Or you could just give Gaitskell a go? Might be worth a shot.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
Or you could just give Gaitskell a go? Might be worth a shot.
...But till then all that Britain needs is more chaos, right? Right.
Wow! You made it within the deadline by second my friend!
Polls now closed!
Full results shortly.
Well, he can be Plan B. Given there's only 20/21 Labour MPs now he might not even be in Parliament anymore. Heck, I could be the most senior member left in the commons!
It is the Party's best chance!
EDIT:
Nooooooooo!
With seconds to go before polls closed Ticket Cookie not only changed the entire election causing a shift a little under 70 seats, he also took us to 60 votes. And I thought John Forsetti was making the conclusion to the election tense .
Final Results!
Total Vote: 60 (-7)
Liberals: 21
Conservatives: 17
Communists: 10
Labour: 6
National Liberals: 6
%s:
Liberals: 35%
Conservatives: 28.3%
Communists: 16.7%
Labour: 10%
National Liberals: 10%
Weighted Votes:
Liberals: 63
Conservatives: 34
Communists: 10
Labour: 3
National Liberals: 3
Seats:
Liberals: 344
Conservatives: 186
Communists: 54
Labour: 17
National Liberals: 17
UUP: 17
Result: Liberal Majority. First Liberal Prime Minister since Lloyd George, first majority government since the Second World War.
.Final Results!
Total Vote: 60 (-7)
Liberals: 21
Conservatives: 17
Communists: 10
Labour: 6
National Liberals: 6
%s:
Liberals: 35%
Conservatives: 28.3%
Communists: 16.7%
Labour: 10%
National Liberals: 10%
Weighted Votes:
Liberals: 63
Conservatives: 34
Communists: 10
Labour: 3
National Liberals: 3
Seats:
Liberals: 344
Conservatives: 186
Communists: 54
Labour: 17
National Liberals: 17
UUP: 17
Result: Liberal Majority. First Liberal Prime Minister since Lloyd George, first majority government since the Second World War.
Damn, that ending! I thought it was all over.
Can't wait for the conclusion update.
:angry:
Also good to see when i put the numbers in my spreadsheet it all works out. I can do polls now.
Can't wait for the conclusion update.
:angry:
Also good to see when i put the numbers in my spreadsheet it all works out. I can do polls now.
Well, congrats, Densley, I have nothing more to say.Now that—that! is how to end an election night.
You won this round, fair and square.
I propose that the first piece of legislation to be enacted by the new government should be to prevent minor parties piggy-backing off the names of larger ones. In short, the National Liberal Party need to drop the word "Liberal" as we're already using that word in our party name
I propose that the first piece of legislation to be enacted by the new government should be to prevent minor parties piggy-backing off the names of larger ones. In short, the National Liberal Party need to drop the word "Liberal" as we're already using that word in our party name
The National Party, eh? Sounds quite fitting.
I propose that the first piece of legislation to be enacted by the new government should be to prevent minor parties piggy-backing off the names of larger ones. In short, the National Liberal Party need to drop the word "Liberal" as we're already using that word in our party name
So independent candidates will henceforth be unable to term themselves "Independent Labour/Liberal/Conservative?" How very illiberal of you.
Drat! Damn you, intricacies of GMT, ruining my plans to upset the election last minute and everything. damn yous.
The Election of 1958
After eight years of Alliance government the final dissolution of the Conservative-National Liberal Alliance gave the Left tremendous hopes of returning to government for the first time since the Korean Crisis. Yet with both Labour and the Liberals competing for the left leaning working class vote, both parties were hopeful of taking on the responsibility bring a new progressive government into power.
The 1958 election was totally defined by the absence of the Labour-Communist Election Pact of 1954, and more significantly the dissolution of the Conservative-National Liberal Alliance of 1948-1958 that had seen its two members come agonisingly close to winning a majority in both 1949 and 1954 and take on the role of a minority government from 1950-1958. Without these pacts the Liberals, whose vote remained virtually unchanged, were able to come just shy of doubling their parliamentary representation. Having narrowly missed out of a large number of seats in 1954 the Liberals secured 9 by less than a hundred votes and dozens more by less than a thousand in what was one of Britain’s closest ever electoral contests. The two parties who had dissolved their respective electoral pacts, Labour and the National Liberals, suffered badly with both losing a substantial portion of their vote to their former allies and an even more substantial number of seats. Meanwhile, although the Communists and Conservative managed to make impressive gains in their share of the vote (the highest since 1945 for the Communists and 1935 for the Conservatives) their share of seats remained largely stable as they struggled without their electoral pacts.
The election in Cardiff South East was notable for its result, for the manner of the Liberal Party in the area during the campaign and for the identity of the elected member. James Callaghan had been elected as the MP for Cardiff South East in 1949 (and Cardiff South in 1945), a close ally of Gaitskell he supported the Right in the factional struggle of 1950 and lost his seat in 1954 before leaving the Labour Party in disgust at Harold Wilson’s election as leader at the expense of Hugh Gaitskell. Leaving Labour, Callaghan entered the Liberal Party and quickly became a leading force within its rapidly expanding Social Democratic wing.
His campaign in Cardiff South East involved the involvement of a coalition of moderate ex-Labour supporters, right wing trade unionists, Welsh regionalists and traditionally Liberal supporters. With the both the Labour-CPGB and Conservative-National Liberal electoral alliances breaking up Callaghan was able to storm to victory with the sitting MP, the National Liberal JJ Hayward, losing his deposit and finishing in 4th on his way to defeat.
Whilst in many ways the defeats suffered by Social Democratic leaning Labour MPs like James Callaghan in 1954 ultimately proved to be blessings in disguise as a number of them were able to re-enter parliament in 1958 as Liberals, Hugh Gaitskell had held firmly to his Leeds South constituency. This left Gaitskell almost trapped within Labour, unwilling to defect yet unwilling to reshape his party on Social Democratic lines the member for Leeds South faced serious challenges going into the election from both the Communists and Conservatives. With the local Liberal Party being comparatively weak, and left leaning, Gaitskell was able to convince both the Labour and Liberal parties in the constituency to rebel openly against their national leadership and jointly sponsor his candidacy. With this alliance Gaitskell became the only Labour MP to increase their majority in 1958.
The success of the Leeds Lib-Lab alliance proved a major concern for both the leadership of the Liberal Party, who feared the growing strength of Social Democrats within the Liberal movement, and to Wilson’s Labour leadership who feared that Gaitskell’s example might lead to the complete annexation of the Labour Party by the Liberals. The Leeds case was certainly an intriguing experiment, which many equally hoped and feared, would point the way to the future of the Centre-Left.
The fate of the Dartford constituency was a familiar one across the country. Here the National Liberals had done extremely well out of the Alliance – gaining a marginal seat from Labour and returning the young and energetic Margaret Roberts, since married to Denis Thatcher. Thorneycroft’s long sought after independence from the Alliance resulted in a predictable collapse in the party’s parliamentary representation across the board as Thatcher joined dozens of other National Liberal MPs in not only facing defeat but humiliation in 1958. With Thatcher finishing behind the Communist candidate in fourth, and only just retaining her deposit, the Conservatives snapped up one of many Right leaning seats previously held by their erstwhile allies.
The shift in the composition of Parliament was quite incredible. With former heavy weights like the Labour and National Liberal Party reduced to tiny cabals the most prominent change in the shade of the assembly was, of course, the Yellow Dawn that ushered in a Liberal majority. With Jo Grimond’s Liberals riding to an incredible victory Britain had its first majority government since the Second World War, its first Liberal Prime Minister since 1922, its first Scottish Prime Minister since 1935 and the first exclusively Liberal government since the formation of the National Government in the First World War. The political landscape of the country had appeared to have changed almost beyond recognition.
As Jo Grimond prepared to assume office the strong parliamentary majority his party had won disguised inherent weaknesses in British Liberalism. The rapid growth of the Liberal Party through the 1950s, and especially after Grimond’s ascension to the leadership in 1955, had produced a broad, unwieldy and ideologically in cohesive party. With the party there were Social Liberals, Social Democrats, Libertarian Socialists, Welsh and Scottish Nationalists of various shades, English Regionalists, Trade Unionists, Classical Liberals, Anti-Imperialists, Pro-Imperialists, University Professors, Small Shop-owners, Steel Miners, every social class and every shade of broadly progressive opinion had coalesced within this single political organisation. Perhaps more concerning from Grimond’s perspective, it had become impossible for the party to continue to rely merely on dues and donations from members to function – instead the Liberals had relied heavily on ‘donations’ made by trade unions during its election campaign even as it resisted formal affiliation.
Left to Right: Clement Davies – Foreign Secretary, James Callaghan – Chancellor of the Exchequer, Emlyn Hooson – Home Secretary
Grimond took great care to attempt to appease the various factions within his party in his appointment of leading cabinet ministers. The last Liberal MP of the vintage of 1929, 74 year old closet alcoholic Clement Davies was granted the prestigious Foreign Office. Davies had sided with the National Liberals during the 1930s before returning to the Liberal Party during the Second World War, his appointment was a clear concession to the conservative wing of the party that was uncomfortable with the rising influence of the Left within the party. The appointment of James Callaghan as Chancellor was the most public sign of this rising strength as the ex-Labour shadow cabinet minister secured the second most important job in the government. Finally, and perhaps most controversially, Grimond appointed his protégé Emlyn Hooson to the office of Home Secretary. Hooson was just four years old when Davies had first entered parliament and had entered politics just at the moment when the Liberal Party was emerging as a national force. Elected to lead the Young Liberals in 1954 at just 19 he went on to become the leader of the Liberal Party in Wales in 1956 as Grimond’s patronage saw him rise through the ranks of the party at an unprecedented rate. His appointment was a bold gesture designed to affirm the youthful vigour and ingenuity of the new government. Finally, Archibald Sinclair, living out the last of his days in semi-retirement in the Lords, was invited to take on the position of Deputy Prime Minister in a largely ceremonial gesture of respect to the former party leader.
Elsewhere, continued electoral disaster would have a major impact on the Labour Party. Whilst the all authoritarian leadership of Peter Thorneycroft shielded him from criticism for the terrible losses suffered by the National Liberals – who lost more seats and more votes than any other party – Wilson was not to be so lucky. His failure to improve Labour’s fortunes coupled with the increased prestige of Hugh Gaitskell after his innovative Lib-Labery in Leeds encouraged a desire for change within the party. However, few, if any, remaining in the party could stomach the idea of a Gaitskellite leadership – the majority of Social Democrats having already left the party long before the election. Gaitskell and Wilson therefore agreed to enter into a dual leadership over the party as Labour once again looked to pick up the pieces from electoral defeat and make a show of unity as they fought to restore themselves to Attlee era influence.
Last edited:
Here I celebrated that Forresti voted for Labour, and you come seconds before the polls are closed. Just, how could you?
At least the foreign secretary is a Conservative-Liberal. Hopefully he will defend our allies and stop communism in Asia and Australia.
Last edited:
Dark days ahead indeed. The Yellow Sun is rising friends, we must stop this cancer before its rays burn all of us..
This one is to dream of the Union of Britain, which just may be a pipe-dream now...
[video=youtube;b-qxZ5T-KGw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-qxZ5T-KGw[/video]
This one's for you Snowden...
This one is to dream of the Union of Britain, which just may be a pipe-dream now...
[video=youtube;b-qxZ5T-KGw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-qxZ5T-KGw[/video]
This one's for you Snowden...
Now that we have Liberal majority, time for a voting reform?
Surely they cannot go against their campaign promises.
If not, the fringe parties are bound to be eternal left out unless some alliance or mergers occur.
Surely they cannot go against their campaign promises.
If not, the fringe parties are bound to be eternal left out unless some alliance or mergers occur.
I think that was the idea, yes. Fringe parties will die out in Westminster, that's natural.
Well then the Liberals would loose their majority haha,so it would be suicide for them. You know it is easier to promise things when you're in opposition than fullfill them.
Hopefully it becomes an internal battle in the party between the different factions. Which may result in that they don't agree on different policies in parliament, i.e that the Liberal MP's vote differently. The Liberal party isn't exaxtly unitary, which will make it difficult to let them agree on policies. ((Just look at the two parties in USA dor starters.))
- Status