Oldham West and Royton

[Davıd Boothroyd]

Dec 5, 2015 20:45:14 GMT tonygreaves said:

Does anyone know what was the electorate for this by-election? I can't find it anywhere - I can find 71998 for the General Election in May. But that would make the reported turnout wrong by about 2%.

Electorate was 69,033.

[Andrew_S]

Dec 5, 2015 21:01:38 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

Dec 5, 2015 20:45:14 GMT tonygreaves said:

Does anyone know what was the electorate for this by-election? I can't find it anywhere - I can find 71998 for the General Election in May. But that would make the reported turnout wrong by about 2%.

Electorate was 69,033.

Interesting that the new registration rules have apparently knocked about 3,000 voters off the electoral register since May.

[lbarnes]

Dec 5, 2015 22:24:49 GMT Andrew_S said:

Dec 5, 2015 21:01:38 GMT Davıd Boothroyd said:

Electorate was 69,033.

Interesting that the new registration rules have apparently knocked about 3,000 voters off the electoral register since May.

It wasn't across the board.

www.chronic-oldham.co.uk/8000-oldham-voters-set-to-lose-their-right-to-vote/

[Merseymike]

Perhaps its just my cynicism but aren't those most likely not to register the people who have never voted and never intend to?

[finsobruce]

Dec 5, 2015 23:19:10 GMT Merseymike said:

Perhaps its just my cynicism but aren't those most likely not to register the people who have never voted and never intend to?

It will vary enormously from area to area I guess but when we went round on a registration exercise about six weeks ago, the houses where no-one was registered were the houses where...no-one is ever registered. And one side effect of the property price boom round here is that a lot of run down HMOs are being converted back into "proper"homes, which may well have the effect of raising the number of voters in certain areas.

[Andrew_S]

Nov 30, 2015 21:50:22 GMT Andrew_S said:

One of the things we seem to be losing in today's society is the idea that something can be perfectly legal but at the same time frowned upon by most people. Instead everything has to be either 100% legal, in which case it has to be pushed into everyone's faces 24/7, 365 days a year, or it's 100% illegal, in which case offenders have to be relentlessly pursued until they end up in court and jail. In previous times most people recognised the fact that there were things that were legal but which were heartily disapproved of by many people in a head-shaking, muttering under once's breath sort of way — such as adultery. I'd put segregating people at public meetings into the same category: not something that should ever be illegal but which we ought to strongly disapprove of.

The latest episode of the Moral Maze seems to be based on what I was talking about:

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06qkp8w

[Crimson King]

Dec 5, 2015 23:19:10 GMT Merseymike said:

Perhaps its just my cynicism but aren't those most likely not to register the people who have never voted and never intend to?

often by virtue of not actually existing (at least not at that address any more)

[right]

Dec 5, 2015 18:02:59 GMT johnsmith said:

Here is my take on the outcome of the Oldham by-election

Yes, the seat has been Labour for decades, and regularly voted for an avowed left winger in Michael Meacher. So we should not be surprised by the fact that Labour won. But what we should take note of is the fact that the size of the Labour majority was so much larger. And with elements of the media openly touting this beforehand as something akin to a referendum on Corbyn, that is telling. Clearly, widespread expectations of a drop in support for Labour did not materialise. UKIP were utterly trounced, and no one else came anywhere. If this truly were the first referendum on Corbyn, he has won it. And we do have to question, in light of this, just how tuned in the media commentariat are to the pulse of the nation. After all, very few of them come from the demographics the Labour left appeals to anymore.

But it is only one byelection in a seat which always backed a left winger. The real test comes in May next year. But I have a sneaking suspicion that Labour will do better than many of it's critics hope and expect. Because no one in the commentariat is really engaging with the forgotten millions for whom Corbyn and the Labour left offer hope. No one in the commentariat is showing much engagement with their concerns. They are the silent forgotten millions. But the vote of each one of them has the same value as each of those whom the commentariat do engage with incessantly. And some of these people will suddenly show up when it comes to voting, however much the media fails to recognise them. There is a tentative but growing groundswell of potential support out there which is so far going unnoticed under the radar.

We will be in for a few surprises in May. And the reaction of the commentariat to that will be most amusing to behold. Unless of course the likes of Simon Danczuk succeed in destabilising the party so much that everything is gifted to the Tories. I genuinely believe people like him view a Tory government as a lesser evil than a Corbyn one. That's the only way his actions make any logical sense.

But the point is that they are not engaging with the forgotten millions, but with self satisfied middle class Marxoid cultists.

It's George Osborne who's taking an axe to the amateur landlord army.

It's Stella first target of deselection Creasy who's taking on the loan sharks.

And UKIP are making the noise about wage pressures from uncontrolled immigration

I think that the solutions offered above are simplistic and counterproductive, but they are an attempt to offer real solutions to genuine problems and not to use it as a backdrop to some demented genocidal worldview that was buried with th Berlin Wall.

I'm the first to rail against politics as usual, but Chapel with a glottal stop makes you realise that there are some good things about it.

[The Bishop]

Creasy is not the "first target for deselection" - this is almost 100% MSM myth.

And yes, some of the things they have claimed are COMPLETELY MADE UP - confirmed by the woman herself.

Silly post to back up your silly recent thread.

[Devil Wincarnate]

This "missing millions" thing seems doomed to be pedalled to the end of time. It's entirely predicated on the idea that they are all secret Labour voters (it has previously been secret Conservative voters too) who just want some red meat. Oldham has done nothing to disprove this.

I had dinner with some Labour activist friends last night. None of them have seen much evidence of a decline in the number of potential Labour voters in recent canvassing, but they have certainly seen no evidence of non-voters suddenly deciding that Corbo is the risen Christ. They've seen non-voters remaining non-voters.

[Devil Wincarnate]

As an aside, I wonder how many people don't vote but are on the register because they think it will improve their credit rating.

[gwynthegriff]

Dec 6, 2015 13:07:04 GMT Devil Wincarnate said:

As an aside, I wonder how many people don't vote but are on the register because they think it will improve their credit rating.

Well it seems to be the main selling point of most local authority registration drives ...

[Devil Wincarnate]

Dec 5, 2015 18:02:59 GMT johnsmith said:

Here is my take on the outcome of the Oldham by-election

Yes, the seat has been Labour for decades, and regularly voted for an avowed left winger in Michael Meacher. So we should not be surprised by the fact that Labour won. But what we should take note of is the fact that the size of the Labour majority was so much larger. And with elements of the media openly touting this beforehand as something akin to a referendum on Corbyn, that is telling. Clearly, widespread expectations of a drop in support for Labour did not materialise. UKIP were utterly trounced, and no one else came anywhere. If this truly were the first referendum on Corbyn, he has won it. And we do have to question, in light of this, just how tuned in the media commentariat are to the pulse of the nation. After all, very few of them come from the demographics the Labour left appeals to anymore.

But it is only one byelection in a seat which always backed a left winger. The real test comes in May next year. But I have a sneaking suspicion that Labour will do better than many of it's critics hope and expect. Because no one in the commentariat is really engaging with the forgotten millions for whom Corbyn and the Labour left offer hope. No one in the commentariat is showing much engagement with their concerns. They are the silent forgotten millions. But the vote of each one of them has the same value as each of those whom the commentariat do engage with incessantly. And some of these people will suddenly show up when it comes to voting, however much the media fails to recognise them. There is a tentative but growing groundswell of potential support out there which is so far going unnoticed under the radar. 

The parallel in my mind is the Kensington & Chelsea by-election under Hague's tenure.  Safe seat, increase in share of the vote, everyone back-slapped each other.  And then within two years Labour won a crushing victory.

The silent, forgotten millions were a myth then, and they are a myth now.  Take Oldham West.  The turnout reduced from 59.6% to 40.3%, despite it being a high-profile election where it was expected to be tight.  If there are missing millions just waiting to vote for Labour, then Oldham has more of them in December than it did in May.

[A Brown]

There's no real reason why turnout can't get back to where it was in 97 like in Scotland but the sort of non voters Corbyn is likely to mobilise are young voters and ethnic minorities already concentrated in ultra safe seats like Manchester Central, Birmingham Ladywood, Tottenham etc so won't help Labour win a general election alone.

All the by election told us is that the UKIP threat to Labour is probably crazily over hyped in it's WWC heartlands in the North of England and possibly Wales as well.

But to make sure this doesn't happen Labour will probably still need maybe a more 'blue Labour' figure like Dan Jarvis to stop any more potential Labour leakage in areas like Stoke and Hartlepool.

[Richard Allen]

Dec 6, 2015 21:23:15 GMT A Brown said:

All the by election told us is that the UKIP threat to Labour is probably crazily over hyped in it's WWC heartlands in the North of England and possibly Wales as well.

It is over hyped due to the inadequacies of UKIP. A more competent and honest UKIP like party could provide a genuine threat to Labour in their WWC northern heartlands.

[Merseymike]

Dec 6, 2015 21:23:15 GMT A Brown said:

There's no real reason why turnout can't get back to where it was in 97 like in Scotland but the sort of non voters Corbyn is likely to mobilise are young voters and ethnic minorities already concentrated in ultra safe seats like Manchester Central, Birmingham Ladywood, Tottenham etc so won't help Labour win a general election alone.

All the by election told us is that the UKIP threat to Labour is probably crazily over hyped in it's WWC heartlands in the North of England and possibly Wales as well.

But to make sure this doesn't happen Labour will probably still need maybe a more 'blue Labour' figure like Dan Jarvis to stop any more potential Labour leakage in areas like Stoke and Hartlepool.

He would never get elected

[Rural Radical]

Dec 6, 2015 21:44:43 GMT Merseymike said:

Dec 6, 2015 21:23:15 GMT A Brown said:

There's no real reason why turnout can't get back to where it was in 97 like in Scotland but the sort of non voters Corbyn is likely to mobilise are young voters and ethnic minorities already concentrated in ultra safe seats like Manchester Central, Birmingham Ladywood, Tottenham etc so won't help Labour win a general election alone.

All the by election told us is that the UKIP threat to Labour is probably crazily over hyped in it's WWC heartlands in the North of England and possibly Wales as well.

But to make sure this doesn't happen Labour will probably still need maybe a more 'blue Labour' figure like Dan Jarvis to stop any more potential Labour leakage in areas like Stoke and Hartlepool.

He would never get elected

You really think that? I think he would have broad support across the party if there was a vacancy

[Merseymike]

Dec 6, 2015 22:33:32 GMT Rural Radical said:

Dec 6, 2015 21:44:43 GMT Merseymike said:

He would never get elected

You really think that? I think he would have broad support across the party if there was a vacancy

Definitely not. Far too gung-ho.

[thirdchill]

Dec 6, 2015 22:47:51 GMT Merseymike said:

Dec 6, 2015 22:33:32 GMT Rural Radical said:

You really think that? I think he would have broad support across the party if there was a vacancy

Definitely not. Far too gung-ho.

The women of the Greenham Common peace camp would be too gun-ho for you

[right]

Dec 6, 2015 13:07:04 GMT Devil Wincarnate said:

As an aside, I wonder how many people don't vote but are on the register because they think it will improve their credit rating.

The sort of person who knows about their credit rating also tends to vote.