UK general election results in full: Labour wins in landslide
www.theguardian.com
With nearly all of the 650 seats declared, Keir Starmer has become the new prime minister with a large Labour majority. Follow the final results and find out how your constituency voted

The Labour party has won over 400 seats (out of 650) in the 2024 UK General Elections, and Keir Starmer is expected to replace Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister. The Conservatives, in power for the last fourteen years, have suffered a rout, losing over two-thirds of their seats. The SNP has collapsed in Scotland, mostly to Labour, and the Liberal Democrats have gained over sixty seats.

    • r00ty@kbin.life
      41·
      6 months ago

      I think it’s important to note that the primary reason the conservative party lost many of their seats is because their vote was split between them, and an even more right wing party led by Nigel Farage. It wasn’t because of a huge shift to the left (or at least the centre left position the labour party occupy right now).

      In my constituency for example, if you put the conservative + reform votes together, they would have beaten the nearest competitor by a country mile.

      • jimmy90@lemmy.world
        14·
        6 months ago

        i think the primary reason was that the tories were a tragic, worthless mess and the reform racists were there to pick up the protest vote and the lib dems, the others. the low turn out were the tories that couldn’t even be bothered.

        i see the republicans in a very similar situation

        • r00ty@kbin.life
          12·
          6 months ago

          That’s what I originally thought would be the case. But, just statistically (looking at voter share here):

          2019: Cons: 43.6% Lab: 32.1% LD: 11.6% SNP: 3.9%
          2024: Lab: 33.7% Cons: 23.7% Reform: 14.3% LD: 12.2% (Weirdly, wikipedia has yet to include reform in their share ranking had to use BBC)

          Labour picked up less than 2% more of the vote share. Reform took the vast majority of the tory lead away.

          Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad the tories are out. But, it’s mostly because reform split the vote and Labour were second place in most constituencies. This is important to bear in mind while the conservatives sort themselves out to decide how they deal with not being right wing enough…

          • jimmy90@lemmy.world
            4·
            6 months ago

            just because numbers didn’t change much doesn’t mean voters didn’t

            i think a lot of labour voters in struggling communities went to reform which means labour got voters from elsewhere to keep up their percentage.

            who know what the reform voters will do when they realise their vote was wasted in 5 years. also a lot of tactical voting will unwind.

          • frazorth@feddit.uk
            4·
            6 months ago

            By that statement though, the LibDems split the left vote and so if your going to compare, you’ll need to add the liberal vote to the Labour as that’s where they would go if LibDems disappeared.

            • r00ty@kbin.life
              3·
              6 months ago

              You could be right, but I am not so sure.

              In terms of percentage, the lib dems made a smaller gain than labour. I’d also suggest that while maybe some of those votes came from wavering labour voters, I expect that at least a similar number would have also come from the tories. I don’t think the lib dems split the vote any more than they normally do.

              Reform, while not new, last time round they did not compete against the tories. This time, they did and the result is clear.

              • frazorth@feddit.uk
                2·
                6 months ago

                LibDems made smaller gains

                I’m not talking about gains, LibDems already split the vote, Reform is just now doing the same to the Tories.

                LibDems are not the same as the Tories. However I would concede that if the LibDems folded, the membership could easily move to Green.

            • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.worksOP
              1·
              6 months ago

              as that’s where they would go if LibDems disappeared.

              Many of them, yes. But there’s also a significant share who’ll vote Lib Dem or Tory, but not Labour.

            • emergencyfood@sh.itjust.worksOP
              1·
              6 months ago

              as that’s where they would go if LibDems disappeared.

              Many of them, yes. But there’s also a significant share who’ll vote Lib Dem or Tory, but not Labour.

              • frazorth@feddit.uk
                1·
                6 months ago

                significant share who’ll vote Lib Dem or Tory, but not Labour

                Citation required for that.

                The Liberal Party, which is now the modern LibDems, was founded as opposition to the Tories. Their values are completely different, which is why most LibDem voters were concerned about the coalition.

                Labour was founded to represent workers rights, the Greens for the planets rights, and the LibDems for social rights.

                The Tories are toxic for all three of those.

                  • frazorth@feddit.uk
                    1·
                    6 months ago

                    As per the initial comment, those that didn’t vote Tory mostly moved to Reform not to LibDem.

                    Because LibDem wouldn’t make sense, as a pro-trans, pro-EU, pro-increase tax to pay for public services party they don’t offer anything that Tories want.

                    That was a wishful thinking comment that some Tories might want to not move far-right, those that find the Tories unpalatable due to their shitty views have already moved.

                    I would suggest that your more likely to find folks who voted LibDem to move to Green now that they’ve rebranded themselves to something other than crusty hippies. I know my mother moved from voting LibDem to Green.

      • then_three_more@lemmy.world
        8·
        6 months ago

        I think it’s important to note that the primary reason the conservative party has had many of their seats in the past is because the left/socially progressive vote was split between labour, lib Dems and the greens.

      • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
        1·
        6 months ago

        Which would make the best chance to keep Trump out would be a third candidate that was a “moderate” republican. Somebody that took the more centrist base away from him.

    • atro_city@fedia.io
      15·
      6 months ago

      The US is going to have Trump. Biden is too senile to be president again and people know it. That last debate probably demotivated many people to even go vote and they won’t be voting for alternative candidates.

      Maybe that’ll teach people to vote for independents and the DNC to stop propping up geriatrics.

      • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
        25·
        6 months ago

        Have you heard Trump?

        “Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is so powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? — but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it’s four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us, this is horrible.”

      • tiredofsametab@kbin.run
        5·
        6 months ago

        Still voting against trump, even if the alternative is a baked potato with googly eyes glued on it; trump is too dangerous, particularly with the recent Supreme Court rulings.