Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 21:13:33 GMT
. The victory of the hard to far right was the biggest story of the night. Where - overall the Centre Right did best with 30% and if the Tories were more Pro EU they would be major players but instead have to be second fiddle to Merkle, then came the Social Democrats, 25%. The Far left got 5% and the Far Right 5%, if we take a simplistic left right view it was near enough 50/50 but the Centre Right have the strongest most organised presence. If it came to the crunch a centre left / right alliance would crush any extremist moves. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 21:14:25 GMT
Addendum. Merkle will not let Fascists thrive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 21:33:34 GMT
Harry Cole speculating a very high turnout here tonight
|
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Jun 5, 2014 21:39:06 GMT
Saw this on Mike Smithson's twitter Mike Smithson @msmithsonpb · 4h UKIP using LibDem style bar chart to win over the anti-CON vote in Newark  It doesn't quite say "Labour cannot win here vote UKIP" but that is the implication. My guess is that we'll see quite a few of this type of bar chart leaflets from UKIP in their target seats next year. Laugh as you want, this is a historic first. A bar chart on an election leaflet that doesn't make the "31%" bar half the size of the "32%" bar, doesn't distort the axes, doesn't ignore third parties; a bar chart that is accurate. Look on it well, ye may not see its like ever again. I've not seen it done before. All point out the utter naivety of UKIP in doing this.... NOW. One gripe: using a Euro election result to convince the voters the result is relevant to a Parliamentary by-election, where voters tend to vote different. But as the Euro election was but a fortnight ago, we can forgive them. Now, back to "ONLY X can beat so and so here - So and So 24,709 (bar so high); Party X 4,891 (bar almost as high); Unelectable third party 2,241 (teensy bar - can't win here) |
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Jun 5, 2014 21:46:17 GMT
Ludicrous hyping up of UKIP on a handful of unrepresentative results, and laying it on with a trowel about how bad things were for Ed and Labour?? Over a thousand complaints you know, a record for political coverage in modern times - and no, I wasn't one of them  UKIP ramping is always tedious, but complaining about Robinson in the BBC election results ramping them is picky and pointless. You might just as easily complain to the PCC or whoever about every single newspaper and every TV station ramping UKIP on every page every day for the last two months. Ramping doesn't just mean explicitly saying "Vote UKIP!" but just talking about them when they're irrelevant. If every newspaper in the country had said 'Here, look at the Patriotic Socialist Party. Tomorrow: look at the Patriotic Socialist Party leader drinking a pint in a pub in Dewsbury. Weekend edition: another picture of the Patriotic Socialist drinking a pint in a pub in Redditch. And another of him drinking a pint in Ashton under Lyne.' then I daresay they might have picked up an MEP or so on the back of such froth. Well, UKIP's the same. There was no reason to talk-talk-talk Farage - the media did so out of want of something to say, for God knows how long this year and last year. I've a nice theory UKIP only exists because of the media mindlessly going on about them over and over - either just ruminating about the phenomenon of UKIP, or all those individual 'candidates say the darnedest things!' stories. If they were ignored the way, say, the Greens tend to be ignored except for Question Time, they'd go away. That's my theory anyway. and I'll stick to it despite any facts presented to me. If on the other hand the complaint is about Robinson saying Labour weren't having a good night, well, they weren't. Two thirds of the 300-ish gains were in London. Outside there, where 7/8 of the English electorate lives, not brilliant results, given the last time these seats were up was when G Brown (anyone remember him?) and Labour were as popular as cholera. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Jun 5, 2014 21:49:24 GMT
In a spirit of ecumenical politics, a Tory win would of course be an excuse to hear that favourite of by-election quotations:
"This victory for [insert name of party] in [stronghold of said party] is a clear sign that all seats support [insert name of party] regardless of their entirely different demographics, circumstances, and indeed all sense of reality".
Not normally phrased like that, but it's always a post by-election favourite.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jun 5, 2014 21:49:54 GMT
Although not an exit poll, the final Survation survey indicates UKIP may have "won" with men but come third with women behind Labour.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 21:53:28 GMT
Although not an exit poll, the final Survation survey indicates UKIP may have "won" with men but come third with women behind Labour. Same problem with the SNP - its yer patriarchy aginst yer matriarchy. or  |
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Jun 5, 2014 21:55:21 GMT
I think that contempt for the BBC's election coverage has been cross party since "Ming's bling" at least. If I lived in London I might have been tempted to sink the barge they used during the 2010 election coverage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 21:58:11 GMT
The Tory spin doctors have been successful in getting many a journo to repeat this line - 'If Ukip can't win here a week after topping a national poll, then when will they win?'
|
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Jun 5, 2014 21:59:14 GMT
In a spirit of ecumenical politics, a Tory win would of course be an excuse to hear that favourite of by-election quotations: "This victory for [insert name of party] in [stronghold of said party] is a clear sign that all seats support [insert name of party] regardless of their entirely different demographics, circumstances, and indeed all sense of reality". Not normally phrased like that, but it's always a post by-election favourite. Don't do it. UKIP already started the internet warrior chorus about dawn this morning, that the Tories shouldn't have to be campaigning in this seat, that they have got hundreds of activists up in this Team 2015 thing means they've lost already... the more Tory activists up there, the more the Tories are desperate, that sort of thing. That a major national party is able to rustle up activists from all over appears to have slipped UKIP by, they are making up for it by prats making comments on internet sites instead (and oh yes I do get the irony of sitting with a glass of Malbec, nowhere near Newark, and typing this UKIP internet-commenter bashing up here) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 22:03:50 GMT
From James Lansdale;
"Labour source says the Tories threw "the k------ sink, the butler's sink, the crockery, and even the Aga" at the #newarkbyelection"
|
|
|
|
Post by psephos on Jun 5, 2014 22:07:12 GMT
From James Lansdale; "Labour source says the Tories threw "the k------ sink, the butler's sink, the crockery, and even the Aga" at the #newarkbyelection" If you're going to play the class war card - and it's a card to play if all else is lost - you have to play it before the polls close. There's wisdom there. Can I have Axelrod's job? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 22:17:00 GMT
From the Newark Advertiser;
Returning officer Andrew Muter says he believes turn-out could be close to 58 per cent...
|
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Jun 5, 2014 22:21:05 GMT
From James Lansdale; "Labour source says the Tories threw "the k------ sink, the butler's sink, the crockery, and even the Aga" at the #newarkbyelection" If you're going to play the class war card - and it's a card to play if all else is lost - you have to play it before the polls close. There's wisdom there. Can I have Axelrod's job? And even you're going to play class war don't start talking about Agas. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jun 5, 2014 22:26:46 GMT
A butler sink, but not a belfast sink?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 22:29:40 GMT
Remember when 58% would have been considered a disappointing turnout in a byelection?
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jun 5, 2014 22:30:37 GMT
The Tory spin doctors have been successful in getting many a journo to repeat this line - 'If Ukip can't win here a week after topping a national poll, then when will they win?' to which the response would be "somewhere more favourable at some other time". ** ** possibly during a general election when no party can send all its people to one place at the same time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 22:36:03 GMT
I listened to the local election results on the radio and I was annoyed by how lacking in knowledge they all were. Jim Naughtie expressing shock when reporting Birmingham at Labour losing Kingstanding ("a safe Labour seat for years" - err, well, not lately) and stating that Labour losing the wards in Edgbaston constituency was a sign that Labour will lose the seat in 2015 - totally ignorant of the fact that the seat ticket-split in 2010 and actually showed a swing to Labour since then.
Also, it was being confidently stated that Labour would struggle to make 150 gains. All on early results. That is what was so stupid.
Labour didn't do well outside London, but it did better than the guesses suggested. I have to say, it was all a bit rubbish and the surprise at some of the UKIP gains in areas they had won in the County elections last year was just weird.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jun 5, 2014 22:37:27 GMT
In 1992 Newark declared at 2:29am with an 82.2% turnout.
See 2:34 below:
|
|
