Heywood and Middleton

[bungle]

Oct 10, 2014 10:16:13 GMT The Bishop said:

Oct 10, 2014 6:31:35 GMT bungle said:

This I can well believe. Moribund or complacent local parties that have forgotten how to campaign are much easier prey to an insurgent alternative. It is nothing new...Liverpool Edge Hill 1979 et al. When a party has been recently fired up and has a good campaign infrastructure it can make a difference - Hartlepool 2004 springs to mind.

Agreed it rarely happens when a party is in opposition but I believe this trend will only increase over time.

Not that long ago, tbh - Bromley/Chislehurst 2006, anyone?

(which led to the Tories learning some lessons and doing much better in by-elections later in that parliament, tbf)

Absolutely. B&C crossed my mind too when typing the above. I looked at the result and the parallels were quite strong - supposed safe seat long held by same party, complacent campaign infrastructure/party machine, classic insurgent 'squeeze' message resulting in 75%+ of the vote going to the top two (just like H&M).

Thus while this is UKIPs moment people should keep some sense of proportion. I think future by-elections will attract more of this 'anyone other than the big two' voting pattern, regardless of who is in government or opposition. We aren't really used to this trend but it has happened before - think the SDP with Warrington then Crosby. Today's insurgents could be UKIP, Green, new parties/independents (Blaenau Gwent 2006?) and eventually the Lib Dems will fill that role again (which until 2010 they were experts at, having honed the 'busted mattress and pot hole' technique since the early 70s). It all depends on which seats become vacant and getting a clear acknowledgement about who is best placed to challenge. Once you have that other parties stand back, not wanting to enter the arms race of rushing to spend £100k+ on a likely defeat.

What is delicious for us lot is where there isn't this acceptance about who is best placed to be the recipient of the 'we're not one of them' vote (as Joe identified, Green v UKIP v Lab/Tory in a by-election in a few places could be very tasty). It would certainly make for a fascinating campaign with a real vigour; a sort of variation on Little and Sad in 1995...

[Sibboleth]

I mean arguably the only odd thing is the party that benefits in that kind of situation; the Liberals were causing by-election jitters in all manner of safe seats from the 60s onwards. Particularly when there was a local issue that could be exploited (there often is). I think we sometimes (wrongly) assume that 'discontent' with the political process is a new thing.

[Devil Wincarnate]

Bromley and Chislehurst also had the added factor that the prior MP treated his constituents with a degree of contempt, something that couldn't really be levelled at Jim Dobbin.

[bungle]

Oct 10, 2014 9:19:03 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

Its a good job that the LibDems had their conference this week to boost their votes or they might really have been in trouble.

Thanks God for Nick's clarion call, eh?

It made all the different. The stats "prove" it. Alas I've no time to put this into a nice yellow bar chart...nor point out the inconvenient results I omitted.

South Shields - 1.4%
Newark - 2.6%
Heywood - 5.1%

"Go home and prepare for government!"

[The Bishop]

Oct 10, 2014 0:26:47 GMT right said:

Lib Dems held deposit. Have Labour really increased their share of the vote?

Easy to mock, but when *was* the last time an incumbent party recieved such a fright in a by-election despite *increasing* its share (however marginally)?

[Sibboleth]

Do Newry & Armagh and South Down count?

[Sibboleth]

But, seriously, I know it nearly happened in Newcastle-under-Lyme after John Golding resigned, but you weren't asking for nearly.

[The Bishop]

I did think of Merthyr Tydfil in 1972, but strictly speaking Labour weren't the incumbents there.....

(present day politics has a very 70s feel about it, no?)

[Deleted]

Oct 10, 2014 11:30:47 GMT The Bishop said:

I did think of Merthyr Tydfil in 1972, but strictly speaking Labour weren't the incumbents there.....

(present day politics has a very 70s feel about it, no?)

I feel there is an appetite for 'real' change not the phony change Labour are offering.
For many voting Lib/Lab/Con is voting for the status quo with the only real alternatives and for change is UKIP and the Greens.

[Sibboleth]

You're sounding just like how the LibDems used to.

[nigelashton]

Oct 10, 2014 11:30:47 GMT The Bishop said:

I did think of Merthyr Tydfil in 1972, but strictly speaking Labour weren't the incumbents there.....

(present day politics has a very 70s feel about it, no?)

Early '80s I reckon. The prospect of Tory MPs peeling away to join UKIP is very reminiscent of Labour MPs joining the SDP in 1981, followed by some spectactular by-election successes.

[neilm]

Oct 10, 2014 10:40:37 GMT cefin said:

And I went home chuckling at their outrage that I had had the audacity to stand and collect my 2,300 votes which they viewed as their own and I haven't stopped since.

Michael Dugher referred earlier to 'our areas.' Obviously he hasn't grasped that he should be slightly more humble and not treat places as safe.

[timmullen1]

Oct 10, 2014 11:28:30 GMT Sibboleth said:

But, seriously, I know it nearly happened in Newcastle-under-Lyme after John Golding resigned, but you weren't asking for nearly.

I was out fundraising for a charity during that by-election and got an egg aimed at Edwina Currie in my back for my troubles! I recall the Alliance candidate who nearly upset Llin Golding was regarded by his colleagues as an unreformed Marxist-Leninist.

[Philip Davies]

Oct 10, 2014 12:05:21 GMT timmullen1 said:

Oct 10, 2014 11:28:30 GMT Sibboleth said:

But, seriously, I know it nearly happened in Newcastle-under-Lyme after John Golding resigned, but you weren't asking for nearly.

I was out fundraising for a charity during that by-election and got an egg aimed at Edwina Currie in my back for my troubles! I recall the Alliance candidate who nearly upset Llin Golding was regarded by his colleagues as an unreformed Marxist-Leninist.

That would've predated her more infamous encounter with eggs.

[Deleted]

[mboy]

Oct 10, 2014 11:19:34 GMT bungle said:

"Go home and prepare for government!"

We're already *in* government, thanks.

[Richard Cromwell]

"If you go to bed with David Cameron, you might wake up with Ed Miliband."

Anyway, I have to say; I'd have been tempted to vote UKIP here. Labour's no-mandate drone of a candidate was particularly abhorrent. In general this was a terrible night for a Labour Party that might want the votes of people like me (ex-fascist twats):

Had to listen to the always insufferable Diane Abbot (made even worse by sitting next to the, ever more charming, Michael Portillo), the Downfall-esque rantings of Michael Dugher and the train-wreck speech of a wild-eyed Liz "Buyer's Remorse" McInnes.

[andrea]

Politcs is often about perceptions. Liz McInnes may be poor but I suppose if she had been selected, Miriam O'Reilly could have really lost this one.

[neilm]

Sept 8, 2014 16:56:35 GMT neilm said:

No, because EAL would tell us off.

What we can say for certain, though, is that the Labour victor will make a speech at the declaration saying something along the lines of 'this is a sign that the public overwhelmingly reject the coalitions cuts, bedroom tax etc etc.'

And, lo, in the first few seconds of her speech she claims this is a message to David Cameron to 'keep your mitts off our NHS.' I didn't watch the rest because I can predict what it will be.

[The Bishop]

Oct 10, 2014 15:32:53 GMT andrea said:

Politcs is often about perceptions. Liz McInnes may be poor but I suppose if she had been selected, Miriam O'Reilly could have really lost this one.

Now there's a thought

(rumour is she was the candidate the leadership wanted, too)

As for the McInnes victory speech - yes it was awful, but such things often are (I still recall Ben Chapman's 1997 Wirral S effort when I want to depress myself) What it really showed is that Labour never expected the result to be as close as it was, and that needs to be thoroughly examined by party strategists.