Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

BuzzJack Music Forum _ News and Politics _ By-elections 2015 - 2020

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 22 2015, 12:04 PM

The first by-election of the 2015-20 parliament is set to be in Oldham West following the death of Labour MP Michael Meacher. He had a majority of over 14,500 in May with UKIP second. The Tories were third and the Lib Dems lost their deposit. Meacher was one of the 22 MPs who nominated Jeremy Corbyn for the leadership and actually voted for him.

Labour may choose to go for a quick by-election in early- to mid-December, or they may wait until the new year.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Oct 22 2015, 12:38 PM

Thank god it's not a marginal. I don't have the energy.

Posted by: Qassändra Oct 22 2015, 07:38 PM

I'm willing for a narrow win over UKIP.

Posted by: Qassändra Oct 22 2015, 07:39 PM

Also that's Oldham West and ROYTON thank you

Posted by: steve201 Oct 25 2015, 11:30 AM

Are you gonna campaign for a Corbyn led Labour Party then Qass?

Posted by: Doctor Death Oct 25 2015, 11:37 AM

Michael Meacher once described socialism as the redistribution of wealth and power to give all people greater opportunity and control over their own lives. : )

Labour should hold quite easily, however nearby Heywood and Middleton was VERY close and that was when the UKIP machine was split between them and Clacton-on-Sea so should probably not be underestimated.

Posted by: Qassändra Oct 25 2015, 11:47 AM

QUOTE(Doctor Death @ Oct 25 2015, 12:37 PM) *
Michael Meacher once described socialism as the redistribution of wealth and power to give all people greater opportunity and control over their own lives. : )


As did Liam Byrne - it's certainly not a controversial proscription in the Labour Party, just most of us tend to disagree on how to get there!

Posted by: Qassändra Oct 25 2015, 11:48 AM

QUOTE(steve201 @ Oct 25 2015, 12:30 PM) *
Are you gonna campaign for a Corbyn led Labour Party then Qass?

I'm going to campaign for my local candidates and then decide come 2020 if I can hand on heart say Labour wouldn't be a disaster of a government.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Oct 25 2015, 12:20 PM

QUOTE(Doctor Death @ Oct 25 2015, 11:37 AM) *
Michael Meacher once described socialism as the redistribution of wealth and power to give all people greater opportunity and control over their own lives. : )

Labour should hold quite easily, however nearby Heywood and Middleton was VERY close and that was when the UKIP machine was split between them and Clacton-on-Sea so should probably not be underestimated.

The seat is a slightly different makeup, with a far smaller non-Labour vote to eat into. They'll be an easy second, but it should be more like Rotherham than Heywood.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 30 2015, 12:39 AM

The Oldham West and Royton by-election will be on 3 December.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Oct 30 2015, 11:09 AM

Labour selection looks likely to be Jim McMahon (leader of Oldham Council), who was expected to be a major contender to be our candidate for Mayor in 2017.

Kate Godfrey who ran in Stafford in the GE has also thrown her hat into the ring. And then got all sorts of abuse for it.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 30 2015, 03:47 PM

Now that the date is fixed, we can mention the fact that, by a strange coincidence, the first by-election of the last parliament was in the neighbouring constituency of Oldham East and Saddleworth.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Oct 30 2015, 04:30 PM

If that pattern continues, my constituency will have a by-election in three years. Probably won't be very interesting.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 30 2015, 04:37 PM

If the pattern continues, I'll be long dead before it gets anywhere near me laugh.gif

Posted by: Brett-Butler Oct 30 2015, 06:57 PM

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Oct 30 2015, 12:09 PM) *
Labour selection looks likely to be Jim McMahon (leader of Oldham Council), who was expected to be a major contender to be our candidate for Mayor in 2017.

Kate Godfrey who ran in Stafford in the GE has also thrown her hat into the ring. And then got all sorts of abuse for it.


That's a shame. I had half hoped that Corbyn would try to put Billy Bragg up for it.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Nov 2 2015, 06:51 PM

Lib Dems have got the ball rolling by selecting Jane Brophy as their candidate for the by-election. She's failed twice to become the MP for the nearby Altrincham and Sale West constituency (2nd in 2010, 3rd in 2015), and the Lib Dem candidate lost his deposit in this constituency this year, so don't expect her to be going to Westminster any time soon.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Nov 2 2015, 08:46 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Nov 2 2015, 06:51 PM) *
Lib Dems have got the ball rolling by selecting Jane Brophy as their candidate for the by-election. She's failed twice to become the MP for the nearby Altrincham and Sale West constituency (2nd in 2010, 3rd in 2015), and the Lib Dem candidate lost his deposit in this constituency this year, so don't expect her to be going to Westminster any time soon.

I think the limit of her ambition will be to get the percentage back into double figures. As the party are unlikely to spend much on the campaign, even that could prove elusive.

For comparison, the Lib Dem vote in the constituency has never been higher than around 20%, so it's been a no-hoper for a long time.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Nov 2 2015, 10:43 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Nov 2 2015, 06:51 PM) *
Lib Dems have got the ball rolling by selecting Jane Brophy as their candidate for the by-election. She's failed twice to become the MP for the nearby Altrincham and Sale West constituency (2nd in 2010, 3rd in 2015), and the Lib Dem candidate lost his deposit in this constituency this year, so don't expect her to be going to Westminster any time soon.

Nearby is stretching it a little!

She's fucking awful though. My first encounter with the notorious Lib Dem bar charts was in 2010 when she used the local election voting percentages on her leaflet showing them coming second and was obviously pretending it was for the last GE.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Nov 2 2015, 10:51 PM

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Nov 2 2015, 10:43 PM) *
Nearby is stretching it a little!

She's fucking awful though. My first encounter with the notorious Lib Dem bar charts was in 2010 when she used the local election voting percentages on her leaflet showing them coming second and was obviously pretending it was for the last GE.

Those bar charts have been going for a great deal longer than that laugh.gif When used properly, they are a perfectly legitimate - and sensible - tactic. Sadly, all parties are now guilty of misusing them at times.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Dec 4 2015, 12:08 AM

Reports suggest that Labour have won comfortably. There are some suggestions that their majority will have been boosted massively by postal votes, i.e. votes cast before this week's vote on Syria. If the Tories tried to time the Syria vote to cause maximum embarrassment in Oldham, they failed. Earlier, UKIP were claiming that they beat Labour on votes cast at the polling stations. That now looks unlikely.

One report gives Labour a likely majority (in percentage terms) roughly the same as in May. Obviously, the number will be down as the turnout was a shade over 40% compared with just under 60% in May.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 4 2015, 12:18 AM

*.*

Posted by: Suedehead2 Dec 4 2015, 12:21 AM

Some sources are now putting the Labour vote close to, or even higher than, their 1997 vote. Even if people have switched to Labour to make sure UKIP don't win, that will be a very good result.

Posted by: Christmaseve201 Dec 4 2015, 12:25 AM

Great signs so far from Oldham biggrin.gif

Posted by: Soy Adrián Dec 4 2015, 07:10 AM

Well consider me surprised.

Fantastic result, turnout was unexpectedly solid as well.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Dec 4 2015, 10:39 AM

Great result.

Farage was throwing his toys out the pram tweeting about how the postal vote was fixed last night, in one of his usual misguided rants with slightly racist undertones.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Dec 4 2015, 11:53 AM

My summary of the four main parties

Labour - first, a relief to hold it. Second, a higher share of the vote than in 1997 makes it a far better result than they would have expected.

UKIP - poor. They talked their challenge up, but came nowhere near winning it. If, after the Labour leadership election, each party had been able to choose where the first by-election would be, only UKIP would even have considered this one, so their performance is pretty awful. It suggests that there are far too many people who despise them for them to make significant progress.

Tories - poor. They put very little effort into the seat and lost half of their share of the vote as a result.

Lib Dems - compared with any result in the seat before May, terrible. Compared with May, disappointing at best. As with a lot of local by-elections (not quite all), where the party had little support even before the coalition, there is no real sign of improvement.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 4 2015, 12:30 PM

1. Grounds for optimism, hooray!

2. Pollsters still crap

3. Farage just outs himself as apparently racist with every opportunistic begrudging soundbite. Perhaps the high turnout and support for labour amongst former or current immigrant communities lies with his alienating everyone but his fellow party members. Just a suggestion of course that's how they are perceived. I'm sure they are not remotely racist in any way...

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 4 2015, 12:34 PM

QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Dec 4 2015, 01:30 PM) *
2. Pollsters still crap

Well not really, as Oldham was never polled.

Posted by: Christmaseve201 Dec 4 2015, 12:39 PM

Perhaps the big Asian communities helped labour here with the whole Syrian vote being in the news these past 2 weeks.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 4 2015, 11:00 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 4 2015, 12:34 PM) *
Well not really, as Oldham was never polled.


change it to media hype insisting UKIP could do it and it would be neck n neck... ohmy.gif

maybe that helped concentrate Labour voters minds laugh.gif

Posted by: Christmaseve201 Dec 6 2015, 10:36 PM

Maybe the media should stop being so anti-Corbyn?!

Posted by: Soy Adrián Dec 6 2015, 10:45 PM

The Independent and the Guardian need to stop getting so excited at every potential "crisis" story. Hopefully the novelty will wear off soon because this government needs better scrutiny and the BBC aren't able to do it while the spectre of being butchered hangs over them.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 6 2015, 11:27 PM

QUOTE(Christmaseve201 @ Dec 6 2015, 11:36 PM) *
Maybe the media should stop being so anti-Corbyn?!

You'll note that pretty much every leader ever has received similar levels of scrutiny. That Corbyn is fucking up more in terms of elementary party management et al isn't so much a sign that he's receiving more scrutiny as a sign that he's less capable of dealing with it.

That said, for the past month the big strategic failures have had Seumas Milne written all over them, so it's difficult to complain given they're all the exact kind of thing to be expected to get coverage when you appoint Seumas Milne as your Head of Comms and Strategy.

Posted by: FrostytheBeaver Dec 7 2015, 09:02 PM

The Establishment hate Corbyn and have attacked him over wearing or not wearing a tie, of not doing a theatrical bow deep enough for the journoa, for not wanting war like just like the rest of the population etc..

I don't trust the right wing supporting Establishment media. It seems that Corbyn is capturing the attention of the public and the media,in its sour attempts to deligitimise him, will give us no signs of this, making everyone, well not me, surprised when Labour smashes by-elections in spite of what the media wants people to believe. If these vote levels hold, unelectable Corbyn could be coming to repeat 1997.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Dec 7 2015, 11:01 PM

The excellent result in Oldham West and Royton was almost entirely down to the strong local candidate as opposed to Corbyn, though given the rubbish spouted in the MSM about how this by-election was a 'referendum on Corbyn' it is tempting to throw it back at them as proving the electorate have a strong belief in Corbyn as a competent leader (even though this would be sticking your head in the sand and ignoring his approval ratings are at worryingly low levels).

Posted by: FrostytheBeaver Dec 7 2015, 11:05 PM

His approval levels are inly so low as the Establishment, including the army, keep throwing mud over every little thing as they are threatened by what he stands for.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 7 2015, 11:07 PM

QUOTE(FrostytheBeaver @ Dec 7 2015, 10:02 PM) *
If these vote levels hold, unelectable Corbyn could be coming to repeat 1997.

Bank details? I bet you £500 that Corbyn (he of -41 approval rating in three months fame) will not win the next general election.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 7 2015, 11:08 PM

QUOTE(FrostytheBeaver @ Dec 8 2015, 12:05 AM) *
His approval levels are inly so low as the Establishment, including the army, keep throwing mud over every little thing as they are threatened by what he stands for.

And how exactly do you think he's going to win a 1997 style landslide from that position?

Posted by: FrostytheBeaver Dec 7 2015, 11:11 PM

As the press won't report on his popularity until he wins. Like with Daniel Craig, criticising him as James Bond, but when people saw the movies and loved him, they all changed their tune and pretended like they had loved him in the role since day one.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 8 2015, 10:02 PM

QUOTE(FrostytheBeaver @ Dec 8 2015, 12:11 AM) *
As the press won't report on his popularity until he wins. Like with Daniel Craig, criticising him as James Bond, but when people saw the movies and loved him, they all changed their tune and pretended like they had loved him in the role since day one.

Can you make up your mind if Corbyn is popular or not? You're saying his -41 approval ratings are because people are just responding to the media attacking him, but at the same time insisting he's popular enough for a 1997 landslide. The two cannot be true at the same time.

£500 bet?

Posted by: Brian Quinn Dec 10 2015, 03:22 PM

I fully expect UKIP to do very well in the 2016 Council Elections.

Brian

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 10 2015, 03:26 PM

Why?

Posted by: Soy Adrián Dec 10 2015, 04:13 PM

It'll be interesting for UKIP in the sense that 2013 was their breakthrough year so this is the last year they could be expected to make decent gains without becoming any more popular nationally.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 11 2016, 11:03 PM

There's going to be a by-election coming up in the Sheffield, Brightside and Hillsborough constituency following the death of the sitting MP, Labour's Harry Harpham. I'm guessing it'll be another solid by-election win for Labour, given that Labour won more that 50% of the votes in May with a majority of more than 13,000.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Feb 11 2016, 11:20 PM

The timing is potentially slightly awkward. There are already local elections and the PCC election in May, and some returning officers prefer not to have more than two elections at the same time. If they wait until the potential date of the EU referendum (23 June is the current favourite), that would break the convention that a seat should not be vacant for more than three months. Therefore, they may choose to go for a quick by-election in March or April.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Feb 11 2016, 11:28 PM

Will the Conservatives be including ALL their receipts for hotel accommodation in this by-election ?

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 11 2016, 11:41 PM

I doubt they'll bother with anything more than a paper candidate!

Posted by: Virginia's Walls Feb 12 2016, 01:06 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 8 2015, 10:02 PM) *
Can you make up your mind if Corbyn is popular or not? You're saying his -41 approval ratings are because people are just responding to the media attacking him, but at the same time insisting he's popular enough for a 1997 landslide. The two cannot be true at the same time.

£500 bet?


Just like the American media ignored Bernie's popularity to their peril.

We are heading for a new opposite Thatcher Reagen politics.

The right wing media's attacks on him will become more and more impotent the strongee his electoral position looks thanks yo by election and council wins till they have no choice but to folloq public opinion instead of trying to sway it.

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 12 2016, 09:08 AM

Don't hold your breath.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Feb 12 2016, 03:28 PM

I'll be going over to campaign with old friends in Hillsborough. Not overly familiar with the seat but I'll be surprised if UKIP do better than in Oldham West.

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 13 2016, 03:14 PM

For a little bit of Labour Party Kremlinology, Huw Irranca-Davies - who's the MP for Ogmore stepping down to run for the Welsh Assembly/First Minister - has been succeeded as Labour's candidate for the by-election by another Cooperite, although one who presumably wouldn't do as Huw did and nominate Corbyn.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Apr 1 2016, 07:50 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Feb 13 2016, 04:14 PM) *
For a little bit of Labour Party Kremlinology, Huw Irranca-Davies - who's the MP for Ogmore stepping down to run for the Welsh Assembly/First Minister - has been succeeded as Labour's candidate for the by-election by another Cooperite, although one who presumably wouldn't do as Huw did and nominate Corbyn.

Irranca-Davies formally resigned his Commons seat last week. The by-election will be on 5 May. I Labour lose it, it will be a massive surprise. The Tories came a very distant second last time, just ahead of UKIP. The Lib Dems will probably not be looking to do anything more ambitious than hold their deposit.

Posted by: Virginia's Walls Apr 1 2016, 08:42 PM

Labour will SMASH it with the grass roots movement, mark my words.

Quassandra should go down to watch it to see it in action first hand!

Lib Dems will lose their deposit and Tories will be pushed down into historic lows.

You beard it here first.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Apr 1 2016, 09:03 PM

Well given that both constituencies are currently held by Labour with over 50% of the vote, it's hardly unlikely they're going to suddenly lose 30%+ of their vote in a by-election.

If anyone tries to use these two by-elections as a demonstration of the strengths of Corbyn, it will falter. Now if there was a by-election in a constituency where Labour could realistically lose their seat, like Halifax for example, and they held the seat, then that would be a different matter altogether.

Posted by: Qassändra Apr 1 2016, 10:57 PM

QUOTE(Virginia @ Apr 1 2016, 09:42 PM) *
Labour will SMASH it with the grass roots movement, mark my words.

Quassandra should go down to watch it to see it in action first hand!

Ohohoho, you have no idea the things I've seen.

Posted by: Suedehead2 May 6 2016, 01:26 AM

Labour have, as expected, won the Sheffield Brightside by-election very comfortably. UKIP came second with the Lib Dems third. The Lib Dems actually managed to hold their deposit!

Posted by: Soy Adrián May 6 2016, 03:16 AM

I have it on good authority that the new Ms. Brightside will be a fantastic MP. Really pleased to see vote share going up.

Posted by: Suedehead2 May 11 2016, 08:41 AM

The Tooting by-election (following Sadiq Khan's election as London mayor) will be held on June 16, one week before the referendum. Khan won by a little under 3,000 with the Tories second. The Greens, Lib Dems and UKIP all lost their deposit. The UKIP candidate had the distinctly un-British name of Przemek Skwirczynski.

Posted by: Brett-Butler May 11 2016, 07:28 PM

This'll be an interesting by-election in that it'll be the first one of this parliament where another party actually as a fighting chance of winning the seat, a 3,000/6% swing isn't entirely unfeasible. Labour will still more than likely hold on to it, especially if the "Khan lift" holds on to next month.

Posted by: Steve201 May 11 2016, 08:12 PM

It's mainly labour vs Tories which will help Labour I think. Always remember Tooting was the seat Khan won in 2010 which signified that they couldn't win a majority and labour had held up better than expected!

Posted by: Qassändra May 12 2016, 04:43 PM

I think Labour should win, but I'm a bit worried Galloway might take enough votes to throw it to the Tories.

Posted by: Virginia's Walls May 12 2016, 05:07 PM

That awful career politician idiot needs to fook off!

Posted by: Brett-Butler Jun 9 2016, 12:30 PM

With all the talk about the EU referendum, one election that seems to have gone under the radar is the upcoming Tooting by-election to fill the seat vacated by London mayor Sadiq Khan. It's the first real test for Labour in this parliament, as the Conservatives were only 3,000 votes away from victory in the last election. The election's next Thursday, and the candidates are:


Note that George Galloway neglected to stand for fear of Labour losing the seat. I'm interested to know what platform Smiley Smillie is running on; perhaps on increased provisions for dental care?

Posted by: Steve201 Jun 9 2016, 11:55 PM

True this is an important one, was so glad in 2010 that Khan held on - as I've said before it was a sign that the Tories hadn't quite convinced the electorate they wanted them to rule and after 13 years out of power.

Hope Labour can hold the seat!

Posted by: Brett-Butler Jun 17 2016, 12:30 PM

Labour won Tooting with a majority of 6,000 over the Conservatives and 56% of the vote. Every other party polled less than 1,000 votes and lost their deposit. Eight candiates polled less than 100, with one candidate polling just 5 votes.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jun 18 2016, 09:26 AM

The Tories, Lib Dems, Greens and UKIP have all announced that they will not be contesting the by-election in Batley and Spen following the murder of Jo Cox MP. If there are no fringe candidates, this will be the first uncontested by-election for many decades, possibly going back to WWII.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jun 18 2016, 09:28 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Jun 17 2016, 01:30 PM) *
Labour won Tooting with a majority of 6,000 over the Conservatives and 56% of the vote. Every other party polled less than 1,000 votes and lost their deposit. Eight candiates polled less than 100, with one candidate polling just 5 votes.

That candidate being your favourite, Smiley Smillie.

Posted by: Silas Jun 18 2016, 10:04 AM

Out of curiosity, what happens in an uncontested by-election? If nobody else runs do they even hold it and does that person automatically become Jane/John Doe MP? or do we throw a couple of mill to organise an election that returns a North Korean style result?

Posted by: Qassändra Jun 18 2016, 10:18 AM

I don't think they hold the ballot, they're just duly elected.

An independent or fringe party will almost certainly run though.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jun 18 2016, 11:02 AM

That's right, there will be no ballot. There a still a few local elections each year which are uncontested.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Jun 19 2016, 09:58 PM

One candidate has stepped forward to challenge Labour at the Batley & Spen by election, a Mr Jack Buckby, who is a member of the far-right group Liberty GB. To give you a flavour of what to expect - he was interviewed last year on a BBC3 documentary about racism in modern Britain, and told the interviewer that she should be kicked out of the country because she isn't white, despite being born here.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jun 19 2016, 10:05 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Jun 19 2016, 10:58 PM) *
One candidate has stepped forward to challenge Labour at the Batley & Spen by election, a Mr Jack Buckby, who is a member of the far-right group Liberty GB. To give you a flavour of what to expect - he was interviewed last year on a BBC3 documentary about racism in modern Britain, and told the interviewer that she should be kicked out of the country because she isn't white, despite being born here.

They have said that they want to restore freedom of speech and repeal the Human Rights Act. That would be the Act that, among other things, helps to protect free speech.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Sep 12 2016, 04:08 PM

David Cameron has resigned as an MP, creating a by-election is his ultra-safe Witney seat. Anything other than a Tory win would be a huge shock.

Posted by: popchartfreak Sep 12 2016, 06:39 PM

QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Sep 12 2016, 05:08 PM) *
David Cameron has resigned as an MP, creating a by-election is his ultra-safe Witney seat. Anything other than a Tory win would be a huge shock.


what a dick. Hasnt even the decency to hang around long enough to see exactly what his mob are doing to us all thanks to his twatty election promises (most broken except the really bad ones).

Posted by: Qassändra Sep 12 2016, 06:41 PM

I still have the feeling being quite so precise with how much each family would lose from Brexit is what did him in.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Sep 12 2016, 07:42 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Sep 12 2016, 07:41 PM) *
I still have the feeling being quite so precise with how much each family would lose from Brexit is what did him in.

The Bank of England have spent £70bn so far on mitigating the effects of the result. That's £1,000 per person already.

Posted by: Silas Sep 13 2016, 12:05 PM

What a coward.

Posted by: Qassändra Sep 13 2016, 12:17 PM

QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Sep 12 2016, 08:42 PM) *
The Bank of England have spent £70bn so far on mitigating the effects of the result. That's £1,000 per person already.

The problem is that regardless of the veracity, by going as exact as £4,300 per family people understandably thought 'how on earth have you come to such a precise figure when we don't know how big the effect could be and what deal we could get?'. I think they should've given a range.

Posted by: Qassändra Sep 13 2016, 12:18 PM

I don't really get the claims of cowardice though. What does he avoid now that he wouldn't have avoided by staying as MP? People are still going to have a go regardless when Brexit hits.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Sep 14 2016, 03:18 PM

Read on Twitter than Jim Davidson (yes, that one) has put his name forward for contention to run for the Conservatives in David Cameron's seat. Couldn't be anything more than a rumour, surely?

Posted by: Doctor Blind Sep 14 2016, 03:21 PM

QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Sep 12 2016, 08:42 PM) *
The Bank of England have spent £70bn so far on mitigating the effects of the result. That's £1,000 per person already.


Needlessly. We haven't even LEFT the EU yet!

Cameron isn't a coward, but he just couldn't be arsed to drag himself in to the lobby and prop up the piss weak majority he achieved for the Conservatives.

Posted by: popchartfreak Sep 14 2016, 07:07 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Sep 14 2016, 04:18 PM) *
Read on Twitter than Jim Davidson (yes, that one) has put his name forward for contention to run for the Conservatives in David Cameron's seat. Couldn't be anything more than a rumour, surely?


I'm shocked! Felt sure it would be UKIP if any....

Posted by: Suedehead2 Sep 15 2016, 09:16 AM

The by-elections in Batley & Spen (Jo Cox) and Witney (Cameron) will be on 20 October.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Sep 23 2016, 09:37 AM

The Tories have passed on the opportunity to provide some variety in the parliamentary party by selecting a local barrister to contest Witney. For what it's worth, Labour and Lib Dems have each selected a local councillor. The Green candidate is Larry Sanders, brother of Bernie.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Sep 23 2016, 06:56 PM

Rob Courts sure is an apt name for a barrister.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Sep 23 2016, 09:56 PM

Tracy Brabin, who played Tricia Armstrong in Coronation Street in the 90s, has been confirmed as Labour's candidate for the Bartley & Spen by-election, which means that she will almost definitely be elected as MP on 21st October, given that the major parties aren't running out of respect, and only a handful of minor parties on the right to far-right have put forward a candidate for the constituency.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Sep 27 2016, 09:54 PM

Full list of candidates taking part in Batley & Spen By-election -

Mainly, Labour & a bunch of right-to-far-right loons. I'm assuming that "Corbyn Anti" changed his (or her?) name by deed poll for the purposes of this election.

Prediction: Labour will win with 85% of the vote.

Meanwhile, the candidates for the Witney by-election, called due to the resignation of some man, are as follows - The UKIP candidate is not the cricket umpire. Unfortunately, ED's candidate is the Winston McKenzie of Celebrity Big Brother 'fame'. Lord Toby Jug of the Eccentric Party was previous expelled from the Monster Raving Loony Party, who are also running here, which means that they run the risk of splitting the "self aware loony" vote.

Prediction - Rob Courts to win with 55% of the vote, giving the Tories their first by-election win of this parliament.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Oct 21 2016, 09:30 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Sep 27 2016, 10:54 PM) *
Prediction: Labour will win with 85% of the vote.


Ooh, was agonizingly close with this one. Labour won the seat in Batley & Spen with 85.8% of the vote, with all other candidates losing their deposits. The English Democrats (which has gradually shifted to the far-right over the past few years after an influx of ex-BNP members swelled its ranks), had its best placing in a general election by coming 2nd, although it wasn't their best result by %s - their best result to date by that metric was in the 2009 Haltemprice and Howden election, which itself was a by-election in which many of the major parties declined to stand.


As for the Witney By-election, the Conservatives retained David Cameron's old seat, albeit with a reduced majority. Interestingly, 2nd place in this by-election were the Liberal Democrats, increasing their share by 23% with a whopping 30% of the vote, which they will hope will lead to a resurgence of support for them. The Great British public do indeed have short memories. Elsewhere, the Ukip vote crashed, dropping off more than 1/2 of 2015's figures and losing their deposit, and ex-CBB "star" Winston McKenzie received a grand total of 52 votes.

Posted by: Oliver Oct 21 2016, 09:43 PM

G'won Lib Dems! cheer.gif

Posted by: popchartfreak Oct 22 2016, 06:53 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Oct 21 2016, 10:30 PM) *
As for the Witney By-election, the Conservatives retained David Cameron's old seat, albeit with a reduced majority. Interestingly, 2nd place in this by-election were the Liberal Democrats, increasing their share by 23% with a whopping 30% of the vote, which they will hope will lead to a resurgence of support for them. The Great British public do indeed have short memories.


Or, more likely, the public have realised that given the alternatives the Lib Dems were never actually that bad (just stupidly naive faced with backstabbing lying rich tosspots to deal with) and are preferable to a party bent on self-destruction or another one bent on nation-destruction.

Labour: presided over the Banking Crisis, and stoked the fires of the Housing Crisis, which in combination with an unregulated sector led to disaster along with illegal foreign wars.

Tory: supported all of the above policies, started the mega-banking which led to the above, then had no solutions to the above other than more of the same, and ended up failing to understand the scale of the subsequent revolution in politics such that they took us out of the EU, which will be disastrous.

LibDems: supported Tory student fee increases introduced by Labour. What complete bast*rds. Let's just ignore the LibDem policies the Tories took credit for that actually assisted the poor, to boot.

All a question of relative scale.


Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 22 2016, 07:49 PM

The Lib Dems put a lot of money and effort into the Witney campaign. They ran a very pro-EU campaign in a constituency that voted Remain and against a Tory who voted Leave. They will be pleased with the result. Obviously they did a lot better than in 2015, but they also did a good deal better than in 2010 (30% against 20%). I suspect the tabloids have barely mentioned it (if they even reported it at all), but it (combined with over 20 gains in local by-elections since May) will have done a lot to boost party morale.

The Tories have pointed out that their vote share is roughly the same as it was when Cameron was first elected. That is true, but he was first elected in 2001. In that election they won one more seat than they got in 1997, their worst performance since WWII. So, if they are happy to have matched what they got in one of their worst ever election results, I'm very pleased for them.

The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that Cameron's statement at the beginning of the summer that he would stay on as an MP and intended to fight the next election was a deliberate lie (yes, another one). If he had stood down in July, it is fairly likely that the by-election would still have been held this week. That would have given the Lib Dems a lot longer to build up momentum. They wouldn't necessarily have won, but they could have made the Tories very nervous.

The result will make the Tories even more worried about the consequences of the decision on Heathrow (if they ever make one). Zac Goldsmith has consistently said that he would resign as MP for Richmond and fight a by-election in a seat held by the Lib Dems up to 2010 if the government gives the go-ahead for a new runway. At the start of the year, his personal vote may have been enough to keep the seat, but his disgraceful London Mayoral campaign may well have damaged his reputation. A combination of that and a boost in Lib Dem confidence will mean the Tories will be fearful of losing the seat.

Posted by: Qassändra Oct 23 2016, 03:10 PM

I don't think Cameron's resignation timing was based at all on a fear of how the Lib Dems would do. For a start, he said he would stay on as MP when he announced he would step down as Prime Minister - to then resign as MP just two weeks later would've been a little transparent. I think it's more likely he did it for a few weeks and it felt a bit too much like low level drudgery for his liking.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Oct 25 2016, 07:49 PM

Son of billionaire Sir James Goldsmith, and general all-round twat-weasel Zac Goldsmith has resigned his seat in Richmond Park forcing a by-election to be held in the near future.

Here he is in 2010 being his moronic self :


Posted by: Brett-Butler Oct 25 2016, 08:06 PM

The last time an MP triggered a by-election to stand again against a single issue was David Davis in 2008 (as erroneously mentioned above), the other major parties refused to stand, gifting him the win. I can't see them being as magnanimous this time around though, although one imagines that he'll still hold on to his seat.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 25 2016, 08:22 PM

Goldsmith will be standing as an independent. Assuming there is also an official Tory candidate, it could be interesting. Goldsmith had a huge majority last year but, apart from that election, it has been a marginal for decades. If the Lib Dems have got their act together, they may well have been out delivering leaflets this evening.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Oct 25 2016, 08:41 PM

Ah, I didn't realise that Goldsmith was running as an indie. Although having read the BBC report about his resignation, it seems as if the Tories aren't going to put up a candidate against him, so it looks like the Lib Dems will be the nearest competition, as you say.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Oct 25 2016, 08:43 PM

You'd hope that the Liberal Democrats would take this seat, especially after the way Goldsmith acted in the recent vitriolic London mayoral campaign.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 25 2016, 09:06 PM

QUOTE(Doctor Blind @ Oct 25 2016, 09:43 PM) *
You'd hope that the Liberal Democrats would take this seat, especially after the way Goldsmith acted in the recent vitriolic London mayoral campaign.

As I said after the Witney by-election, that may prove to be his downfall. Maybe the Lib Dems should select a Muslim woman as their candidate.

Posted by: Silas Oct 25 2016, 09:45 PM

I would love to see him lose his seat over this. I heavily doubt he cares one iota about this runway and is just using it as a ploy to ensure reelection in 2020

Posted by: Taylor Jago Oct 26 2016, 08:02 AM

Since he's running as an independent, either he loses his seat or the Tories are down to 330 seats in Parliament. Or even better, both of those things happen and the Lib Dems better an additionnal seat.

Anyway, apparently some Tory voters in the areas affected by the Heathrow expansion have said they will no longer vote Conservative due to the "no ifs, no buts" promise David Cameron made being broken, so they could flock to the Lib Dems as they're anti-expansion. So regardless of whether the third runway gets built, the decision made yesterday could be the difference being the Tories having a majority and there being another coalition in 2020 (but maybe I'm just being optimistic).

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 26 2016, 06:05 PM

Some Labour backbenchers have suggested that they shouldn't put up a candidate for the Richmond by-election. Others - and I agree with them - have said that that would look too much like a stitch-up. It would be better to field a candidate, but not do much campaigning.

The Lib Dems will repeat the tactic adopted in Witney and run a strongly pro-EU campaign. They agree with Goldsmith on Heathrow, so they can't differentiate themselves from him on that. However, Goldsmith supported a Leave vote whereas over 70% of Richmond voters supported Remain. I would hope they also remind people of Goldsmith's racist mayoral campaign.

It is in the Tories' best interests to get the contest out of the way as soon as possible, so a late November or early December by-election seems likely.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 27 2016, 06:04 PM

UKIP have announced that they will not be fielding a candidate and will be backing Goldsmith. Whether Goldsmith welcomes that backing may become apparent later.

Posted by: Steve201 Oct 27 2016, 10:19 PM

With Goldsmith resigning following the Heathrow decision does anyone else think this could spiral into an early GE next year as the Tories eat each other up? They only have a majority of 11 now.

Posted by: Harve Oct 27 2016, 10:43 PM

So Goldsmith is the UKIP candidate? Clearly no need for UKIP in the UK now that the Tories have adopted their manifesto. Expect a not so subtle BNP-esque demonstration of what it truly means to be far right for UKIP's 2020 campaign.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Oct 28 2016, 07:41 AM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Oct 27 2016, 11:19 PM) *
With Goldsmith resigning following the Heathrow decision does anyone else think this could spiral into an early GE next year as the Tories eat each other up? They only have a majority of 11 now.

It might, but not for that reason.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Oct 28 2016, 09:06 AM

QUOTE(Harve @ Oct 27 2016, 11:43 PM) *
So Goldsmith is the UKIP candidate? Clearly no need for UKIP in the UK now that the Tories have adopted their manifesto. Expect a not so subtle BNP-esque demonstration of what it truly means to be far right for UKIP's 2020 campaign.


No, he is not.

Posted by: Taylor Jago Oct 28 2016, 09:26 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Oct 28 2016, 09:06 AM) *
No, he is not.

It's an easy mistake to make. He looks, sounds and acts like an UKIP candidate.

Posted by: Qassändra Oct 28 2016, 09:28 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Oct 28 2016, 10:06 AM) *
No, he is not.

He's the UKIP-endorsed candidate, so for all intents and purposes...

Posted by: popchartfreak Oct 28 2016, 11:19 AM

so with all the gutless parties backing out totally afraid of giving the locals democratic choices it's left to the Libdems to become the official opposition to a shoo-in candidate.

Cowards.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Oct 30 2016, 08:40 PM

As anticipated, the by-election will be on 1 December. The Lib Dems have select a local woman as their candidate, thereby resisting the temptation to choose one of the bigger names from their list of ex-MPs.

Posted by: Taylor Jago Nov 5 2016, 09:53 AM

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/04/stephen-phillips-resigns-over-undemocratic-brexit-process

Even a Brexiteer Tory can have shame. Anyway, this means a by-election in Sleaford and North Hykeham, although this is a Tory safe seat, so I doubt the Tories will lose a MP should they decide to field a new candidate in the constituency.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Nov 26 2016, 09:40 PM

The odds in the Richmond by-election haven't changed much for over a week. Goldsmith is the odds-on favourite with Sarah Olney (Lib Dem) at 5/2. The Lib Dem strategy of concentrating on the EU (given that the main candidates all agree on Heathrow) looks to be having some success.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Nov 26 2016, 11:26 PM

The last figures I heard were:

IND 46.7
LD 43.3
LAB 9.5

which suggests the Lib Dems could do it! Here's hoping. : )

Posted by: Doctor Blind Dec 1 2016, 10:31 PM

Result of Richmond Park is expected about 0200-0230. Polls have now closed and turnout less than 50% apparently.

Let's hope the cold stopped the elderly from voting for Zac. biggrin.gif

Posted by: Doctor Blind Dec 2 2016, 06:42 AM

Sarah Olney (Liberal Democrats) - 20,510
Zac Goldsmith (Independent) - 18,638

Zac humiliated for the second time in 2016! Haha, brilliant. Sarah Olney swells the Lib Dem contingent in Parliament by 12.5%, they now have 9 MPs. The Tory majority also falls from 12 to 10.


Posted by: Suedehead2 Dec 2 2016, 07:59 AM

And the embarrassment for the Lib Dems of having no female MPs is at an end. I suspect Goldsmith's racist Mayoral campaign weakened his support. The Lib Dems' good performance in Witney helped to boost morale which, in turn, led to last night's result.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 2 2016, 08:08 AM

It looks like the Lib Dem strategy of being the 'protest vote party' a la 2005 + 2010 has paid off - becoming the pro-EU party in the face of the public obviously won them the vote, and if a few more byelections crop up in Remain areas, they could swell their ranks even more.

Posted by: Silas Dec 2 2016, 08:19 AM

Brilliant to see the back of this twat and to see that his little stunt backfired spectacularly

Posted by: richie Dec 2 2016, 08:26 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 2 2016, 08:08 AM) *
It looks like the Lib Dem strategy of being the 'protest vote party' a la 2005 + 2010 has paid off


Can anybody aim to be a 'protest vote party'? The Lib Dems do have a fixed set of policies that haven't dramatically changed, so can't really see them chasing the "protest" vote.

The reason they fell from grace in 2015 was because few of those policies could not be realised when they were a very small part of the government. When they did get something through (cutting the lowest rate of tax etc.) the Tories pretended it was their idea...and then blamed the Lib Dems for being complicit in voting along with them on really shitty decisions (tuition fees etc.)

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 2 2016, 08:08 AM) *
- becoming the pro-EU party in the face of the public obviously won them the vote,


They've always been pro-EU. Maybe their voice is getting stronger somewhere?

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 2 2016, 08:08 AM) *
and if a few more byelections crop up in Remain areas, they could swell their ranks even more.


Here's hoping. The Tories have a very slender majority. Just another 8 by-elections to go...

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 2 2016, 09:00 AM

QUOTE(richie @ Dec 2 2016, 09:26 AM) *
Can anybody aim to be a 'protest vote party'? The Lib Dems do have a fixed set of policies that haven't dramatically changed, so can't really see them chasing the "protest" vote.

The reason they fell from grace in 2015 was because few of those policies could not be realised when they were a very small part of the government. When they did get something through (cutting the lowest rate of tax etc.) the Tories pretended it was their idea...and then blamed the Lib Dems for being complicit in voting along with them on really shitty decisions (tuition fees etc.)


But their success, in my mind, in 2005 & 2010 has been as a result of taking a strong stand on an issue that has provided divisive and making it appear to be the core aim of the party. If you were to ask 'the man on the street', in 2005 you would have said that the Lib Dems were the party of opposition to the Iraq War (and to a lesser extent, to the opposition of ID cards), and in 2010, there were the party opposed to tuition fees - in the latter case, I had friends from home who changed their polling area from NI to the uni towns they were studying in in England/Scotland for the sole reason that the Lib Dens were standing there + had promised to stop the hike in tuition fees. I know that they had many other policies, but in the eye of many people, the party were defined by those key issues.

QUOTE
They've always been pro-EU. Maybe their voice is getting stronger somewhere?



Being pro-EU party didn't matter one jot when a) we were safely in the EU, and b) there was no realistic possibility that we were going to leave. The vote in June changed everything. It seems that politics is realigning between the pro-EU and anti-EU sides, and as the Liberal Democrats are now the biggest Great Britain-wide party that have made staying in the EU their central plank (now that the Conservatives are more or less firmly behind triggering Article 50, and Labour have more or less gone the same way), they are in the biggest position to benefit from the votes of the 48% of Remainers by making it their key policy to "the man on the street". It worked in Richmond, and it'll work in other by-elections in other Remain-majoirity territories.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 2 2016, 09:15 AM

*.*

Posted by: Soy Adrián Dec 2 2016, 09:27 AM

The Croydon Cat Killer will now have a lot more time for killing cats.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 2 2016, 11:36 AM

Danny may be amused to know that I have joined the Lib Dems.

Posted by: richie Dec 2 2016, 11:50 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 2 2016, 09:00 AM) *
But their success, in my mind, in 2005 & 2010 has been as a result of taking a strong stand on an issue that has provided divisive and making it appear to be the core aim of the party. If you were to ask 'the man on the street', in 2005 you would have said that the Lib Dems were the party of opposition to the Iraq War (and to a lesser extent, to the opposition of ID cards), and in 2010, there were the party opposed to tuition fees - in the latter case, I had friends from home who changed their polling area from NI to the uni towns they were studying in in England/Scotland for the sole reason that the Lib Dens were standing there + had promised to stop the hike in tuition fees. I know that they had many other policies, but in the eye of many people, the party were defined by those key issues.


I guess that's a fair point, its people's perceptions rather than party policies and, sadly, people do often vote on a single issue. Also, the Lib Dems get practically no media coverage at all and it's only being strongly opposed to Government bills that gets them column inches.

But I think the belief that a vote for anyone other than the Tories or Labour is a protest vote is wrong. There are several legitimate parties in the UK and none of them can really be tied to one single goal. I include the SNP and Plaid Cymru in that.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 2 2016, 11:57 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 2 2016, 12:36 PM) *
Danny may be amused to know that I have joined the Lib Dems.


Glory hunter. tongue.gif

(I jest, I jest).

Posted by: Suedehead2 Dec 2 2016, 12:08 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 2 2016, 11:36 AM) *
Danny may be amused to know that I have joined the Lib Dems.

biggrin.gif

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 2 2016, 12:45 PM

hooray another Lib Dem on buzzjack and also in the Houses of rich posh twats. cheer.gif

Now that the Libdems have also effectively lost the anti-online argument (we are all now subject to having our online use subject to nosey parkers in dozens of fields of life, for no reason whatsoever, say, slagging off the cold-hearted, hypocritical woman who brought it in) they can focus entirely on what is the single-most important issue for the future of the country and the future of a generation.

Labour are a gutless waste of space, vacuous platitudes and giving this Tory government support when it should be exposing their anti-democratic actions purely because they want to pick up anti-gov feeling votes down the line, not alienate working class Ukippers, and basically wanting out of Europe anyway with dreams of a socialist paradise once they get in power. I mean that in a caring sort of way, just like Saint "sleepin-on-the-job" Jezza does.


Posted by: Soy Adrián Dec 2 2016, 02:09 PM

Does that make me the only Corbyn-sceptic Labourite left? Oh goody.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 2 2016, 03:14 PM

On an unrelated note, when was the last time that Labour lost their deposit in a by-election?

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 2 2016, 03:42 PM

Henley 2008.

Posted by: Taylor Jago Dec 2 2016, 07:27 PM

I'm ecstatic at Goldsmith losing his seat, good riddance to the little shit. His Heathrow stunt backfired!

Posted by: Danny Dec 2 2016, 07:44 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 2 2016, 11:36 AM) *
Danny may be amused to know that I have joined the Lib Dems.


Ha, just as I suggested to you (a bit sarcastically) a while ago. kink.gif

Is it because of Brexit, or Corbyn?

Posted by: Danny Dec 2 2016, 07:52 PM

Well done to the Lib Dems for getting that race-baiting idiot out, but I really doubt this is going to be the start of a trend. Richmond Park has to rank as one of the top "Orange Book" seats in the country: one of the only seats where people are economically-Tory and love low taxes and big businesses and don't care about public services, yet also are diehard social liberals who put staying in the EU as one of their top priorities. Most economic-Tories outside of London actually voted for Brexit or else even if they voted Remain don't feel that strongly about it, whereas most people who DO feel strongly about Europe are often fully-fledged Corbynistas when it comes to economic matters. I don't see that the Lib Dems are very attractive to either group.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 2 2016, 08:36 PM

well that tells the whole population of Richmond then, all nicely lumped together in one selfishly-innuendo'd batch and categorized off. Or maybe they see the looming catastrophe as a bit inconvenient for the whole country, not just themselves.

So where are these fully-fledged Corbynistas EU-loving disciples while Saint Jezza is not merely letting Hard Brexit Tories get him to bend over compliantly, he's letting them shaft him royally, because HE WANTS IT! He wants it HARD. tongue.gif

So why aren't they having a word with their leader over his attitude since the morning of the day after the vote and his "Trigger It Now!" demands following his 6 out of 10 half-hearted defence of it at the last minute? Errr cos they don't care, or else they are just timid star-struck groupies. Has to be one or the other, because they are clearly not making their opinions known (as those "traitors" on the more centrist part of the party have and got banged down for it).


Posted by: Danny Dec 2 2016, 09:01 PM

QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Dec 2 2016, 08:36 PM) *
So why aren't they having a word with their leader over his attitude since the morning of the day after the vote and his "Trigger It Now!" demands following his 6 out of 10 half-hearted defence of it at the last minute? Errr cos they don't care, or else they are just timid star-struck groupies. Has to be one or the other, because they are clearly not making their opinions known (as those "traitors" on the more centrist part of the party have and got banged down for it).


Maybe the average voter in Islington and Hackney is a star-struck Corbyn groupie, but that doesn't change the fact that, IMO, since they like him / his general policy agenda so much, they are off limits to the Lib Dems, no matter how much they might agree with the LDs on Europe.

Posted by: Weiss Schnee Dec 2 2016, 11:00 PM

Very pleased for the Lib Dems. May they continue to fight back in all other by-elections that come along. Given they outperformed in Witney I figured it was only a matter of time until they got something like this in something that was fairly favourable to them and as small as it is, it's a start for the counterbalance to everything that went tits up this year politically, at the least for the airtime power of the LDs.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 3 2016, 03:55 AM

QUOTE(Danny @ Dec 2 2016, 07:44 PM) *
Ha, just as I suggested to you (a bit sarcastically) a while ago. kink.gif

Is it because of Brexit, or Corbyn?

Brexit. And just as much down to the 'moderates' as the left of the party.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 3 2016, 03:56 AM

QUOTE(Danny @ Dec 2 2016, 09:01 PM) *
Maybe the average voter in Islington and Hackney is a star-struck Corbyn groupie, but that doesn't change the fact that, IMO, since they like him / his general policy agenda so much, they are off limits to the Lib Dems, no matter how much they might agree with the LDs on Europe.

I would agree, but I think this does potentially depend on how much he gets shown up on Brexit should an early election on the issue happen. I could genuinely see Labour having a marginal chance of going the way of Scottish Labour if it happened, on vote share (but pretty much certainly not seats). I don't think it's impossible for the Lib Dems to get to the low 20s on the issue and Labour to sink to the low 20s on a mixture of the issue and everything else.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 3 2016, 10:38 PM

So Corbyn has responded (as usual, knee-jerk in panic) after the result suddenly realising "sheeeeet we might get tactically-voting hammered in the general election in some areas by Remoaners" and makes a statement that Labour will be pushing for Remoaner-pleasing concessions in the event of a short 3-line Bill passing through the Commons (having been previously happy to have the Tories make all the decisions on Parliaments behalf).

Unfortunately the Leader Of The Opposition also said if they don't get their way they will still vote it through anyway. Net result: May & co won't listen to a word he says, and he clearly is just making a useless token gesture. The man is a fool.

I don't think Libdems will have much to worry about Labour getting their act together when registered Labour members can't even be arsed to vote for them, preferring either to be anti-Tory or stay at home.

Posted by: Danny Dec 6 2016, 01:46 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 3 2016, 03:56 AM) *
I would agree, but I think this does potentially depend on how much he gets shown up on Brexit should an early election on the issue happen. I could genuinely see Labour having a marginal chance of going the way of Scottish Labour if it happened, on vote share (but pretty much certainly not seats). I don't think it's impossible for the Lib Dems to get to the low 20s on the issue and Labour to sink to the low 20s on a mixture of the issue and everything else.


Colour me sceptical. If this is based on that YouGov poll which said an "anti-Brexit Lib Dems" would beat a "pro-Brexit Labour" then that seems to me a prime example of a leading question. Similar to those Ashcroft polls before the 2015 election which asked people to "think specifically about your own constituency" which showed way too optimistic results for the Lib Dems -- in the event, when a lot of people went into the polling booths, they WEREN'T solely thinking about their own constituencies (they were thinking about what they wanted from the national government too), just as in 2020 people WON'T be thinking only about Brexit and nothing else when they go into the polling booth, as that YouGov question implies.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 6 2016, 01:52 PM

QUOTE(Danny @ Dec 6 2016, 01:46 PM) *
Colour me sceptical. If this is based on that YouGov poll which said an "anti-Brexit Lib Dems" would beat a "pro-EU Labour" then that seems to me a prime example of a leading question.

Nah, not based on that. More just that I think Labour will have an even more incoherent, unbelievable position than normal (they're heading straight for a full-on anti-immigration position which...I don't see Corbyn being a particularly credible carrier for). As pissing off all sides to the extent neither believes the position goes, I think it's got a good chance of making the immigration mugs look like a storm in a teacup.

(Leaving aside the merits of Brexit economically there too, but obviously a. I'm inclined to think it won't go well, and b. the way the party approaches things now I bet it could go so disastrously that there was STARVING IN THE STREETS AND SEVERAL HORSES OF THE APOCALYPSE ROAMING WILD and you'd still have most Labour MPs holding to the line of "but it's important we aren't seen to be overriding the NATIONAL WILL and VERY REAL CONCERNS about immigr-*blender noise*")

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 6 2016, 01:59 PM

(DISCLAIMER: the above post is not actually me predicting starving on the streets before anyone goes there)

Posted by: Danny Dec 6 2016, 02:04 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 6 2016, 01:52 PM) *
Nah, not based on that. More just that I think Labour will have an even more incoherent, unbelievable position than normal (they're heading straight for a full-on anti-immigration position which...I don't see Corbyn being a particularly credible carrier for). As pissing off all sides to the extent neither believes the position goes, I think it's got a good chance of making the immigration mugs look like a storm in a teacup.

(Leaving aside the merits of Brexit economically there too, but obviously a. I'm inclined to think it won't go well, and b. the way the party approaches things now I bet it could go so disastrously that there was STARVING IN THE STREETS AND SEVERAL HORSES OF THE APOCALYPSE ROAMING WILD and you'd still have most Labour MPs holding to the line of "but it's important we aren't seen to be overriding the NATIONAL WILL and VERY REAL CONCERNS about immigr-*blender noise*")


I'm trying (and failing) not to be petty here, but it's really hard not to see that your only problem is that suddenly it's YOUR principles and YOUR career prospects that are suddenly under threat, whereas a couple of years ago, you were happy to throw the working-class and welfare claimants under a bus all for the sake of Labour's supposed "electability". Suddenly the mantra of "there's no point in purity if you can't get elected" has disappeared.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 6 2016, 02:21 PM

As I've said before, I think Brexit is going to completely smash pretty much everyone. Sure, it's not a pretty case to make, but there is an argument that in exchange for the pain for a comparative few you can on balance help the least off overall by, say, committing to a welfare cap with a Labour government. (Not one that works out if people don't really believe you either way, which is why I don't think Labour's going to pull off this immigration position too well.) The sum economic benefit we're going to get for subjecting everyone to a likely pretty severe recession via Brexit is...not immediately obvious. I don't think it's all that much of a moral quandary to choose to die in the ditch of fighting against the majority of the people in the country being made worse off.

I suppose there is an irony in that I've come around to a Corbynite mindset, of sorts - neither Labour nor the Lib Dems are going to win any time soon, so I may as well stick true to my values and do all I can to pressure Labour to not get in the habit of social conservatism. I wouldn't have ordinarily gone for the Lib Dems as the best way of doing that, but the mindset in the party seems to only respond to external pressures at the moment. So be it.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 6 2016, 02:29 PM

The other side of it is that I think the anti-Brexit side will be vindicated. There are a few reasons for that, but the one most likely to not get me told off for talking Britain down (or something) by the likes of PeaceMob is that the deal Theresa is aiming for (pay more than we pay for EU membership to begin with to keep single market access for a few select sectors) is going to go down like a cup of cold sick among a lot of Brexit voters, even besides how the economy's doing by that stage. And it's pretty much the best we could hope for the EU to agree to.

Posted by: Danny Dec 6 2016, 03:27 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 6 2016, 02:21 PM) *
As I've said before, I think Brexit is going to completely smash pretty much everyone. Sure, it's not a pretty case to make, but there is an argument that in exchange for the pain for a comparative few you can on balance help the least off overall by, say, committing to a welfare cap with a Labour government. (Not one that works out if people don't really believe you either way, which is why I don't think Labour's going to pull off this immigration position too well.) The sum economic benefit we're going to get for subjecting everyone to a likely pretty severe recession via Brexit is...not immediately obvious. I don't think it's all that much of a moral quandary to choose to die in the ditch of fighting against the majority of the people in the country being made worse off.


The benefits cap is one thing; that sometimes means big families have to move to a smaller house, which is stupid (and also counterproductive since it causes more disruption to the kids in that family and thus makes them even less likely to settle down at school and eventually become a "normal citizen"), but it's not a catastrophe. It's quite another thing to back sanctions which stop people's benefits altogether and give them NOTHING to live on, and to support slashing back the safety nets and public services that a lot of people on the breadline rely on. By not standing up against all that in 2010-15 and pressuring (in parliamentary votes and by not trying to change public opinion), Labour caused really misery for thousands. Now maybe you see why so many Labour members, myself included, felt so strongly about the ridiculous lengths some Labour MPs were taking the "electability is more important than principles" mantra to (leaving aside that they don't even have a ghost of a clue how to win elections in any case).

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 6 2016, 02:29 PM) *
The other side of it is that I think the anti-Brexit side will be vindicated. There are a few reasons for that, but the one most likely to not get me told off for talking Britain down (or something) by the likes of PeaceMob is that the deal Theresa is aiming for (pay more than we pay for EU membership to begin with to keep single market access for a few select sectors) is going to go down like a cup of cold sick among a lot of Brexit voters, even besides how the economy's doing by that stage. And it's pretty much the best we could hope for the EU to agree to.


Even if this DOES happen, I really don't think that's going to mean people want to rejoin the EU. They will quite possibly blame May and the government for "not doing what we told you" and might well be open to other parties promising to "negotiate a better Brexit deal", but for Jo(e) Public to actually say s/he doesn't want to leave the EU would be for him.her to admit to themselves they got the decision in the referendum wrong -- and, to the state the obvious, very few humanbeings like to willingly admit they were wrong about something. It's not even like Iraq, where people who were vaguely in favour of it in 2003 were later able to convince themselves that they were never really in favour of it, and thus avoid thinking "I got it wrong".

Posted by: Soy Adrián Dec 6 2016, 05:09 PM

QUOTE(Danny @ Dec 6 2016, 03:27 PM) *
Even if this DOES happen, I really don't think that's going to mean people want to rejoin the EU. They will quite possibly blame May and the government for "not doing what we told you" and might well be open to other parties promising to "negotiate a better Brexit deal", but for Jo(e) Public to actually say s/he doesn't want to leave the EU would be for him.her to admit to themselves they got the decision in the referendum wrong -- and, to the state the obvious, very few humanbeings like to willingly admit they were wrong about something. It's not even like Iraq, where people who were vaguely in favour of it in 2003 were later able to convince themselves that they were never really in favour of it, and thus avoid thinking "I got it wrong".


My biggest wonder with all this is how much the average person will actually be aware of it when we inevitably get a bad deal. May will do pretty much anything to make sure people don't feel the effects in obvious ways like prices going up, even if it means tanking the economy in ways they won't notice. It's the same problem that Labour has in pointing out that the Tories have failed to reach every deficit reduction target they've set themselves - the figures themselves are entirely abstract and the message doesn't cut through unless people are prepared to listen.

Basically you can see how the era of spin led pretty much seamlessly to post-truth politics.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 6 2016, 05:29 PM

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Dec 6 2016, 05:09 PM) *
May will do pretty much anything to make sure people don't feel the effects in obvious ways like prices going up, even if it means tanking the economy in ways they won't notice.

...how?! I mean short of literally paying to subsidise imported good, I'm not sure how she gets around that 20% currency drop.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 6 2016, 05:35 PM

QUOTE(Danny @ Dec 6 2016, 03:27 PM) *
Now maybe you see why so many Labour members, myself included, felt so strongly about the ridiculous lengths some Labour MPs were taking the "electability is more important than principles" mantra to

You're right - I do, more than I did then. Although there is a difference in that it at least felt reachable then. Now there's at least some comfort in everything being terrible probably whatever happens.

QUOTE(Danny @ Dec 6 2016, 03:27 PM) *
Even if this DOES happen, I really don't think that's going to mean people want to rejoin the EU. They will quite possibly blame May and the government for "not doing what we told you" and might well be open to other parties promising to "negotiate a better Brexit deal", but for Jo(e) Public to actually say s/he doesn't want to leave the EU would be for him.her to admit to themselves they got the decision in the referendum wrong -- and, to the state the obvious, very few humanbeings like to willingly admit they were wrong about something. It's not even like Iraq, where people who were vaguely in favour of it in 2003 were later able to convince themselves that they were never really in favour of it, and thus avoid thinking "I got it wrong".

I don't really know what obvious 'better' deal there would be. The deal May will get will lend itself pretty well to the next thought process being 'wait, it probably just makes more sense for us to stay in as I wanted to be out on the basis it wouldn't cost us that much, and we're paying more for less access to stop immigration but we're paying a LOT to stop immigration' (two thirds of British people say they wouldn't give up a pound of their income to reduce immigration, which I think will become more obvious if we start paying a lot for the deal to stop it).

Also, I know people kid themselves about a lot these days, but how many will realistically think 'someone is definitely waiting in the wings who is a tougher negotiator than Theresa May and capable of getting us better terms than when we were in the EU to begin with'?

Posted by: Harve Dec 6 2016, 05:59 PM

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Dec 6 2016, 05:09 PM) *
My biggest wonder with all this is how much the average person will actually be aware of it when we inevitably get a bad deal. May will do pretty much anything to make sure people don't feel the effects in obvious ways like prices going up, even if it means tanking the economy in ways they won't notice. It's the same problem that Labour has in pointing out that the Tories have failed to reach every deficit reduction target they've set themselves - the figures themselves are entirely abstract and the message doesn't cut through unless people are prepared to listen.

Basically you can see how the era of spin led pretty much seamlessly to post-truth politics.

I'm wondering the same thing, and this thinking underpins why May's cabinet has hinted at turning the UK into much more of a protectionist command economy with a bit of state-sponsored capitalism that is likely to be more popular with the voters that Labour need than Cameron/Osborne's liberalism. See her swipes at the so-called 'capitalist elite', not very subtle grovelling towards Nissan and dropping austerity plans. I'm interested in the 2017 budget, and for that matter more details of Trump's infrastructural plans.

Socially quite authoritarian but economically rather centrist, although I'm not sure if it will really be redistributionalist or focussed on public services.

Also if you thought government debt was a problem 2009-2012 then just wait for 2020. biggrin.gif

Posted by: Soy Adrián Dec 6 2016, 09:46 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 6 2016, 05:29 PM) *
...how?! I mean short of literally paying to subsidise imported good, I'm not sure how she gets around that 20% currency drop.

Obviously in this case it's easier said than done - it was more of a general point about the strategy that she'll take. That and letting Crosby loose on Corbyn.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 6 2016, 09:51 PM

all polls these days seem to be biased. Frinstance the consultation about NHS changes (aka cuts) in Dorset gives 2 options:
1. Do you want A&E in Bournemouth closing and combining with Poole

or

2. Do You want A&E in Poole closing and combining with Bournemouth.

Work is underway on access improvements to Bournemouth and it serves a slightly bigger catchment area so the result will give them what they want to hear, as opposed to the real question:

3. Do you want to die waiting 2 or 3 hours to get to hospital unless you live nearby Bournemouth Hospital on the outskirts of the town because ambulances take up to 90 minutes to arrive from all over Dorset, Wilts and Somerset, and then another 45 minutes fighting through traffic if you live on the wrong side of the Poole/Bournemouth boundary? Or would you prefer to keep both open serving 700,000 people and not die?

bast*rds.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Dec 6 2016, 09:56 PM

When I was in Poole hospital last month, the man in the opposite bed had been rushed in from Purbeck. If he had needed to go all the way to Bournemouth, the extra delay could well have been fatal.

Posted by: PeaceMob Dec 7 2016, 01:48 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 6 2016, 02:29 PM) *
The other side of it is that I think the anti-Brexit side will be vindicated. There are a few reasons for that, but the one most likely to not get me told off for talking Britain down (or something) by the likes of PeaceMob is that the deal Theresa is aiming for (pay more than we pay for EU membership to begin with to keep single market access for a few select sectors) is going to go down like a cup of cold sick among a lot of Brexit voters, even besides how the economy's doing by that stage. And it's pretty much the best we could hope for the EU to agree to.


As long as Theresa May ends freedom of movement and the UK has complete control over our borders, the European Court of Justice can no longer overrule the UK's laws and decisions, and we no longer pay towards the EU budget then I think the British people will be more than happy with the Prime Minster and the government. If she fails on any of this, Brexit voters won't see her as a traitor because she did vote to stay in the EU but she will be absolutely hated, far more than Thatcher could ever dream of, and it will throw the 2020 election wide open.

Posted by: Silas Dec 7 2016, 07:01 PM

WE ALREADY HAD "CONTROL" OVER OUR BORDERS.

The ECJ doesn't overrule UK law, it rules on EU law and where national law is in direct conflict with EU law.

f***ing nora. Read something other than the axis of evil

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 7 2016, 08:09 PM

QUOTE(PeaceMob @ Dec 7 2016, 01:48 PM) *
As long as Theresa May ends freedom of movement and the UK has complete control over our borders, the European Court of Justice can no longer overrule the UK's laws and decisions, and we no longer pay towards the EU budget then I think the British people will be more than happy with the Prime Minster and the government. If she fails on any of this, Brexit voters won't see her as a traitor because she did vote to stay in the EU but she will be absolutely hated, far more than Thatcher could ever dream of, and it will throw the 2020 election wide open.


We have given control over to the UK already, in real terms, and the Brexit crowd are already frothing at the mouth when British legal experts point out British law to British politicians who were too vague to state exactly what the referendum meant (because Cameron didn't expect to lose).

May, if she doesn't deliver a fair society, that promotes British industry and well-being in PARTNERSHIP with the EU will be hated by far more than half the population and we will be lining up to dance on her grave in coming decades - just as Thatcher doesn't have a grave for the same reason.

The EU referendum:

Do you wish to remain in the EU?

No further details to vote on. No promises, no if's and and's and but's, just the basic fact. All else was promises made by a bunch of lying tossers who still can't agree amongst themselves what leaving the EU means, what they meant, what they said, and what they had no powers to promise because they weren't the Prime Minister.

The one he had did a runner, the one we have thinks she's Queen Of The UK (not elected, no policies to offer, and not answerable to the electorate or Parliament.

THAT is the sorry state of British Politics. It's not democracy as we've known it, which is why Judges are reminding the power-crazed harpie that she can't ignore parliament (and presumably the wishes of some of the people who did vote for Brexit, and all of the ones who didn't. Around two-thirds of the population)

Posted by: Doctor Blind Dec 7 2016, 08:11 PM

Sleaford and North Hykeham tomorrow.

Since its creation in 1997 as a constituency it has always gone Conservative with a massive 24K majority last time out. Obviously the complete opposite of Richmond Park so don't expect an upset and this is an easy Conservative hold, however more of interest will be seeing what happens with the Lib Dem vote (5.7% in 2015) as they are the only party to really speak for the 38% who voted remain in the district given the very pro-Brexit campaigns the other parties have been employing locally.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 7 2016, 08:17 PM

I used to go to an ex-Grammar School in North Hykeham. It's not posh, and it was quite a violent bullying school at the time (70's). I don't think it's unthinkable that there could be a surge for the Libdems, I suspect a good proportion of the pro-Brexit votes came from the more working-class parts of the electorate...

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 7 2016, 08:18 PM

Yes, I agree that Sleaford will almost definitely be won by the Conservatives. Apart from whether the Lib Dems will take the runner-up position, I'm interested to see how Marianne Overton of the Lincolnshire Independents does in this constituency. She's retained her deposit in the last two general elections and is a local councilor who seems quite popular in the constituency, so will be interesting to see if she makes it 3 in the row, which would be pretty good going for an independent from a micro-party.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Dec 7 2016, 08:20 PM

UKIP remain favourites to finish second in Sleaford, but the odds against the Lib Dems have plummeted since last week. They are now clear favourites to knock Labour into fourth place.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 8 2016, 12:16 PM

QUOTE(PeaceMob @ Dec 7 2016, 01:48 PM) *
As long as Theresa May ends freedom of movement and the UK has complete control over our borders, the European Court of Justice can no longer overrule the UK's laws and decisions, and we no longer pay towards the EU budget then I think the British people will be more than happy with the Prime Minster and the government. If she fails on any of this, Brexit voters won't see her as a traitor because she did vote to stay in the EU but she will be absolutely hated, far more than Thatcher could ever dream of, and it will throw the 2020 election wide open.

Because there is no way that she's going to be able to do all of the things you say without shattering several of our most important economic sectors by leaving them open to massive tariffs from the EU - a deal which would see her completely hated and loathed for shattering our economy. So the only way around that is paying into the EU budget. Which is a solution. But one which the government has done nothing to prime people for. So it's going to go down very, very badly.

Posted by: Hollyver Dec 8 2016, 01:04 PM

With the constituency apparently getting more annoyed that Brexit isn't happening quicker, is there any chance that the Conservatives and UKIP will split the Pro-Brexit vote enough for a shock Pro-EU Lib Dem challenge?

Posted by: Doctor Blind Dec 8 2016, 06:51 PM

QUOTE(Hollyver @ Dec 8 2016, 01:04 PM) *
With the constituency apparently getting more annoyed that Brexit isn't happening quicker, is there any chance that the Conservatives and UKIP will split the Pro-Brexit vote enough for a shock Pro-EU Lib Dem challenge?


Little prospect of a shock challenge unfortunately, a lot of the Conservative flyers almost looked like UKIP flyers so I expect UKIP may actually come third behind the Lib Dems... will be interesting to see what happens. Labour look likely to come fourth...!

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 8 2016, 09:56 PM

QUOTE(Hollyver @ Dec 8 2016, 01:04 PM) *
With the constituency apparently getting more annoyed that Brexit isn't happening quicker, is there any chance that the Conservatives and UKIP will split the Pro-Brexit vote enough for a shock Pro-EU Lib Dem challenge?

It's possible, but tremendously unlikely I'd imagine. A fair chunk of the Remain vote in the constituency would've been from Conservative voters, who I think are more aligned to the idea that a decision has been made and Theresa May should be allowed to get on with it. I used to work in Lincoln, which is a next door constituency, and the typical Conservative Remain voter in Sleaford and North Hykeham will be very, very different in their cultural outlook to a typical Conservative Remain voter in Richmond Park. They could possibly move to the sort of fervently anti-Brexit position where they will happily vote against the Conservatives, but it'll take a while of some pretty sustained evidence that it's an economic disaster that won't work.

Posted by: Hollyver Dec 9 2016, 07:42 AM

Results (Major Parties)

17570 | 53.5% | Conservative (-2.7%)
04426 | 13.5% | UKIP (-2.2%)
03606 | 11.0% | Lib Dems (+5.3%)
03363 | 10.2% | Labour (-7.1%)

Posted by: Hollyver Dec 9 2016, 07:45 AM

Considering all the time, effort and money UKIP ploughed into campaigning for this seat I'd say it's a loss for them! cheer.gif

Posted by: Harve Dec 9 2016, 07:49 AM

Conservatives will win every single East Midlands seat in 2020 except the 6 that make up Leicester and Nottingham, calling it now.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 9 2016, 11:57 AM

QUOTE(Harve @ Dec 9 2016, 07:49 AM) *
Conservatives will win every single East Midlands seat in 2020 except the 6 that make up Leicester and Nottingham, calling it now.

Christ, if they won BOLSOVER...

I'm cautiously optimistic that Labour would hold on to Derby South, Bassetlaw and Ashfield too, though Derby South could go. Chesterfield would also be a really, really big ask for the Tories to get.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 9 2016, 12:07 PM

A good win for the Conservatives, a reassuring uplift for the Lib Dems, an okay result for UKIP, and disastrous for Labour. Interestingly, the Lincolnshire Independent candidate won back her deposit for the 3rd election in a row with an impressive 9% of the vote, which is pretty good going for a minor local party.

Posted by: Harve Dec 10 2016, 04:54 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 9 2016, 11:57 AM) *
Christ, if they won BOLSOVER...

It depends if Dennis Skinner retires! ohmy.gif

I think it's very possible if UKIP collapse and all their votes go to the Tories and not Labour due to Corbyn shenanigans, even if many 2015 UKIP voters are ex-Labour.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 21 2016, 02:08 PM

We're going to have a by-election in the New Year, as Labour MP Jamie Reed is standing down to join the nuclear industry. I'm sure Jeremy Corbyn will be happy about that.

His majority was about 2,500 votes in the last general election, and his constituency, Copeland, was a very strong "leave" voice in the EU referendum (62% voted for Brexit there), so there's a real danger of Labour losing their seat there. Who to though is anyone's guess. Definitely not the Lib Dems anyway.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 21 2016, 02:57 PM

If Corbyn can't win a Labour seat, against a Tory government, and having been lukewarm towards the EU at best, and clammering for an instant Brexit next day, and assured his support for any Tory Brexit (more or less, give or take bland wishful thinking for a soft Brexit), not been bothered about Parliament being involved (it got him off the hook if he could blame it all on Tories when it goes tits up), then he's finished as Leader Of The Opposition. There won't be another coup, but he'll be a dead political duck, just quacking till even his blindest followers realise he's a going to take them all down with him.

Better get stuck in then......

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 21 2016, 03:01 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 21 2016, 02:08 PM) *
We're going to have a by-election in the New Year, as Labour MP Jamie Reed is standing down to join the nuclear industry. I'm sure Jeremy Corbyn will be happy about that.

His majority was about 2,500 votes in the last general election, and his constituency, Copeland, was a very strong "leave" voice in the EU referendum (62% voted for Brexit there), so there's a real danger of Labour losing their seat there. Who to though is anyone's guess. Definitely not the Lib Dems anyway.

Very unlikely the Lib Dems, but not *completely* impossible. In the exceptionally unlikely event of a four-way race, the winning post would probably only be around 30%. Not an impossible figure to get to from ~17,000 Remain votes in the constituency. Just deeply unlikely the Lib Dems will be able to unify all that from a very low starting base. Having Tim Farron's local machine next door can't hurt though.

Posted by: Silas Dec 21 2016, 06:36 PM

I can't see Farron being the kind to warrant that kind of rabid support though. LibDems need a new leader but they've got no one to chose from.

If ukip get this seat we're f***ed as a country

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 21 2016, 08:20 PM

Hey, he's increased the Lib Dem's number of MPs by 12.5% in less than 18 months, that's not too bad going.

As for Ukip, I'm not sure if they've got much of an infrastructure in Cumbria to mobilise a by-election campaign, so Labour's biggest opposition in the by-election is most likely going to be the Conservatives.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 21 2016, 08:52 PM

QUOTE(Silas @ Dec 21 2016, 06:36 PM) *
I can't see Farron being the kind to warrant that kind of rabid support though. LibDems need a new leader but they've got no one to chose from.

If ukip get this seat we're f***ed as a country

People in Richmond Park weren't voting Lib Dem for Tim Farron.

Unless by that you were referring to him having a local machine. In that respect - rebuilding the party through their traditional by-election wins - he's actually a pretty good leader for the Lib Dems to have. He turned a safe Tory seat into a safe Lib Dem seat (he was one of the few successes of the Lib Dems' 2005 decapitation strategy, which aimed to take out Tory Shadow Cabinet members) to the extent that he's pretty much the only Lib Dem with a majority to write home about. If he can get that campaign infrastructure camped out in Copeland for the next three months they could make a real dent in the Remain vote there.

After all, as it stands there isn't *really* a good reason to vote Ukip, and there won't be unless Theresa May looks like she's on the verge of backsliding on Brexit or abandoning ending free movement as a red line. Conversely, given Brexit dominates at the moment, if stopping Brexit or making it as soft as possible is your number one issue, the Lib Dems are a far more obvious choice in that respect than Labour are. Labour will be hoping voters aren't deciding on the basis of the EU for this by-election, because changing the subject is the only way they can really make themselves the answer as things stand.

Annoyingly for Labour, nuclear (obviously huge in Copeland because of Sellafield) isn't a way they can do that - the Lib Dems reversed their opposition to nuclear power in 2013. And Trident...is probably something the Labour leadership would prefer to avoid discussing.

Posted by: Frosty Xmas Baps Dec 21 2016, 09:37 PM

Labour will win Cumbria. The North and Scotland wsnt no part in thi Tory government.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 22 2016, 12:54 AM

Two of Cumbria's six seats are *already* Conservative. They're 800 votes off taking Barrow and 2,500 off taking Copeland. And that was for a Prime Minister much less popular than Theresa May is, as things stand. Labour could keep Copeland, but there's no chance in hell a Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party will hold Barrow.

Posted by: Harve Dec 22 2016, 02:26 AM

QUOTE(Frosty Xmas Baps @ Dec 21 2016, 09:37 PM) *
Labour will win Cumbria. The North and Scotland wsnt no part in thi Tory government.

Parts of Scotland have a sleeping centre-right that will usurp the SNP in rural, unionist areas. The Tories' rise in May was only the beginning, I just don't know how much further it will go.

Posted by: Steve201 Dec 22 2016, 02:03 PM

I can imagine the main opposition to a centre left dominant SNP in Scotland will be a unionist tory party, no doubt about it!

In terms of Jamie Reed, I haven't seen the resignation of a backbencher get so much coverage in the uk press before....

Posted by: Silas Dec 22 2016, 02:22 PM

The only Tory seat in Scotland is in the borders. They're a massive threat in all three border seats and Aberdeenshire. I.e. Rural land owners. They've always been Tory. The threat isn't new they're just pickin up some of the other unionist votes in opposition to the SNP. Their rise is driven by centrists who don't like independence but otherwise don't mind many SNP policies.

In an indie Scotland their support will wane back down again once there's no union to blindly defend

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 22 2016, 02:35 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 22 2016, 02:03 PM) *
In terms of Jamie Reed, I haven't seen the resignation of a backbencher get so much coverage in the uk press before....

It's only recently become a thing again.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 22 2016, 02:35 PM

QUOTE(Silas @ Dec 22 2016, 02:22 PM) *
In an indie Scotland their support will wane back down again once there's no union to blindly defend

I wouldn't be so sure of that. Someone has to be the opposition. Once an independent Scotland has to pay its own bills, it'll restore what's typically one of the main drivers for economic conservatism in a country that hasn't had that driver for quite a long time.

Posted by: Steve201 Dec 22 2016, 11:44 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 22 2016, 02:35 PM) *
It's only recently become a thing again.


I wonder why....the press like the attack don't they!

As they say the reason why Corbyn is attacked and they claim is unelectable simply means he can't be bought!!

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 23 2016, 12:31 AM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 23 2016, 12:44 AM) *
I wonder why....the press like the attack don't they!


As I've said before, Brexit changed everything.

Posted by: Frosty Xmas Baps Dec 23 2016, 01:31 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 23 2016, 01:31 AM) *
As I've said before, Brexit changed everything.


What do you mean? They have hated him since day one as he can't be bought and threatens the Establishment.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 23 2016, 02:15 AM

They don't really attack him anymore though. They just don't talk about him, as he rarely has anything to say.

Posted by: Steve201 Dec 23 2016, 02:19 AM

He clearly does have a lot to say that's different to the established centre left/Centre right economic thinking?!!

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 23 2016, 08:16 AM

QUOTE(Frosty Xmas Baps @ Dec 23 2016, 02:31 AM) *
What do you mean? They have hated him since day one as he can't be bought and threatens the Establishment.


Yes, the man who's undertaken paid work for both Iranian and Russian state propaganda networks cannot be bought.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Dec 23 2016, 08:29 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 23 2016, 08:16 AM) *
Yes, the man who's undertaken paid work for both Iranian and Russian state propaganda networks cannot be bought.


A company linked to torture no less, but we should probably just totally ignore that because it's convenient for the 'establishment'.

Seriously though - I think Labour are likely to very narrowly hang on, but it isn't within the bounds of possibility that they just lose this to the Conservatives (it is in a ~60% leave vote constituency) though this would of course be incredibly rare for a governing party to gain a seat and would in ORDINARY circumstances lead to a big shake-up in the leadership of the opposition... but we are in extraordinary times so who knows.

Interesting by-election though!

Posted by: Frosty Xmas Baps Dec 23 2016, 11:49 AM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 23 2016, 03:19 AM) *
He clearly does have a lot to say that's different to the established centre left/Centre right economic thinking?!!


Absolutely this!!!

Posted by: Frosty Xmas Baps Dec 23 2016, 11:50 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 23 2016, 09:16 AM) *
Yes, the man who's undertaken paid work for both Iranian and Russian state propaganda networks cannot be bought.


That's not reallly true.

He was paid to speak his anti-establushment opinions which of course would be valued by their anti-qest-establishment propaganda channels.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 23 2016, 01:03 PM

QUOTE(Frosty Xmas Baps @ Dec 23 2016, 12:50 PM) *
That's not reallly (sic) true.

He was paid to speak his anti-establushment (sic) opinions which of course would be valued by their anti-qest-establishment (sic) propaganda channels.


And that nullifies my point because?

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 23 2016, 01:05 PM

He can't be bought in the same way Tim Farron can't be bought - they aren't governing rich political-bed-hoppers like the Tories and former UKIP leader. But he's not loathed for that reason, he's loathed for his support of terrorists (oh yes he does, and has, consistently, regardless of the massive death tolls, while he spouts on about others supporting actions causing deaths as being war criminals). He's such a hypocrite on so many issues: like demanding the removal of all previous Labour leaders within months of being elected, and then moaning about it when he gets the same treatment. Like insisting on Cabinets chosen by MP's, and then refusing to do it when he's leader. Like not condemning attacks on his fellow MP's for not agreeing with him (when they, despite not agreeing with him, toelerted him for 35 years and even - very stupidly - elected him on to the ticket). Like not supporting Brexit when that was his party's position (his speeches were rewritten by his anti-EU colleagues to bland out and dumb down any significant pro-European topics).

Not that I have any love for New Labour, but Corbyn is just so useless he is going to destroy Labour as a movement. If Momentum have such great ideas then why don't they just stand under that banner and let's see how they do in elections rather than try and subvert an existing political party. Which worked out so well for the activists in the 80's and so well for the country - legacy: Thatcher, Banker worshipping legislation which led to the mess we're in now.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Dec 23 2016, 01:09 PM

QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Dec 23 2016, 02:05 PM) *
If Momentum have such great ideas then why don't they just stand under that banner and let's see how they do in elections rather than try and subvert an existing political party. Which worked out so well for the activists in the 80's and so well for the country - legacy: Thatcher, Banker worshipping legislation which led to the mess we're in now.


As I've mentioned before, they more or less did this in 2015 with the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition. It didn't go too well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Unionist_and_Socialist_Coalition -

QUOTE

TUSC stood 135 prospective parliamentary candidates across England, Wales and Scotland,[10]as well as 619 council candidates in local elections.


The party performed badly at the election, winning 36,327 votes, or 0.1% of the popular vote. No parliamentary seats were gained and no deposits were saved.

Posted by: Steve201 Dec 23 2016, 01:25 PM

Why don't Progress stand??

Because they are philosophical movements within parties like Orange Bookers in the LDs and the New Britannia group in the Tory party - they are not political parties.

And on his support for terrorists - should be not have talked to Gerry Adams in 1984/5?

On his lack of support for former Labour leaders - he supported Labour and stood as a candidate in elections for them but if the Labour cabinet proposed something he didn't agree with he would oppose it. There's nothing wrong with that - do you want him to close his eyes and support like a robot no matter what? Course not - I reiterate he wasn't in the cabinet.

And yes he did support remain and has reiterated this many times but sure box him in the way you want to characterise him all you want. He took the most flexible position admitting the EU wasn't perfect and needed reformed. Maybe if other Tory members in the remain camp had done this instead of issue threats of breaking from the Westminster position people wouldn't have revelled as much?!

Posted by: Frosty Xmas Baps Dec 23 2016, 02:26 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Dec 23 2016, 02:03 PM) *
And that nullifies my point because?


It's called typing on a phone!!

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 23 2016, 07:08 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 23 2016, 01:25 PM) *
Why don't Progress stand??

Because they are philosophical movements within parties like Orange Bookers in the LDs and the New Britannia group in the Tory party - they are not political parties.

And on his support for terrorists - should be not have talked to Gerry Adams in 1984/5?

On his lack of support for former Labour leaders - he supported Labour and stood as a candidate in elections for them but if the Labour cabinet proposed something he didn't agree with he would oppose it. There's nothing wrong with that - do you want him to close his eyes and support like a robot no matter what? Course not - I reiterate he wasn't in the cabinet.

And yes he did support remain and has reiterated this many times but sure box him in the way you want to characterise him all you want. He took the most flexible position admitting the EU wasn't perfect and needed reformed. Maybe if other Tory members in the remain camp had done this instead of issue threats of breaking from the Westminster position people wouldn't have revelled as much?!


They are intolerant bullies on a mission to eradicate non-Momentum opinions.

It's one thing to support a viewpoint, it's quite another to support organisations that murder thousands of innocent people over decades, including children. Talking to terrorists (and lets not forget his much-hated "war criminal" Tony Blair was the one who brought peace in Northern Ireland, not him) is not in any way the same as condoning their actions and calling them heroes.

Corbyn didn't just disagree with Labour leaders, he was actively trying to get them booted out within months of being elected, which is quite a different thing. This is his own party. You don't have to agree with anyone about anything, but if you consistently try to remove a leader because you disagree with them, then you can't whinge about others doing the same to you. Fair play I call it....

He supported Remain reluctantly, very sadly late in the day. He was the one calling for immediately leaving the EU within hours of the result (which shows how clueless he is), and his closest team advisors are all anti-EU (as he was before getting the job as leader). Re: the "scare" tactics of Remain, pretty much most of what was said was fact or based on logical likelihoods, and most of what was said by Leavers was lies. Remain could have won had he been vocal, leaving working-class voters who are going to be much worse off by 2020 under no illusions what we were heading for (including those who voted for it, but sadly also those who didn't - about two-thirds of the population).

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 23 2016, 07:37 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 23 2016, 02:19 AM) *
He clearly does have a lot to say that's different to the established centre left/Centre right economic thinking?!!

So why does he not say it? He's done fuck all media or public statements in the last few months. He makes Ed Miliband look dynamic.

Anyway, I hope you're not kidding yourself that it's connecting in any way whatsoever with the public.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 23 2016, 07:39 PM

QUOTE(Doctor Blind @ Dec 23 2016, 08:29 AM) *
Seriously though - I think Labour are likely to very narrowly hang on, but it isn't within the bounds of possibility that they just lose this to the Conservatives (it is in a ~60% leave vote constituency) though this would of course be incredibly rare for a governing party to gain a seat and would in ORDINARY circumstances lead to a big shake-up in the leadership of the opposition... but we are in extraordinary times so who knows.

Interesting by-election though!

I'd say it's probably more likely the Conservatives will win. Labour are shedding votes to both the Lib Dems and Ukip. The Conservatives just need to stand still - all it would take would be Labour losing 3% to both the Lib Dems and Ukip each for the Tories to take the seat.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 23 2016, 07:44 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 23 2016, 07:37 PM) *
So why does he not say it? He's done fuck all media or public statements in the last few months. He makes Ed Miliband look dynamic.


Those brussel sprouts and potatoes aren't going to harvest themselves, he's a busy man! Assuming he can stomach foodstuffs that sound suspiciously EU supporting.....

Posted by: Steve201 Dec 24 2016, 12:58 AM

Most Sunday's when I watch the morning politics shows he's usually on one of them every other week - he also allocated the economic alternative to his chancellor McDonnell. It's a lazy throw back to say he doesn't do anything.

In terms of N.Ire of course Blair was one of those who helped bring about the GFA but to complain about JC meeting SF reps in the 80s is ridiculous and short sighted. It's also frankly annoying being Irish and listening to English people saying SF are terrorists - the same ANC terrorists who the British government refused to talk to in the 80s - my point being if you understood these conflicts (most of them caused by past British colonialism) you would realise that in order to find a solution you MUST speak to all those involved in the conflict.


Posted by: Steve201 Dec 24 2016, 01:00 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Dec 23 2016, 07:37 PM) *
So why does he not say it? He's done fuck all media or public statements in the last few months. He makes Ed Miliband look dynamic.

Anyway, I hope you're not kidding yourself that it's connecting in any way whatsoever with the public.


I don't think you want his economic arguements to connect with the public on a personal level because you don't believe in them, hence why you have left the party.

Posted by: Frosty Xmas Baps Dec 24 2016, 03:00 AM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 24 2016, 01:58 AM) *
Most Sunday's when I watch the morning politics shows he's usually on one of them every other week - he also allocated the economic alternative to his chancellor McDonnell. It's a lazy throw back to say he doesn't do anything.

In terms of N.Ire of course Blair was one of those who helped bring about the GFA but to complain about JC meeting SF reps in the 80s is ridiculous and short sighted. It's also frankly annoying being Irish and listening to English people saying SF are terrorists - the same ANC terrorists who the British government refused to talk to in the 80s - my point being if you understood these conflicts (most of them caused by past British colonialism) you would realise that in order to find a solution you MUST speak to all those involved in the conflict.


Go Steve and go Corbyn! cheer.gif

Corbyn's policies are popular. The media attack dogs of the BBC and Muedoch Empire are what affect his popularity.

Posted by: popchartfreak Dec 24 2016, 10:26 AM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 24 2016, 12:58 AM) *
Most Sunday's when I watch the morning politics shows he's usually on one of them every other week - he also allocated the economic alternative to his chancellor McDonnell. It's a lazy throw back to say he doesn't do anything.

In terms of N.Ire of course Blair was one of those who helped bring about the GFA but to complain about JC meeting SF reps in the 80s is ridiculous and short sighted. It's also frankly annoying being Irish and listening to English people saying SF are terrorists - the same ANC terrorists who the British government refused to talk to in the 80s - my point being if you understood these conflicts (most of them caused by past British colonialism) you would realise that in order to find a solution you MUST speak to all those involved in the conflict.


Hi Steve, I entirely agree about talking to all sides in disputes being a must, and both sides were as bad each other in N.I. I also agree about British colonialism, just look round the world and see the mess left behind by the invading British - in terms of local inhabitants, at least, not necessarily British immigrants (ironic some racist Brits hate immigrants when the UK has invaded and got rich on the backs of half the world, hypocrites!).

I don't believe in violence though. Back in the day we were all bomb targets, (I spent one morning looking for IRA bombs in the workplace in Bournemouth - happily the ones they planted under the pier didn't go off) so, yes, I'm afraid I kinda take it personally - killing people who don't disagree with your basic rights is no way to win friends, or your arguments. Corbyn always seems to "forget" to condemn that sort of action, except when it's from the side he sees as not his.

Maybe he DOES do a full days work, though that's not an impression he gives (eg going on holiday while the country's future was in the balance), but it is at least great news for comics for the next 4 years having the allotment thing to refer to, the gift that just keeps giving laugh.gif

Posted by: Steve201 Dec 24 2016, 02:54 PM

Yeh Fair enough we will always look at these things from different perspectives and both sides were as bad as each other in NI. It's terrible that bombs went off in England (and Europe for that matter) and I am very sorry for the innocents involved but tend to look at it with frustration of the obvious mistakes that were made to make sure the minority wasn't protected in 1921 or throughout the mid twentieth century. Also being a nationalist myself the obvious artificial and sectarian nature of the borders of the state which divided communities and destroyed the economy - these two thing mixed together were a recipe for disaster.

Have you read - War in an Irish Town? It's an award winning book on the troubles by Eamonn McCann and the part of that book which had the biggest impact on me was when in 1969 after a notorious civil rights march which went from Belfast to Derry and was attacked by the police and loyalists throughout - when the people got back to Derry they returned to their homes beaten and battered and that night the police went into the bogside (nationalist part of Derry) and started kicking doors in of people's houses and beating up those inside - a neighbour down the street saw what was happening and immediately went to phone the police - he was put through to Victoria RUC station in the centre of town and immediately realised the futility of what he was doing - the next day the barricades went up on the streets of the bogside to protect the people - and You Are Now Entering Free Derry was scrawled on the cable wall at its entrance.


But I think JC tends to see the bigger picture and has been right about the bigger issues if you look at everything that has happened since the crash of 2008.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 25 2016, 10:12 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 24 2016, 12:58 AM) *
Most Sunday's when I watch the morning politics shows he's usually on one of them every other week - he also allocated the economic alternative to his chancellor McDonnell. It's a lazy throw back to say he doesn't do anything.

Yes, being leader of the opposition involves slightly more than going on the Sundays. It's a running joke among journalists that the Labour Party leadership has barely anything to say most days of the week. There was actual shock that they had a press release out within an hour of Paul Nuttall's election as Ukip leader, because it was the first time in months the leader's office had shown basic levels of press competence in months.

Posted by: Qassändra Dec 25 2016, 10:13 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Dec 24 2016, 01:00 AM) *
I don't think you want his economic arguements to connect with the public on a personal level because you don't believe in them, hence why you have left the party.

Me leaving the party had barely a thing to do with Corbyn's economic arguments, as would be plain to anyone who read my reasons for leaving.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Jan 13 2017, 06:34 PM

Labour face another potentially tough by-election, as ex-historian, former potential Labour leader and nun hater Tristram Hunt has resigned as MP for Stoke-on-Trent to work in a museum, following Jamie Reed out the door into respectable employment (and a pay rise of 200%). Although he had a 5,000 majority in the last election, his constituency backed Leave by 69% & Ukip finished 2nd, which could make things rather difficult when the writ is moved.

I wonder if there'll be many more resignations from MPs before the next general election who would risk losing their seat when the numbers in parliament are reduced to 600? That seems to be the trend at the moment.

Posted by: Harve Jan 15 2017, 02:53 PM

I know a few Stokies who would, um, have UKIP-leaning tendencies.

They'd be way less inclined to vote for an Asian guy. Just sayin'. UKIP aren't doing themselves any favours with their candidate choice.

edit: I mistakenly thought Tariq Mahmood was a confirmed candidate.

Posted by: Envoirment Jan 18 2017, 12:13 AM

With Theresa's speech on brexit, could the conservatives win the Stoke-on-Trent seat? UKIP isn't really needed now a hard brexit looks on the cards and the conservatives weren't far behind UKIP in the previous election. Will be an interesting one to watch.

Posted by: burbe Jan 18 2017, 02:46 PM

Yeah, I think that will work in their favour and weaken UKIP's position. I seriously hope so, I can't be dealing with UKIP gaining another seat.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Jan 18 2017, 04:12 PM

I can't see how UKIP can win Labour 'heartland' seats in areas where the Tories aren't completely anaemic. One of the main effects of May's stance will be putting the Tories in a position to challenge lots of semi-safe Labour seats where the majority voted Leave. UKIP aren't the direct threat.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Jan 18 2017, 04:49 PM

FTR, if the Conservatives were to gain in either of the forthcoming by-elections - these would be the first gains of a governing party since the Mitcham and Morden by-election in June 1982.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jan 21 2017, 11:59 AM

The Copeland and Stoke Central by-elections will be held on 23 February. Paul Nutjob is set to be the UKIP candidate in Stokt.

Posted by: popchartfreak Jan 21 2017, 02:36 PM

OK, LIbdems...GO! Start campaigning hard and stuff the Hard Brexiters who are imposing what wasn't voted for sick2.gif

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jan 21 2017, 03:09 PM

QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Jan 21 2017, 02:36 PM) *
OK, LIbdems...GO! Start campaigning hard and stuff the Hard Brexiters who are imposing what wasn't voted for sick2.gif

From what I've read the Lib Dems are planning to concentrate their efforts on Stoke.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Jan 21 2017, 03:48 PM

Paul Nuttall in Stoke is going to be interesting, as it will be the first real test for UKIP in its post-Farage, post-"having a better idea of what Brexit is going to entail", and given that its leader and best-known member bar Farage is standing there, then their success (or lack of) in this by-election will set the stage for whether UKIP continue as a going concern. If he wins the seat (which at the moment I'd say he has a 50:50 chance alongside the as-yet unannounced Labour candidate), then it will give them a 2nd wind and they'll make modest gains in the upcoming local elections. If however he doesn't win the seat (and even more so if he loses by a large margin), then I can see UKIP's vote slashed in the local elections, and could be the beginning of the end of the party's political relevance.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jan 21 2017, 04:09 PM

This year's local elections (county councils) are a big test for UKIP. The same elections four years ago saw them make their first real impact in local elections.

Posted by: Qassändra Jan 21 2017, 09:22 PM

I'd make Labour slight favourites to win Stoke-on-Trent Central, but I could genuinely realistically see any of Labour/Ukip/Conservatives/Lib Dems taking it. Which is the first time I think that's ever been the case. I don't think Ukip will win though. What reason to vote Ukip is there over the Conservatives at the moment? Theresa May is showing no signs whatsoever of needing her feet held to the fire as far as hardcore Leave voters would be concerned.

Posted by: Silas Jan 21 2017, 09:30 PM

Stoke isn't far from me. Tempted to go throw things at Paul Nutjob tbh

Posted by: Suedehead2 Jan 21 2017, 10:40 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Jan 21 2017, 09:22 PM) *
I'd make Labour slight favourites to win Stoke-on-Trent Central, but I could genuinely realistically see any of Labour/Ukip/Conservatives/Lib Dems taking it. Which is the first time I think that's ever been the case. I don't think Ukip will win though. What reason to vote Ukip is there over the Conservatives at the moment? Theresa May is showing no signs whatsoever of needing her feet held to the fire as far as hardcore Leave voters would be concerned.

Indeed. Why vote for a UKIP MP to sit on the opposition benches when you can vote for a UKIP MP who can join the UKIP Prime Minister on the government benches?

Posted by: Steve201 Jan 22 2017, 03:00 PM

I'm not aware of the demographics on the constituency although I assume it's old labour so maybe some would never vote for the Tories so would find it easier to transfer from Labour to UKIP?

Posted by: Qassändra Jan 22 2017, 03:02 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Jan 22 2017, 03:00 PM) *
I'm not aware of the demographics on the constituency although I assume it's old labour so maybe some would never vote for the Tories so would find it easier to transfer from Labour to UKIP?

The winning post has been 38% for the last two elections. If it craters even more the winner could conceivably do it with just a third of the vote.

Also I wouldn't be quite so sure. There hasn't been a more Old Labour-friendly Tory leader than Theresa May in quite some time.

Posted by: Steve201 Jan 22 2017, 03:08 PM

I understand that but is there not some old labour voters who would never vote Tory?

Posted by: Silas Jan 22 2017, 03:48 PM

Theresa May is a lot more 'old labour' than Corbyn ever could dream of being. Her Hard Brexit rhetoric will go down well in a 70% leave constituency.

Posted by: Qassändra Jan 22 2017, 03:51 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Jan 22 2017, 03:08 PM) *
I understand that but is there not some old labour voters who would never vote Tory?

Oh of course there'll always be. But 'old Labour' often gets conflated with 'Bennite Labour'. A lot of people forget that most of the time, old Labour was closer the Labour "old right" position now of being eye-wateringly hardline on things like crime and immigration but broadly redistributive on the economy.

That isn't Theresa May's position by any means, but I wouldn't be surprised if an old Labour voter who voted Leave and has only paid passing notice to the news would be perhaps more inclined to vote Tory when the comparison is her vs Corbyn, at least compared with when it was Cameron vs Corbyn. For a quick illustration of that you only need to go back to Danny's cautious positivity on Theresa May when she first got in and general non-chalance/luke-warm approval of her Brexit position.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Jan 22 2017, 04:45 PM

Can't see the Lib Dems coming through the middle in either Copeland or Stoke to be honest. Would expect a 1,000-ish majority for the Tories in Copeland and Labour in Stoke. If either party can win both it'll be an interesting night.

Posted by: Qassändra Jan 22 2017, 05:01 PM

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Jan 22 2017, 04:45 PM) *
Can't see the Lib Dems coming through the middle in either Copeland or Stoke to be honest.

I don't think it's likely, but the pool of Remain votes in every by-election means it can't really be ruled out so long as it's a seat where Labour's vote likely predominantly voted Leave (and ergo is having to compete for that vote with Ukip and the Tories). Especially somewhere where the winning post can conceivably be as low as a third of the vote, which means the Lib Dems would notionally only need to unite about, say, 7,000 votes out of the ~20,000 that voted Remain in the Stoke seat (assuming a potentially optimistic turnout of about 21k for the by-election, given they only manage about 30k for general elections).

Posted by: Qassändra Jan 23 2017, 09:41 AM

Copeland projected as an easy win for the Conservatives by Labour canvass returns, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/20/exclusive-labour-set-lose-copeland-by-election-partys-canvass/.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Jan 23 2017, 12:21 PM

Chances that it's been deliberately leaked to manage expectations and it's actually going to be much closer?

Somehow after the fiasco the leadership made of the selection, I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by: Qassändra Jan 23 2017, 12:32 PM

QUOTE(Soy Adrián @ Jan 23 2017, 12:21 PM) *
Chances that it's been deliberately leaked to manage expectations and it's actually going to be much closer?

Somehow after the fiasco the leadership made of the selection, I'm not holding my breath.

I imagine the only advantageous expectation management here will be "we're going to lose anyway so let's get it priced in way beforehand", given holding it would've been seen as a success either way.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 4 2017, 04:07 PM

The full list of candidates for the Copeland by-election are:

Independent - Michael Guest
Liberal Democrat - Rebecca Hanson
Conservative - Trudy Harrison
Independent - Roy Ivinson
Green - Jack Lenox
UKIP - Fiona Mills
Labour - Gillian Troughton

No real surprise packages within the candidates to note. My prediction is for a Conservative gain.

The candidates for the Stoke-On-Trent By-Election are -

Independent - Mohammad Akram
Liberal Democrat - Zulfiqar Ali
Conservative - Jack Brereton
Monster Raving Loony - The Incredible Flying Brick
Green - Adam Colclough
Christian Peoples - Godfrey Davies
Independent - Barbara Fielding
BNP - David Furness
UKIP - Paul Nuttall
Labour - Gareth Snell

A much wider range of candidates in this constituency. Outside the question of whether newly minted Ukip leader Paul Nuttall will win the seat (my prediction is that Labour will hold on to it, with Ukip a closer than expected 2nd), one candidate of note is Barbara Fielding, who has a reputation as a vexatious litigant. According to http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/stoke-on-trentcentral/comment-page-16/#comments, she's claimed "that the media are affecting her heartbeat, reporters led to the downfall of Kings and Queens and she’ll therefore remove all homosexuals from the media as well as all Jewish reporters." Other bad smells running include seemingly the only member of the BNP left.

Posted by: Steve201 Feb 5 2017, 01:31 AM

Still can't get over that candidate labour have in Stoke!

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 5 2017, 08:15 PM

QUOTE(Steve201 @ Feb 5 2017, 02:31 AM) *
Still can't get over that candidate labour have in Stoke!


What is it about him that's caused this flurry of disbelief?

Posted by: Steve201 Feb 6 2017, 11:08 AM

He's an ardent remainer and former adviser to Tristram!

Totally the opposite of the kind of candidate Labour need to stand in that seat!

Posted by: Soy Adrián Feb 6 2017, 01:55 PM

It's a balancing act - the Lib Dems aren't completely moribund in Stoke, so having a Labour Leave member (not to mention that there's relatively few of them who are viable candidates in many places) might have spoiled our chance to drive up anti-UKIP turnout. Our candidate backs the triggering of Article 50, which at this point is all that matters.

Posted by: Steve201 Feb 7 2017, 01:15 PM

Wonder if Tristram would have done the same?

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 17 2017, 07:23 PM

Having read the BBC's guide to the Stoke-On-Trent by-election, I am getting a feeling that there's one of the candidates that the BBC is less keen on than the others. Look at the photo of the 4 main candidates http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38955403 and note for which one they chose to use a photo that makes him look like a right eejit.

Posted by: Silas Feb 17 2017, 07:58 PM

That's amazing!!!

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 19 2017, 04:55 PM

So with 4 days until the polls open in the by-election, my predictions are -

Copeland - Conservative gain over Labour, about 1000 votes in it.

Stoke Central - a Labour hold, with Ukip a very distant second.

Although anything could happen in the next few days.

Posted by: Soy Adrián Feb 19 2017, 07:36 PM

Was in Stoke today but it was hard to tell how it was going. I'm inclined to agree on Copeland.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 20 2017, 08:41 PM

The Tories' odds in Stoke have tumbled from 25-1 to 7-1 in the past 24 hours, I'm sorely tempted to put a couple of quid on their chances, even though I still think Labour's going to hold this seat.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Feb 20 2017, 09:52 PM

Theresa May was in Stoke earlier drumming up support and likely hoping to capitalise on the recent UKIP controversies, that is likely the reason for the shortening odds, there doesn't seem to be any other evidence to suggest that the Tories will gain here. Hard to call it but a narrow Labour hold seems the most likely outcome at this point with UKIP in a very close second (all the private polling is said to show UKIP narrowly ahead, at the moment).

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 20 2017, 10:01 PM

QUOTE(Doctor Blind @ Feb 20 2017, 09:52 PM) *
Theresa May was in Stoke earlier drumming up support and likely hoping to capitalise on the recent UKIP controversies, that is likely the reason for the shortening odds, there doesn't seem to be any other evidence to suggest that the Tories will gain here. Hard to call it but a narrow Labour hold seems the most likely outcome at this point with UKIP in a very close second (all the private polling is said to show UKIP narrowly ahead, at the moment).

Whose private polling? If it's leave.eu's they'll be doing everything they can to make it look like Ukip are still in with a shot.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Feb 20 2017, 10:09 PM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Feb 20 2017, 10:01 PM) *
Whose private polling? If it's leave.eu's they'll be doing everything they can to make it look like Ukip are still in with a shot.


Not sure of the source, it was reported in the Independent.

Leave.EU are of course claiming it is a significant lead but I don't believe that!

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 20 2017, 11:16 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Feb 17 2017, 08:23 PM) *
Having read the BBC's guide to the Stoke-On-Trent by-election, I am getting a feeling that there's one of the candidates that the BBC is less keen on than the others. Look at the photo of the 4 main candidates http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38955403 and note for which one they chose to use a photo that makes him look like a right eejit.


Interestingly, it appears that the BBC have http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38955403 to make said eejit look a little less eejity. I'm guessing that someone complained?

Posted by: Soy Adrián Feb 21 2017, 08:50 AM

The Tories might have had a good shot at it had Copeland not been on the same day. I suppose we'll see what the Labour turnout is like on Thursday, but if we only win narrowly and lose by 1,000 or more in Copeland then the Tories might regret putting all their resources on the easier one and not gambling.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 24 2017, 09:15 AM

The Conservatives have gained Copeland from Labour, with a majority of 2000.

Labour however managed to hold on to Stoke Central, with a 2,500 majority over 2nd placed Ukip.

Posted by: PeaceMob Feb 24 2017, 09:32 AM

A great night for the Conservatives and these results show that it is possible for the Conservatives to take lots of seats in the North. It's looking more and more like a possible Tory 400+ seats with a 100 majority in the 2020 general election.

Posted by: Queen LeQueefa Feb 24 2017, 09:38 AM

Lol not in the north east. The north wants nothing to do with the Eton lot ruling the Tories. Nothing to do with us.

Posted by: common sense Feb 24 2017, 09:41 AM

Corbyn should go as he's such a liability but he won't. Will he even go after they're crushed in 2020? Heard some Labour guy on Sky News saying they're well on course to form the next Government with Corbyn as PM in 2020 and nearly choked on my coffee with laughing.

Posted by: PeaceMob Feb 24 2017, 09:41 AM

QUOTE(Queen LeQueefa @ Feb 24 2017, 09:38 AM) *
Lol not in the north east. The north wants nothing to do with the Eton lot ruling the Tories. Nothing to do with us.


Yeah cause Labour has done so much for the North East in the last CENTURY.

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 24 2017, 09:57 AM

QUOTE(PeaceMob @ Feb 24 2017, 09:41 AM) *
Yeah cause Labour has done so much for the North East in the last CENTURY.

Have you even been to Newcastle any time in your life? Get to fuck.

Posted by: Oliver Feb 24 2017, 10:14 AM

Blyth Valley will never go anything other than Labour. Honestly, I hate our MP but he's part of the furniture now (he's been our MP for 30 years) and our constituency has been around over 50 years and we've only ever had four MPs (that's how long they last up here laugh.gif).

Posted by: Soy Adrián Feb 24 2017, 10:20 AM

Virtually nothing changed in Stoke, which probably spells doom for Paul Nuttall. UKIP collapsing is good news for the Tories in the short to medium term as it gives them more of an avenue in some Labour seats in the North (by no means all, it's not every day that you have to defend a seat where your leader has 30 years of vocal opposition to its only industry). In the long term, UKIP eating itself makes it more likely that we can retain our status as the undisputed second party in the country until the time comes that we can actually win an election.

As you might be able to tell, I'm trying really hard to be positive.

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 24 2017, 10:33 AM

Can't do it anymore. Rejoined Labour.

Posted by: burbe Feb 24 2017, 10:34 AM

QUOTE(Oliver @ Feb 24 2017, 10:14 AM) *
Blyth Valley will never go anything other than Labour. Honestly, I hate our MP but he's part of the furniture now (he's been our MP for 30 years) and our constituency has been around over 50 years and we've only ever had four MPs (that's how long they last up here laugh.gif).


My constituency has had 7 MPs since 1885 laugh.gif

Speaking of which, I think Gisela Stuart will be gone this time. Her majority has been narrowing each election and the fact she supported Leave will probably go against her. My dad will be pleased, he can't stand her! So quietly hopeful ~

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 24 2017, 10:37 AM

I don't think it'll spell immediate doom for Paul Nuttall, I think he'll stay on as leader in the medium term, but it does deal a real hammer blow to Ukip. If the upcoming local elections see Ukip either losing or maintaining about the same level of seats, then that'll be the sign that Ukip is spent as a political force.

I've said before that there is a market that Ukip could exploit post-Brexit - one that mixes a populist approach with economic policies that directly help, and appeal to, the working classes. However, the last year has shown that Ukip can't go beyond being the "anti-EU" party, and their perceived stance towards the NHS will be a millstone around their neck that they just can't remove. Personally, I'd love to see a Christian Democracy-type party, a la those on mainland Europe, become a force within UK politics, although in Great Britain at least, I think that ship has well and truly sailed.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 24 2017, 10:39 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Feb 24 2017, 11:33 AM) *
Can't do it anymore. Rejoined Labour.


Will you be rejoining the Lib Dems again the next time they win a by-election? tongue.gif

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 24 2017, 10:41 AM

Nah. Heard the words 'CCTV' in a party meeting and realised I couldn't deal with that much green pen in my life.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 24 2017, 10:47 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Feb 24 2017, 11:41 AM) *
Nah. Heard the words 'CCTV' in a party meeting and realised I couldn't deal with that much green pen in my life.


Pardon my ignorance, but what do you mean by "green pen"?

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 24 2017, 10:55 AM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Feb 24 2017, 10:47 AM) *
Pardon my ignorance, but what do you mean by "green pen"?

http://blog.tigerpens.co.uk/green-ink-the-colour-of-eccentrics-and-spooks/

Posted by: Soy Adrián Feb 24 2017, 10:56 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Feb 24 2017, 10:33 AM) *
Can't do it anymore. Rejoined Labour.

tirren.jpg

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 24 2017, 10:59 AM

QUOTE(Qassändra @ Feb 24 2017, 11:55 AM) *
http://blog.tigerpens.co.uk/green-ink-the-colour-of-eccentrics-and-spooks/


Ah, that explains a lot. Although one would have thought that the natural home for the majority of those sorts is the Green Party.

Posted by: Danny Feb 24 2017, 11:09 AM

No getting it around it now, Corbyn needs to go. The electoral results in the first half of 2016 were not as bad as the media were presenting - now, they are as bad as presented, if not even worse. A 6.5% swing away from the opposition in a mid-term by-election is off-the-charts terrible -- the closest I can find in recent times was a 3% swing from the Tories to Labour in one of the early byelections in the first Blair government.

Posted by: Qassändra Feb 24 2017, 11:09 AM

I think Lisa Nandy's good. She hits the tone right as well.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Feb 24 2017, 01:18 PM

QUOTE(common sense @ Feb 24 2017, 09:41 AM) *
Corbyn should go as he's such a liability but he won't. Will he even go after they're crushed in 2020? Heard some Labour guy on Sky News saying they're well on course to form the next Government with Corbyn as PM in 2020 and nearly choked on my coffee with laughing.

That claim is just as ridiculous as the Tory claims that William Hague would lead them to victory in 2001. It is the job of party spokespersons to talk up their party's electoral prospects even when they don't even believe it themselves.

Posted by: Harve Feb 24 2017, 01:47 PM

Farage claiming that UKIP's failiure was because their message on immigration was 'too mainstream'.

If the Tories in 2017 are repeating what UKIP said in 2015, the latter will go full 'alt-right' for 2020.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Feb 24 2017, 02:53 PM

It was mildly satisfying to see Paul Nuttalls of the UKIPs roundly rejected in Stoke but the mood music up in Copeland of a new historic nadir for Labour post-1945 was most depressing.

QUOTE(Harve @ Feb 24 2017, 01:47 PM) *
Farage claiming that UKIP's failiure was because their message on immigration was 'too mainstream'.

If the Tories in 2017 are repeating what UKIP said in 2015, the latter will go full 'alt-right' for 2020.


He's deluded, it is primarily because with the UK now leaving the EU - his party/movement has no reason to exist and will return to the fringes of UK politics.

Posted by: popchartfreak Feb 24 2017, 03:05 PM

CCTV and Libdems? Has to be better (whatever it relates to) than the Corbyn and May joint effort to allow all UK citizens to be hacked by large numbers of non-national-security jobsworths on a whim....

The US and the UK are busily in the process of surrendering large parts of long-established democratic principles using long-established fascist techniques ("Enemies Of The People" spearheading the law, the press, dissenters, freedom of speech) and it's happening very fast. Putin took a good 3 years of sneaking about knocking them off one by one before anyone noticed democracy and freedom of speech had ended.

There is no room for trivialities anymore, it's Big Issues only. In case anyone missed the headlines about the 10's of thousands of extra deaths likely partly-caused by the breakdown in UK social care support and disintegrating ambulance services (outside big urban areas).

Corbyn is useless and he will go before the election as the Unions know a massive Tory majority means their own existence will be at risk from this very right-wing government. The sorry excuses coming forth today convince no-one.

May gives the appearance of being competent using the Headmistress-Thatcher style. She is devious and does not have the JAMS in her heart. They are being fooled but it will take years and a wrecked economy to convince them. The KLF were down with JAMMS too and they also ended up burning shitloads of money to prove a point..but at least they had the excuse of Art.

UKIP are irrelevant for as long as T. May runs the UK.

That is all.

Posted by: Queen LeQueefa Feb 24 2017, 04:54 PM

QUOTE(PeaceMob @ Feb 24 2017, 09:41 AM) *
Yeah cause Labour has done so much for the North East in the last CENTURY.


They have.

Believe me as someone from the north that when the greedy Tories are in living standarda here go down the toilet and poverty shoots up.

Whenever Labour is in the change for the north is tangible.

And remember the floods? When it happened in the south there was no expense spared. When it happened in Cumbria oh sorry no money spare! All they did was a shitty photo op ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE BRIDGE grinning uncomfortably. They can f*** right off.

If you had ever stepped foot up here you'd hear about just how people have sucfered under That her and Tory governments. When Thatcher closed the mines people LITERALLY had no food and relied on neighbours during the strikes. Don't condescend us about politics. We've lived Tory hardship first hand. They have no place here. Back to Eton with them.

Posted by: PeaceMob Feb 24 2017, 05:25 PM

QUOTE(Queen LeQueefa @ Feb 24 2017, 04:54 PM) *
They have.

Believe me as someone from the north that when the greedy Tories are in living standarda here go down the toilet and poverty shoots up.

Whenever Labour is in the change for the north is tangible.

And remember the floods? When it happened in the south there was no expense spared. When it happened in Cumbria oh sorry no money spare! All they did was a shitty photo op ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE BRIDGE grinning uncomfortably. They can f*** right off.

If you had ever stepped foot up here you'd hear about just how people have sucfered under That her and Tory governments. When Thatcher closed the mines people LITERALLY had no food and relied on neighbours during the strikes. Don't condescend us about politics. We've lived Tory hardship first hand. They have no place here. Back to Eton with them.


Why are you still living in the past, and I don't know why you're instantly dismissive of Tory MPs that went to Eton when Labour are no different either, Labour is filled with Blairites and metropolitan elite MPs all living in London, far away from the North. And the current Conservative Prime Minister never went to Eton or was born into wealth, she's worked her way up in life.

Posted by: Queen LeQueefa Feb 24 2017, 05:43 PM

Exactly.

Don't be surprised if the North joins Scotland one of these days.


Posted by: PeaceMob Feb 24 2017, 06:14 PM

QUOTE(Queen LeQueefa @ Feb 24 2017, 05:43 PM) *
Exactly.

Don't be surprised if the North joins Scotland one of these days.


If the Conservatives can bring more prosperity in the North, I guarantee the Tories would dominate Westminster for a long, long time.

Posted by: Queen LeQueefa Feb 24 2017, 06:26 PM

You do know it is a point of pride to say you have never voted Tory up here ... right??

They do not represent us, tbh they should stop campaigning. Their collusion with the police with Hillsborough sums up their disregard to people of the north. They favour big business over people and the establishment over the poor.

I did not like voting Miliband but without an SNP alternative for now - and they are tooright wing forme - I grin and bear it.

Posted by: popchartfreak Feb 24 2017, 08:21 PM

QUOTE(PeaceMob @ Feb 24 2017, 05:25 PM) *
Why are you still living in the past, and I don't know why you're instantly dismissive of Tory MPs that went to Eton when Labour are no different either, Labour is filled with Blairites and metropolitan elite MPs all living in London, far away from the North. And the current Conservative Prime Minister never went to Eton or was born into wealth, she's worked her way up in life.


Just when I decided not get caught up in futile responses on here, sigh...

The past is inextricably linked to the present. You're an idiot if you don't see that. Thatcher set the banks free to become too big to fail, to lie with no control, and deceive everyone. Other countries followed suit in that moronic regulation. That has led us to the current misery. Consequences.

Being informed on the past is supposed to help one avoid making the same mistakes in the present. Sadly idiot voters with no knowledge of history and gullibility fall for liars. These liars are ALWAYS rich. They end up getting much much richer.

The Tories have traditionally been the party to look after the wealthy. They continue to do this. They have Offshore British territories to avoid tax and keep themselves all wealthy. Fact. Members of the government have offshore accounts. T. May is middle-class, and her views of the world are coloured by that background. Her husband, by the way, is an investment banker and she was introduced to him via Benazir Bhutto, so not exactly free from leg-ups to the elite.

Labour Party MPs (and other parties, bar UKIP) from wealthy backgrounds are essentially rebelling against the injustices they grew up with and know about well, Tories are in the business of keeping them going. It's very simple.

Like Mrs May, I also attended a Grammar School. I also attended poor rural primary schools (Lincolnshire), poor urban primary schools (Liverpool and Mansfield), a suburban one (Chesham) Secondary Moderns, Comprehensives and a College Of Education for teaching (or Uni as they call 'em now) so I think I have a pretty-rounded view of life and the types of people in society. For the first decade of my life we were piss-poor, poorer than anyone typically on benefits today. No central-heating. No car. No phone. No bath. No shower. No inside toilet. Heating depended on having the money to buy coal. Things improved in the 70's. Then in the 80's things got worse. Mass unemployment. Miners strikes. My grandad, dad and brother all worked down a coalmine for some of their working life. It ruins your health in old age, but when those are the only jobs going.....

So, yes, all of that "living in the past" affects my life right here right now as I care for a mother with dementia, a brother who has to work despite ill-health, and a father who is more-or-less disabled following a heart-attack 2 years ago. At the same time I get the pleasure of enduring local government cutbacks (I effectively currently do 2-full-time jobs for less than the price of one and am desperate to retire so I can support myself while caring for others). Government-funded assistance for carers is bollocks.

So, I too dwell on the past because it informs life now, and I've also had 50 years of watching what rich people do to poor people given half a heartless chance. And this current lot are taking up that challenge immediately, starting with making anything that passes through government illegal to be let into the public domain (proposed) both for whistle-blowers and the press, so they get perfect cover and protection for whatever they claim to be true for all of eternity.

This is the most dangerous government of our lifetime, potentially. We've already seen the results of Thatcherism on the poor. The rich are even richer, of course, thanks to her.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Feb 27 2017, 08:52 PM

There will be a by-election in Manchester Gorton following the death of Labour MP Gerald Kaufman. He won over 2/3rds of the vote last time with the Greens a very distant second on just under 10% so it should be a very easy Labour win. I suspect it will be held on the same day as the county elections, i.e. 4 May.

Posted by: Brett-Butler Feb 27 2017, 08:57 PM

I'd be shocked if Kaufman's replacement didn't win the constituency with over 50% of the vote, it will definitely be a predictable by-election, unlike the prior two.

He was the Father of The House before his passing. Scarily, we are only one Ken Clark-attack away from Dennis Skinner holding that role. If he does take on that mantle after the next election, well, let's just say that the swearing in of the Speaker will be very interesting indeed.

Posted by: Brétt-Butler Mar 31 2017, 06:34 PM

QUOTE(Brett-Butler @ Feb 27 2017, 09:57 PM) *
I'd be shocked if Kaufman's replacement didn't win the constituency with over 50% of the vote, it will definitely be a predictable by-election, unlike the prior two.


Well, colour me wrong, as Assange apologist George Galloway's announced that he's running in Manchester Gorton. He has form in pulling off shock by-election victories over Labour (c.f Bradford West), and the constituency does have a high level of citizens of Asian origin (which was one of the reasons given for George Galloway's victory in Bradford West), and he has many things in common with the former holder of that seat (a hatred of Israel, for example), so he could be a dark horse. His vote to leave the EU could count against him though.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 31 2017, 08:08 PM

Kaufman was a strong supporter of Israel when he was first elected. Besides, I would hope Galloway has lost all credibility by now.

Posted by: Steve201 Apr 1 2017, 08:25 AM

I was gonna say I thought Kauffman was a Zionist!

Posted by: Suedehead2 Apr 1 2017, 09:33 AM

He eventually turned against Israel because of their increasingly intransigent and right-wing governments. He went from being one of the country's strongest supporters to a fierce critic.

Posted by: Steve201 Apr 2 2017, 06:23 PM

I didn't realise that!

Posted by: Brett-Ocat Apr 8 2017, 11:31 AM

The candidates for the Manchester Gorton by election are -

Kemi Abidogun, Christian Peoples Alliance
Peter Clifford, Communist League
The Irrelevant Johnny Disco, Official Monster Raving Loony Party
Phil Eckersley, UKIP
George Galloway, Independent
David Michael Hopkins
Shaden Jaradat, Conservative
Mohammed Afzal Khan, Labour
Sufi Miah Khandoker, Independent
Jess Mayo, Green Party
Jackie Pearcey, Liberal Democrats

Labour's candidate, Mr Khan, is currently an MEP for the region, so is hoping for a win to ensure he doesn't become unemployed in two years. The Communist League (?) are fielding a candidate. It's also very Christian of the Christian People's Alliance to donate £500 towards the running of the by-election.

Prediction - Labour win, with 50% of the vote. Lib Dems second. Galloway will keep his deposit.

Posted by: Steve201 Apr 9 2017, 02:05 PM

Is there such party as the Communist Party of GB?

Posted by: Brett-Butler Apr 20 2017, 02:17 PM

The Manchester Gorton by-election has now officially been cancelled due to the General Election in June. Whether those who have already pledged to stand will get their deposit back, or whether their nomination papers will carry over to the General Election, I do not know.

Posted by: Suedehead2 Apr 20 2017, 04:42 PM

We will also no longer have the by-elections which would have been caused by the sitting MP winning a mayoral election in May.

Posted by: Doctor Blind Apr 20 2017, 08:46 PM

What a shame for George Galloway.... NOT.

Posted by: Andrew. Nov 26 2017, 10:10 PM

Scottish By Election results earlier this week:

QUOTE(Britain Elects)
Perth City South (Perth & Kinross) result:

SNP: 32.1% (+6.3)
CON: 31.2% (+6.0) HOLD.
LDEM: 28.8% (-5.9)
LAB: 5.7% (-0.7)
GRN: 1.8% (-1.2)
IND: 0.5% (+0.5)

Con elected after vote transfers.


QUOTE(Britain Elects)
Rutherglen Central & North (South Lanarkshire) first prefs:

LAB: 38.5% (+7.5) HOLD.
SNP: 27.4% (-12.0)
LDEM: 18.2% (+8.9)
CON: 12.1% (-4.2)
GRN: 2.9% (-1.1)
UKIP: 0.9% (+0.9)


Good to win (on voteshare) a ward we didn't in May but concerning result in Rutherglen given the Central Belt was so close in the General election

Posted by: Harve Nov 26 2017, 10:23 PM

These are just council elections, they get pitiful turnouts.

But re: Tories being elected in Perth off the back of Labour and Lib vote transfers - it's frustrating that the unionist bloc impacts voter preference over other political issues. The Lib Dems are diametrically opposed to the Tories on Brexit and other social issues, Labour are diametrically opposed to the Tories when it comes to unbridled capitalism. The SNP have a lot in common with these two parties, and should be getting more second/third preferences from Labour and the Lib Dems, but because Scottish politics is divided over the independence question rather than anything else, Lib Dem and Labour voters are choosing the Tories over them.

Posted by: Andrew. Nov 26 2017, 10:46 PM

QUOTE(Harve @ Nov 26 2017, 10:23 PM) *
These are just council elections, they get pitiful turnouts.

But re: Tories being elected in Perth off the back of Labour and Lib vote transfers - it's frustrating that the unionist bloc impacts voter preference over other political issues. The Lib Dems are diametrically opposed to the Tories on Brexit and other social issues, Labour are diametrically opposed to the Tories when it comes to unbridled capitalism. The SNP have a lot in common with these two parties, and should be getting more second/third preferences from Labour and the Lib Dems, but because Scottish politics is divided over the independence question rather than anything else, Lib Dem and Labour voters are choosing the Tories over them.

Well yeah but the Cardonald by election in September had a similar result so a pattern seems to be emerging here. The Unionist parties have been good at getting their vote out recently and the SNP less so so perhaps it's that but in places like Cardonald and Rutherglen you'd think they'd be promoting the left wing policies rather than independence!!

It's really disappointing I agree sad.gif

Powered by Invision Power Board
© Invision Power Services