Labour win two by-elections.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-68277176
Roll on Rochdale!
|
Wellingborough by election loss is the biggest swing since ww2 i read this morning. Looks like lots of Con voters stayed at home, however Labour did pretty well getting more voters. Reform are said it be more than happy with their performance.
Turnout well down.
|
>> Wellingborough by election loss is the biggest swing since ww2 i read this morning.
The Beeb just said it was the second biggest swing.
|
|
Turnouts are often fairly low in by-elections aren't they?
|
>> Turnouts are often fairly low in by-elections aren't they?
They certainly have been latterly. Whether it would be different if we had a minority government on the cusp of losing power I don't know.
|
|
There’s no way the Comservatives can recover in time not to suffer an overwhelming defeat in the General Election. I doubt they get back into power for at ten years . A good chance that the Conservative Party will fall apart and cease to exist as such.
|
>> . A good chance that the Conservative Party will fall apart and cease to exist
>> as such.
Unlikely, far too much money behind them.
|
|
Undoubtedly something will emerge from the ashes but it won’t look l much like the the Conservative Party we have known i.e. a broad coalition of the right. Division and fragmentation is already too far gone.
|
After 12+ years in power all governments have a back catalogue of errors, omissions, deceit etc.
The ousted party will go through leadership and direction turmoil.
The Tories in 1997 went through Hague and Duncan Smith before getting to an electable Cameron.
Labour in 2010 went through Harman (twice), Milliband and Corbyn before finding salvation in Starmer. In 1979 (start of Thatcher) they were headed by Foot, Kinnock, Smith an Beckett before getting to 3 E's Blair.
Whether Labour score a landslide in the next 10 months is rather more debatable - although I expect Sir Kier to get the keys to No 10. The new government has only promises - none of the baggage and very little experience.
Whether they last more than one term depends on economic performance and how long it takes the new opposition to find a new electable leader. For a few years the incoming can blame their predecessors for any problems - but after 5 years the excuses will start to wear a bit thin.
|
>> There’s no way the Comservatives can recover in time not to suffer an overwhelming defeat
>> in the General Election. I doubt they get back into power for at ten years
>> . A good chance that the Conservative Party will fall apart and cease to exist
>> as such.
Do, please try to keep things in proportion.
The British electoral system has had a repeated cycle of 10 to 15 years in office for one party, the electorate get fed up with them, they are then voted out and replaced by the other party for 10 to 15 years, the electorate get fed up with them and they are voted out in turn.
Rinse and repeat.
Here you are. It's a Wikipedia thing about the ruling parties in British government.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_governments
|
“The British electoral system has had a repeated cycle of 10 to 15 years in office for one party, the electorate get fed up with them, they are then voted out and replaced by the other party for 10 to 15 years,“
The Liberal party thought that until 1918.
|
So by all projections, Tories will lose convincingly at the next election. Sunak obviously needs to seek re election but there is a good chance he will end up, immediately anyway, being the leader of the opposition but imagine he will lose that title pretty soon after the election. But he doesn’t want to sit for 5 years in the opposition benches. He can’t influence contacts from there.
Same with many current Tory MPs, some may find themselves re elected and when they look around the opposition benches they may wish they did not win! I suppose there will be a cross mix, some career MPs, some that will think they gain more party power by being there but others like JRM etc won’t be happy being in opposition.
Could be interesting times ahead.
|
I expect a large number of Tory MPs to stand down - particularly those with previous ministerial responsibilities and age 45-50+.
Opposition is impotence. As a career they have gone as far as they ever will. Some may stay for the local kudos of being an MP but likely spend little time in Westminster.
Younger MPs are more likely to stay, seeing an opportunity for a shadow role and the possibility of a career with substance in 5-10 years time.
Sunak will stand down as leader - possibly staying around for as long as it takes to appoint a successor. Falling on sword seems to be the fate of leaders who lose - and I suspect he has plenty else to keep him occupied.
|
But once he has stood down as a leader, will he continue being a backbench MP?
Or resign and call by election.
|
"So by all projections, Tories will lose convincingly at the next election"
If the swing to Labour in the General Elections is the same as the same at Wellingborough Tories would have just 4 seats
It won't happen of course but it does put the scale of the problem they face into perspective
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Fri 16 Feb 24 at 23:00
|
Well, as it seems likely that Labour will get in at the 2024/25 General Elections and be in for 10 - 15 years, I am afraid I won't be around to see it.
I would like to remind you of the reception Tony Blair got in 1997 - was it? He was the New Messiah, that didn't turn sour, did it?
|
Not sure of the 10-15 years bit.
Gonna take a helluva time to try and fix everything that the Tories have broken. Could well get to the end of first term and not see many changes for the better.
Edit - and the Tories still have more time in power to break even more.
Last edited by: Bobby on Sat 17 Feb 24 at 10:30
|
I don't think I'd be alone in being somewhat disappointed if any party, especially one with a large majority, hadn't managed significant change within 5 years. Sounds like you are already making excuses!! :-)
Though I'm not sure how one measures when things are "fixed", and undoubtedly some other stuff will get broken along the way.
|
>> I don't think I'd be alone in being somewhat disappointed if any party, especially one
>> with a large majority, hadn't managed significant change within 5 years. Sounds like you are
>> already making excuses!! :-)
One certainty is that they won't get halfway into term #2 and blow both feet off......
|
I think, to be honest, you're looking back as far as Attlee for a government that really shifted to ground in the first term.
Thatcher was in term #3 before simplification of income tax got into its stride and the multiple higher rates went....
|
One certainty is that they won't get halfway into term #2 and blow both feet
>> off......
>>
There's no certainty when it comes to politicians.
|
Blaming the previous government for problems unsolved works for a few years. As an excuse it becomes increasingly weak.
After 5 years the public will start to seriously doubt the competence of those they elected if significant problems persist.
Labour need to ensure unemployment remains low, real incomes increasing, NHS waiting lists reduced, illegal immigration solved (whatever that means), public sector borrowing reducing, economy growing etc.
|
>> Labour need to ensure unemployment remains low, real incomes increasing, NHS waiting lists reduced, illegal
>> immigration solved (whatever that means), public sector borrowing reducing, economy growing etc.
That would be quite a trick, but I agree. The Conservatives don't even have a plan for that.
While planning tax cuts, their own outlook is for debt:GDP to be 4% higher at the end of 5 years than it is now. Crooks.
|
>> I don't think I'd be alone in being somewhat disappointed if any party, especially one
>> with a large majority, hadn't managed significant change within 5 years. Sounds like you are already making excuses!! :-)
You must be massively disappointed with the Conservatives then.
Sadly, I don't think they will be permanently exterminated. At some point it will dawn on them that they have progressively reduced the breadth of their own appeal by moving ever further to the right.
If they lose, and Badenoch gets hold of the steering wheel, it will I hope make them even less acceptable to centre right voters but eventually they will stumble on a leader with some integrity and humanity and enough sense to see how irrelevant they have become. I just hope whoever that is has a ruthless streak and boots the neo-nazis, crooks and charlatans like Shapps far into the frozen wastes.
Meanwhile Starmer has done a very good job of making Labour at least digestible for the centre/centre left inclined. The policies he has ditched have in that respect been as important as the ones he has promoted.
The time is near for Labour to bolster its position by giving voters some positive reasons to vote for it, not just getting rid of the incumbents.
I'd like one of those to be putting some meat on the bones of making Brexit work. Such as working towards re-joining the customs union. I don't think that particular one will happen but it's probably the best single idea for recovering lost growth there is. Without growth there will be little scope for improving the NHS, services, prisons, infrastructure, housing stock, education, policing etc that the Conservatives have systematically destroyed for the benefit of their patrons over the last 14 years.
Last edited by: Manatee on Sat 17 Feb 24 at 14:07
|
In 1964 we had Harold Wilson bleating on about thirteen years of Tory misrule.
History repeats itself.
|
>>History repeats itself.
Indeed it does. And still the turkeys vote for Christmas.
|
>> >>History repeats itself.
>>
>> Indeed it does. And still the turkeys vote for Christmas.
>>
Reflect on the fact that in 2019 44% of the vote went to the Tories with only 32% to Labour.
Categorising the majority as turkeys, whilst not impossible, evidences more than a little arrogance on the part of the opposition who seemed to have nothing of interest to offer any other than dyed in the wool lefty Corbynites.
|
Replying to Manatee at 14:04
I would be more impressed by your arguments if you could drop the insults and abuse and simply be clinical.
|
I insulted no one. I used a metaphor to say that in my opinion many people vote Conservative against their own best interest.
That isn't all of them. Broadly, the ones without capital or bargaining power.
I felt this less strongly until the last few years. Perhaps it was inevitable, and it won't disappear just because there is a Labour government should that happen, but the UK is going the way of the US, which despite being the richest country in the world has millions living in poverty or with inadequate health care.
The myth that underpins this is that anyone get rich if they work hard enough. In reality, the controllers of money steal from the wider society that creates the wealth, incidentally consuming far more than their fair share of natural resources.
This is a bit shorthand. Sorry if it's hard to understand. I don't mean that as an insult either.
|
I used a metaphor to say that in my opinion many
>> people vote Conservative against their own best interest.
>
Why do you think they do that?
|
>> I used a metaphor to say that in my opinion many
>> >> people vote Conservative against their own best interest.
>> >
>>
>> Why do you think they do that?
>>
Edit, i think I asked you that before. Feel free to ignore.
|
>> >> I used a metaphor to say that in my opinion many
>> >> >> people vote Conservative against their own best interest.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Why do you think they do that?
>> >>
>>
>> Edit, i think I asked you that before. Feel free to ignore.
It's still a very good question. Maybe I'm wrong. If not, I can only speculate. Perhaps someone who thinks it might still be reasonable to vote for another Conservative government can answer?
Most will have good motives. Perhaps they believe it's essential for general prosperity, and they 'trust' not so much that it will make them personally better off but that that will protect or reduce risk for them and their families and even society in some way - to vote for a 'progressive' party risks upsetting the status quo.
It seems likely part of it is just the association of progressive alternatives with industrial unrest, revolution and communism. "Socialist" is a big insult in the US and whilst it's not as bad as that here, one of my neighbours pretty much said that to me 2 or 3 years ago (he asked if I knew the Nazis were socialists). Having heard this one before, I asked what socialist policies he didn't like - was it old age pensions, social housing, or the national health service?
The big lie to me is the implication that if you are poor, it's your fault. That getting everybody into work is the answer. There are lots of hard-working people who are poor, and there's no denying that even in "broken Britain" there should be enough wealth to relieve that.
For all the talk about "highest ever tax take", ours is still well below that of our peers. We don't hear quite so often that the rich are the richest they have ever been.
I apologise if I am over-righteous. Left-leaners tend to think it's about right and wrong, fair and unfair, rather that holding a different but equally valid opinion. The implication of that is that those on the right are bad people. Clearly that is not the case. Some of my best friends etc...
|
It's still a very good question. Maybe I'm wrong. If not, I can only speculate.
>> Perhaps someone who thinks it might still be reasonable to vote for another Conservative government
>> can answer?
>>
>> Most will have good motives. Perhaps they believe it's essential for general prosperity, and they
>> 'trust' not so much that it will make them personally better off but that that
>> will protect or reduce risk for them and their families and even society in some
>> way - to vote for a 'progressive' party risks upsetting the status quo.
>>
I think people have a more individual streak here than in other countries so what's seen as normal, such as higher taxes, are seen as weird here.
For one policy that you might see as gov help others might see as gov interference. As Labour tends to have more positions (perhaps not policy) of the former enough see it as the latter. The wheel only tends to turn when people get bored of a Con government.
|
>> I think people have a more individual streak here than in other countries so what's
>> seen as normal, such as higher taxes, are seen as weird here.
It's interesting you see it that way, I tend to think people are being conservative, small c, as in risk averse, cautious.
Traditionally Conservatism has had two aspects. On one hand, support for the monarchy, tradition, the constitution, laissez faire and free speech but an inclination not to rock the boat too much - evolution not revolution, with gradual incremental change only where necessary. On the other, a libertarian desire for individual autonomy and self reliance, a belief in low taxation on the basis that people can better choose where to spend their money than the government can that maybe fits better with your perception.
The present Conservative parliamentary party doesn't really fit into that, certainly the libertarian side is dominating but it seems to have twisted into authoritarianism - stripping human rights, banning protest and strikes.
The Dominic Grieveses, Rory Stewarts and Ken Clarkes would look quite at home now in Starmer's Labour and completely out of place in the present government.
As I said in an earlier post, where I think Starmer has carefully made Labour more broadly tolerable (not yet actually appealing), the Conservatives have accidentally narrowed their acceptability by becoming very right wing and authoritarian. And if the election is a wipeout, the people currently dominating will just think they haven't been right wing enough. I'm pretty sure they are wrong about that, and if the party does crumble it will be their fault.
|
It's interesting you see it that way, I tend to think people are being conservative,
>> small c, as in risk averse, cautious.
>>
On the other,
>> a libertarian desire for individual autonomy and self reliance, a belief in low taxation on
>> the basis that people can better choose where to spend their money than the government
>> can that maybe fits better with your perception.
Yes that more it, I don't really see the former (risk averse etc) playing much of a part. For example you describe them as authoritarian, banning protests most in the public don't really care about that. Of all the words used to describe the current gov's lack of popularity I'd bet those phrases aren't even in the top 20. Which I think supports my general point that people are more individual and so don't mind protests or strikes as long as they don't inconvenience them.
I doubt Labour will be in hurry to repeal those laws.
And if the election is a wipeout, the people
>> currently dominating will just think they haven't been right wing enough. I'm pretty sure they
>> are wrong about that, and if the party does crumble it will be their fault.
>>
Possibly so, but I doubt they see themselves as too right wing at all. They'll see themselves as centre ground politics as opposed to a variety of left wing parties.
|
I mostly vote Tory but have done otherwise on occasions. But I have never voted Labour, and I doubt I ever would. I suppose it's "the more lefty stuff" which bothers me most, and I don't really want to quantify that before you ask, as I'm really just trying to offer a reasoning for me tending towards turkeyism :-)
I really dislike the idea of not using my vote, but nor do I see a "protest" vote particularly useful.
I'm in a fairly blue area so another consideration has been in the past that my little vote won't make any difference anyway. However the LibDems lead the coalition with Labour which unseated the Tories in 2022.*
So the Tories (usually) get my vote, and probably will this time around. I am certainly far from happy with them at the moment but my take on the alternatives (probably) suit me even less.
* Which hasn't stopped some of the staunch Labourites on social media blaming the Tory council for everything in the borough. It's as though they don't know that the Tories are no longer in power (actually they clearly don't!!). Oh, and also they don't realise that Council isn't responsible for drains, weather, the railway and 101 other things they get the blame for in the FB group (which I daren't join but I know someone in the Council who has to moderate the rubbish which is posted)
|
Thanks Smokie.
I won't press, but if any 'lefty stuff' occurs to you I'd be interested. I'm trying to think of something myself. Wealth taxes?
|
That’s interesting Smokie.
To me who is a complete anti Tory and everything they stand for, I feel the current Tories have went far too right and that the current Labour is a direct replacement for the traditional Tory party. Even as recent as May’s party. So for a Tory voter to say they would prefer to vote for far right Tory cos they fear Labour interests me.
Current Labour is sadly a million miles from the Labour of John Smith.
|
Not sure I said fear Bobby, but if that's how you interpret it so be it.
But surely you can see what I mean - after all, you are pretty similar but just on the other side of the fence (even though you seem much more enthusiastically anti Tory in your stance than I am anti-Labour). Would you ever vote Tory, even a more "traditional" version?
And just to repeat myself, as it seems you missed it first time around, "I am certainly far from happy with them at the moment"
|
Would you ever vote Tory, even a more "traditional" version?
There is no chance of Tories ever moving left enough to get my vote.
|
>> Would you ever vote Tory, even a more "traditional" version?
When Corbyn was leader and potential PM? Absolutely Yes I would. I would have voted for Putin rather than him. The Labour party is just as bad as the Tories with the way they flip flop from extreme to moderate. And that there is a microcosm of why our political party system is a mess.
And it gets my goat that this filters down to local council elections. Party allegiances at that level should be banned.
Last edited by: Zero on Sun 18 Feb 24 at 19:36
|
>> Current Labour is sadly a million miles from the Labour of John Smith.
Just as well really, he was leader (in opposition) for just 22 months, changed nothing, and during his time in shadow cabinet changed nothing and did nothing. Nice bloke and all that, but was only voted in as a nonentity that would upset no factions of the party.
|
I like to think most people see the problem with selectively disapplying human rights? Of all things for me, that puts them outside the pale.
Is it too cliched to mention Pastor Niemoller?
|
>> I like to think most people see the problem with selectively disapplying human rights? Of
>> all things for me, that puts them outside the pale.
Not at all, as long as doesn't interfere in their lives, many I'd bet aren't bothered. Strikes are fine as long as it's not stop oil type protests then they (broadly speaking) want the gov to do something. If it's standing in a car par park waving a banner getting wet fine.
When it comes to human rights, that's code for lefty lawyers clogging the system up or making sure burglers get compo etc.
Not all of course, but the Cons know their plans play well, especially on immigrants. Starmer knows it too.
>> Is it too cliched to mention Pastor Niemoller?
>>
>>
Cliched? No probably not, not very helpfully though if you want to conveince people at a population level. Probably switch a lot of people off tbh.
|
>> I would like to remind you of the reception Tony Blair got in 1997 -
>> was it? He was the New Messiah, that didn't turn sour, did it?
He did well for a number of years, till the self importance got to him. Like it does to all of them regardless of political leaning.
|
In political debate, views expressed are frequently unnecessary and deliberately inflammatory extremes.
The UK political playing field inhabits the centre ground. In a substantially two party system electoral success relies upon attracting (simplistically) 51% of the vote. Both parties have to operate within the same environment - economic, financial, international, democratic etc.
Most policies will be similar - only at the margins will they diverge often based upon a delusional dogma driven rationale - eg: borrow to invest, reduce taxes to encourage investment.
Extreme wings will fail. The Reform "branch" of the Tories has about as much general traction as had the Corbynite left. Both a response to failure creating dogma driven polarisation.
I am Tory voter, with occasional forays into the LibDem world for local elections and a protest vote. I value objectivity over dogma, believe in balancing the books, tend towards self reliance and small state.
Increased taxes to improve public services and may be justified if that is what is democratically mandated. Clarity is needed - who pays, what are the impacts, on what will it be spent, how will success or failure be measured. Simply playing the envy or unfair card is not justification.
Tory performance over the last few years leaves a lot to be desired - Brexit was an abysmal mistake. Liz Truss was a triumph of dogma over competence. To express my displeasure, Lib Dem would be the alternative. Labour managed 8% in 2019 - not in the frame.
Starmer seems a decent but uninspiring politician. In their efforts to form the next government they are playing a standard politics- create the illusion they can solve all the problems, criticise the current incumbents, avoid committing to hard plans. This does not impress me!
|
|
I doubt it. There are certainly a number of seats with large Asian populations but only one George Galloway. Like him or loathe him (I’m in the loathe camp) he is a brilliant speaker and rabble rouser and knows how to stir up a crowd but has no party behind him. I suspect he will lose to an official Labour candidate when then the GE comes round. By then the passions around Gaza are likely to have cooled
|
>>By then the passions around Gaza are likely to have cooled
That or they'll have spread and be very hot indeed!!
|
I agree that it may be down to timing of the next general election and whether Gaza is still on the agenda - although even if the conflict ended next week the consequences will linger.
But reflect upon the UKIP experience - in 2015 they went from inconsequential to 3.8m votes (13% of the turnout) on the back of another very effective communicator - Nigel Farage.
|
And how many MPS did UKIP have?
Their main success has been taking over the Conservative party
Starmer hit the nail on the head this week when said "these are not the Conservatives your parents voted for".
Gaza is not a serious problem for Labour. It's serious problem for Gazans and Israel. Not every Labour candidate is like the one in Rochdale and thankfully there are no more George Galloways.
Last edited by: Manatee on Fri 1 Mar 24 at 09:37
|
Their main success has been taking over the Conservative party
>>
>>
>> Gaza is not a serious problem for Labour. It's serious problem for Gazans and Israel.
>> Not every Labour candidate is like the one in Rochdale and thankfully there are no
>> more George Galloways.
>>
Well Labour has been 'taken over' by their ex-leader in the past with somewhat different policies. I wouldn't rule it out.
|
|
I don't think they'll get anymore MPs but they'll split the vote in enough seats for it to be an issue.
|
I don’t see many people voting for a party that number one aim is to leave NATO and is avowedly pro Russia.
“We categorically reject the attempt by the ruling class, its paid agents and the EU imperialist bloc to rewrite history so as to equate the Soviet Union with Hitlerite Germany. “
|
|
I don't think many voters bother reading manifestos.
|
'Gorgeous' George has long history as a disruptor. This is his fourth seat but he's not held one at a General election since Hillhead.
I suspect that, like Farage, he's difficult to work with and will not garner the following needed to disrupt Labour at the GE.
|
|
The fact a local man standing on an Independent tag came second is also interesting.
|
>> Is gaza an election problem for sks?
NAh, labour party disowned their candidate before the election, its a really low turn out, and by-elections are not really an indication. This one was pretty unique
|
I wonder how many people will remember George's appearance on Big Brother?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=6v9IXwFb_cg
|
The guy's a loon but I still recall him giving a big middle finger to the Yanks about Iraq:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnoST3eQm0k
|
Kingswood and Wellinborough By-Elections - sooty123
