iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,330
|
Post by iain on Apr 21, 2024 14:51:04 GMT
So we have a situation where local and national politics don't mesh. In local political terms what they did made sense, in national political terms it didn't and in the end national politics will trump local politics where it is troublesome. They ought to mesh, though. Let's go through it again. Galloway, especially since being thrown out of the Labour Party 20 years ago, has had a consistently terrible record on antisemitism, quite apart from his uncritical support of bloody autocratic, and sometimes genocidal, régimes including Syria & Iran's clerical fascists - and before someone goes for the tu quoque, I am absolutely not a supporter of Israel's current administration, indeed I hate them with a passion, even though I believe in the state's right to exist within secure borders, and to defend itself where necessary. He goes far, far further than simply being an anti-Zionists, and this is why he was endorsed by the neo-Nazi and Jew-hater Nick Griffin. He also scandalously attempted to blame Naz Shah for what was essentially her statutory rape. He constantly pathetically but very nastily attempts to undermine legitimate free speech via threats of legal action. The list goes on and on. If Galloway wishes to say Vote Lib Dem in Spotland, there's nothing the LDs can do to stop him doing that; but even if he is currently the local MP, he should be totally beyond the pale in terms of posing for pics with him, and so on, and someone active in the Lib Dems at whatever level should be aware of that, surely. The endorsement of Galloway OUGHT to be something to be actively avoided, and repudiated if it happens; voters need to be made aware of what he really is, what he really stands for. Instead of which he wins elections from time to time, then swans around the country or indeed to other countries neglecting his constituents, and second time around they realise that he is not a good representative. Of course there is little to disagree with there. But let’s not pretend we don’t know how politics, especially local politics, functions in these communities. In areas like this all party labels are more or less flags of convenience.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,330
|
Post by iain on May 1, 2024 21:37:52 GMT
|
|
andrea
Non-Aligned
Posts: 7,757
|
Post by andrea on May 3, 2024 12:53:38 GMT
So far
Healey: Labour Milkstone and Deeplish: Galloway Wardle, Shore and West Littleborough: Con West Middleton: Labour West Heywood: Labour Littleborough Lakeside: Labour Bamford: Con North Heywood: Labour Balderstone and Kirkholt: Labour
|
|
|
Post by willlucky on May 3, 2024 12:54:42 GMT
First set of results through here.
Lab holds in Balderstone and Kirkholt, Littleborough Lakeside, North Heywood, West Heywood and West Middleton.
Con holds in Bamford and Wardle Shore and West Littleborough.
Workers Party have made their first gain, Milestone and Deeplish with a majority of 1099.
|
|
|
Post by listener on May 3, 2024 13:06:03 GMT
Milkstone and Deeplish is a gain from Lab. Retiring councillor, Shahid Mohammed, was seeking re-election.
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on May 6, 2024 17:53:30 GMT
Only two gains for the Workers Party. The two wards they won, Central Rochdale and Milkstone & Deeplish, are majority Muslim, but they fell short in Kingsway (42% Muslim) and didn't even stand in Smallbridge & Firgrove or Spotland & Falinge (both over 30%). Among the places they did stand though was Littleborough Lakeside, where they received a grand total of 17 votes.
The localist loss referred to here I think is in East Middleton, where the sitting councillor was originally elected for the Middleton Independent Party but defected to Labour less than a month later.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,876
|
Post by Sibboleth on May 6, 2024 18:49:46 GMT
My guess is that apparently unattached independents would have done better in the mixed wards than candidates associated with the Galloway brand, which does act as a bit of an incentive for those who are not the target audience to actually vote.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on May 6, 2024 19:04:07 GMT
Only two gains for the Workers Party. The two wards they won, Central Rochdale and Milkstone & Deeplish, are majority Muslim, but they fell short in Kingsway (42% Muslim) and didn't even stand in Smallbridge & Firgrove or Spotland & Falinge (both over 30%). Among the places they did stand though was Littleborough Lakeside, where they received a grand total of 17 votes. The localist loss referred to here I think is in East Middleton, where the sitting councillor was originally elected for the Middleton Independent Party but defected to Labour less than a month later. Littleborough Lakeside must have been an enthusiastic local. Otherwise it is deranged targeting.
|
|
Ports
Non-Aligned
Posts: 601
|
Post by Ports on May 7, 2024 15:21:31 GMT
My guess is that apparently unattached independents would have done better in the mixed wards than candidates associated with the Galloway brand, which does act as a bit of an incentive for those who are not the target audience to actually vote. Perhaps with the way it has been talked about it would surprise people to know that only four WPB councillors were elected after all - and none in Oldham and Blackburn. To me it is a common theme whereby Galloway receives or takes the credit for being a well-known part of a movement when his own contribution is more limited and more importantly will remain limited for the reasons you hinted at.
|
|