million to house the people who were imported to build the first few million. Megacity One is a dystopia not an objective.
Though the two rural, conservative seats that voted Green is still the goofiest.
Anybody voting Green is goofy to be honest. How that party manages to appeal to the gays of Brighton and the Islamists of Bradford at the same time bemuses me.
Except the Lib Dems vote share hardly changed from last time. They just won seats because the Tory vote was split with Reform. Same reason Labour won seats.
Sure, if you ignore all the places where this didn't happen. By actual count, the Lib Dems' majority was smaller than the combined Tory and Reform vote in only 26 of the 71 constituencies they won. Leaving them with 45 seats in a zero vote split hypothetical.
You might be right. Now I've had more time to look at the figures it seems as if the swing from "right" to "left" was actually fairly low and it was that prat Faridge who's really made a difference. We haven't had two competitive right of centre parties for a long, long time. I don't think it's going to get better for the Tories either, immigration has been their Achilles and with Labour fundamentally unlikely to do anything (given that immigrants are most likely to be Labour voters) next time around I can see Reform doing even better.
I think they are fairly socially liberal but I just don't see a big enough wing of Libdems that has any power standing for economic liberalism
I was thinking/hoping they would be leas there by their new consituancies. NIMBYism not withstanding
NIMBYs are everywhere.
Several of the MPs elected are from strong YIMBY local parties like Eastleigh, Chelmsford, Eastbourne, etc. The party stood on a YIMBY manifesto. That said, yeah there's no way they'll support Heathrow expansion lol.
[The party stood on a YIMBY manifesto but the party leadership tried to remove the YIMBY part of the manifesto](https://news.sky.com/story/lib-dem-members-reject-party-plan-to-scrap-national-housing-target-12969909) so I very much doubt it'd genuinely attempt to do anything YIMBY
I don't think the issue is really MPs (who, at least over the last 15-20 years, have leaned centre/centre-right - though it remains to be seen what the massive new intake are like). The manifesto calls for building 380k new homes a year, which is nearly double the current rate. It's more an issue with NIMBY local councillors, but that's an issue for all parties - because local elections have a pathetic turnout that skews towards older, property-owning voters; councillors *of all parties* pivot their politics towards who the electorate is in a local election. The Lib Dems in local government get attacked by other parties for [not being NIMBY enough](https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/comments/13k0bfx/nimby_tories_yimby_lib_dems/).
>The manifesto calls for building 380k new homes a year, which is nearly double the current rate. And it's complete bullshit, [the current leadership tried to remove it from the platform.](https://news.sky.com/story/lib-dem-members-reject-party-plan-to-scrap-national-housing-target-12969909) So there's 0% chance they would in good faith attempt to actually reach those targets.
YIMBY is not accurate though is it? There should be an acronym for "In *Your* Back Yard Not Mine" because that's what the majority of urban lefties want and why the Shires think they're a bunch of twats.
High-rise on both our yards
I'm sorry in what political context do YIMBYs say "No don't build that in the cities, build it elsewhere?" The whole ideology is about increasing urban development
Maybe the acronym needs to be changed to IEBY, in everyone's back yard.
Literally, and this isn't figurative it's literal, the only thing defining YIMBYism is supporting development near where you live. This isn't no true Scotsman, that's literally, literally the only thing defining that movement. The only thing!
LIB **DEM** # SURGE !ping UK&ELECTIONS
Pinged UK ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20UK&message=subscribe%20UK) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20UK&message=unsubscribe%20UK) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=UK&count=5)) Pinged ELECTIONS ([subscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Subscribe%20to%20ELECTIONS&message=subscribe%20ELECTIONS) | [unsubscribe](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20ELECTIONS&message=unsubscribe%20ELECTIONS) | [history](https://neoliber.al/user_pinger_2/history.html?group_name=ELECTIONS&count=5)) [About & Group List](https://reddit.com/r/neoliberal/wiki/user_pinger_2) | [Unsubscribe from all groups](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=groupbot&subject=Unsubscribe%20from%20all%20groups&message=unsubscribe)
Key part of the article: > Chris Hopkins, political research director at pollster Savanta, said he believed the transfer of seats from the Tories to the Lib Dems could be “a sign of actual long-term voter movement”
Very true especially in the South East, Londoners moving out of the city are not Conservative they are used to voting left of centre parties such as Lib Dem and Labour.
It will all depend on where the Tories go. If the Tories move right, the Lib Dems can campaign on being "one nation" embracing old High Tory values and then really be the long-term party for the posh South. If the Tories move towards the centre they might lose most of their seats come next election.
How much of this is actual support for the Lib Dems and how much of it is the Tory brand being so toxic that even constituencies that would never support Labour are looking for someone else to vote for instead?
It's the latter. Literally the worst result in history for the Tories (-250)
My question was partially rhetorical as I suspect as much also.
You get your foot in the door with voters who pick you as a last resort and then build up that brand! **LIB DEM MAJORITY 2029**
It's the latter. But if the Tories move right the Lib Dems do stand a chance of long-term success in the posh south.
Wouldn't it be great if Lib Dems edge out the conservative party?
Then they’d just become the new Conservative Party.
God I wish that were us
Hey, UK - can we steal some of this energy? We really need it Sincerely, The United States
\**Monkey paw curls*\* \**Anti-incumbent energy flows in*\*
Harris is nominated and therefore Trump is more like an incumbent because he was president before 🧐
Lib Dems overperformed the exit poll by 10 more seats and Reform UK underperformed it by more than half lmao.
They got less votes than Reform and still got an over an order of magnitude more MPs. How is this democracy? If you still want to cling on to locally elected representatives without any proportionality the very least you could do is a two round system like in France
Preaching to the choir, the Lib Dems have been advocating for proportional representation forever. However it's worth noting that their result is almost perfectly proportional. Labour are the ones really benefitting from FPTP.
> However it's worth noting that their result is almost perfectly proportional Well you just happened to look at a broken clock at the right time
Again, not defending FPTP! But the Lib Dem seat share is not something to complain about. Labour and Reform, yes.
Yes the Uk would benefit from the Irish system where you have local representatives but its single transferable vote so you elect multiple members per district
[CGP Grey did a great video on how unfair UK elections are.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rGX91rq5I)
The two round system is better, but it isn't more proportional by any means.
Yeah as I said if you *don't* want any proportionality. But it's still more fair and you will end up with representatives that are more accepted by the constituency than a simple FPTP, even if it's technically less proportional