|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Jul 26, 2024 21:18:57 GMT
Ask the 1992 Rainbow Alliance candidate for Streatham? There wasn’t one - do you mean the Natural Law Party? Did you know who I meant? Her. My recollections are vague. I was 10 and lived in the neighbouring constituency.
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jul 26, 2024 21:35:58 GMT
The Natural Law Party's highest percentage vote in 1997 by some way was in a Glasgow constituency. It's not a city widely associated with yogic flying etc., but the explanation appears to be that their candidate in that seat was called Blair. Some voters in the constituency appear to have thought that they were voting directly for Tony Blair.
|
|
|
Post by sanders on Jul 27, 2024 2:47:41 GMT
Suella defects if/when not nominated, IMHO.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,205
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 27, 2024 10:46:21 GMT
The Natural Law Party's highest percentage vote in 1997 by some way was in a Glasgow constituency. It's not a city widely associated with yogic flying etc., but the explanation appears to be that their candidate in that seat was called Blair. Some voters in the constituency appear to have thought that they were voting directly for Tony Blair. See also the "New Labour" candidate in Cardiff S/Penarth at that election for a similar if not identical thing. Stunts like that were a major reason why the electoral description rules were tightened up.
|
|
|
Post by eastmidlandsright on Jul 27, 2024 12:40:05 GMT
Suella defects if/when not nominated, IMHO. That would be an exceptionally dumb time to defect as it would make clear that it is being done for personal reasons and has nothing to do with political principle.
|
|
European Lefty
Top Poster
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 6,044
|
Post by European Lefty on Jul 27, 2024 16:34:18 GMT
Though those two statements are not necessarily mutually exclusive (though I don't really see her defecting)
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Jul 27, 2024 17:30:17 GMT
I don't really see her detecting) She does lack self awareness
|
|
graham
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,289
|
Post by graham on Jul 27, 2024 19:26:33 GMT
You might not get it back. And getting it back is likely to entail some grovelling that you find really humiliating. I will be surprised if they all get the whip back. Ending MccDonnell's career is a fairly cost-free gesture of power and authority for Starmer. I also think that it is arguably in Starmer's long-term interest to create a hard-left party that acts as a magnet for people he wants rid of, but that would be a dangerous game, they potentially become Labour's Reform. Mcdonnell may well not wish to stand again , but were he to do so I would fancy his chances as an Independent. It will be interesting to see how the PLP behaves should the party start losing by elections.
|
|
|
Post by mattbewilson on Jul 27, 2024 20:22:03 GMT
I think the real test is when we have an issue that leads to a significant difference of opinion. I think there was a lot of good will on this vote. New government, give them a chance, etc.
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jul 27, 2024 20:24:01 GMT
You might not get it back. And getting it back is likely to entail some grovelling that you find really humiliating. I will be surprised if they all get the whip back. Ending MccDonnell's career is a fairly cost-free gesture of power and authority for Starmer. I also think that it is arguably in Starmer's long-term interest to create a hard-left party that acts as a magnet for people he wants rid of, but that would be a dangerous game, they potentially become Labour's Reform. Mcdonnell may well not wish to stand again , but were he to do so I would fancy his chances as an Independent. It will be interesting to see how the PLP behaves should the party start losing by elections. I've been thinking about this myself. I think he does extremely well in Heathrow Villages, but less so in relation to an official Labour candidate further north in the constituency.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,536
|
Post by john07 on Jul 27, 2024 20:50:59 GMT
You might not get it back. And getting it back is likely to entail some grovelling that you find really humiliating. I will be surprised if they all get the whip back. Ending MccDonnell's career is a fairly cost-free gesture of power and authority for Starmer. I also think that it is arguably in Starmer's long-term interest to create a hard-left party that acts as a magnet for people he wants rid of, but that would be a dangerous game, they potentially become Labour's Reform. Mcdonnell may well not wish to stand again , but were he to do so I would fancy his chances as an Independent. It will be interesting to see how the PLP behaves should the party start losing by elections. McDonnell is not exactly charismatic in the way that Corbyn and Livingstone are. I just don’t see him following the path of defection.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 28, 2024 0:21:20 GMT
Mcdonnell may well not wish to stand again , but were he to do so I would fancy his chances as an Independent. It will be interesting to see how the PLP behaves should the party start losing by elections. I've been thinking about this myself. I think he does extremely well in Heathrow Villages, but less so in relation to an official Labour candidate further north in the constituency. Why in Heathrow villages especially?
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,843
|
Post by YL on Jul 28, 2024 7:40:14 GMT
The Natural Law Party's highest percentage vote in 1997 by some way was in a Glasgow constituency. It's not a city widely associated with yogic flying etc., but the explanation appears to be that their candidate in that seat was called Blair. Some voters in the constituency appear to have thought that they were voting directly for Tony Blair. See also the "New Labour" candidate in Cardiff S/Penarth at that election for a similar if not identical thing. Stunts like that were a major reason why the electoral description rules were tightened up. A rather odd but genuine minor party having a candidate whose surname is coincidentally the same as a party leader's is a very different thing from a deliberate attempt to confuse, even if the electoral effects might be similar.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jul 28, 2024 7:54:21 GMT
The Natural Law Party's highest percentage vote in 1997 by some way was in a Glasgow constituency. It's not a city widely associated with yogic flying etc., but the explanation appears to be that their candidate in that seat was called Blair. Some voters in the constituency appear to have thought that they were voting directly for Tony Blair. See also the "New Labour" candidate in Cardiff S/Penarth at that election for a similar if not identical thing. Stunts like that were a major reason why the electoral description rules were tightened up. Foreman is not a similar surname to Michael (?). The New Labour Party had about 4 candidates in 1997, iirc. Presumably it was a splinter breakaway party which was unhappy with Blair being too right-wing.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,205
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 28, 2024 8:50:15 GMT
See also the "New Labour" candidate in Cardiff S/Penarth at that election for a similar if not identical thing. Stunts like that were a major reason why the electoral description rules were tightened up. Foreman is not a similar surname to Michael (?). The New Labour Party had about 4 candidates in 1997, iirc. Presumably it was a splinter breakaway party which was unhappy with Blair being too right-wing.If it was an actual splinter party, then surely there should be information about it sonewhere.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jul 28, 2024 9:30:07 GMT
Foreman is not a similar surname to Michael (?). The New Labour Party had about 4 candidates in 1997, iirc. Presumably it was a splinter breakaway party which was unhappy with Blair being too right-wing.If it was an actual splinter party, then surely there should be information about it sonewhere. The South Wales Echo reported at the time that Foreman , who lived in Penarth, had been a member of the Labour party for eighteen months prior to the election and was expelled as a result of standing as a candidate. He refused to say why he was standing under the descrption except to say "I feel it is my democratic right to stand in this election, and describe myself how I wish", declined to give any personal details or be photographed. So the paper got someone to wait outside his house and take a picture when he emerged. In a further report Foreman was quoted as saying " It should be perfectly clear that I am the New Labour candidate and Mr Michael is the Labour and Co-Operative candidate to any voter that takes an interest in politics. I made it perfectly clear to Mr Michael of my intentions well before I put in nomination papers and this is now just sour grapes".
I think we can conclude that Foreman was a bad faith actor although it can't be discerned whether this was an individual act or one possibly 'encouraged' by others
It also mentions that Labour had taken legal action in Gravesham to remove the description 'New Labour' from a candidate in that constituency saying "There are special circumstances in Gravesham". I suspect those 'special circumstances' were that the seat was a key marginal, whereas CS&P was not. Foreman got 3,942 votes, a not inconsiderable total.
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Jul 28, 2024 9:38:43 GMT
It may well be however that a few, many or all of the votes the New Labour candidate received were from voters who fully understood the point he was making in opposition to the Labour and Co-operative candidate.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jul 28, 2024 9:42:46 GMT
It may well be however that a few, many or all of the votes the New Labour candidate received were from voters who fully understood the point he was making in opposition to the Labour and Co-operative candidate. I really doubt it. The South Wales Echo also quoted a voter (one Mr Harmer) who contacted Foreman as he hadn't had any leaflets from him to ask him "what he stood for". Foreman's reply was that "he agreed with Tony Blair's policies". When Harmer then asked him why he was standing against the official Labour party candidate, lead by Tony Blair, Foreman said "No Comment".
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,205
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 28, 2024 10:26:19 GMT
Though they aren't (unlike Foreman) described as such on Wikipedia (it is frustrating I don't have my 1997 Guardian pullout of the results to hand at present) I definitely seem to recall there was another "New Labour" candidate in Hackney South and Shoreditch who (as in Cardiff S) saved their deposit. One reason for this is that I remember Brian Sedgemore indignantly describing how one voter had actually tried to eat their ballot paper after realising they had voted for the "wrong" candidate.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,359
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jul 28, 2024 10:35:03 GMT
Though they aren't (unlike Foreman) described as such on Wikipedia (it is frustrating I don't have my 1997 Guardian pullout of the results to hand at present) I definitely seem to recall there was another "New Labour" candidate in Hackney South and Shoreditch who (as in Cardiff S) saved their deposit. One reason for this is that I remember Brian Sedgemore indignantly describing how one voter had actually tried to eat their ballot paper after realising they had voted for the "wrong" candidate. well if it was made from rice paper that's ok
|
|