|
|
Post by bigfatron on Dec 9, 2016 9:08:03 GMT
Hmmm...
Conservatives - very happy I would think; the are simply the least worst option for so many people, and that is a very powerful thing
UKIP - disappointed but relieved it is not worse; if you are the main opposition in a constituency it is pretty poor to see your vote share drop in a by-election. They must have been hoping for 20%+
Lib Dems - ok but disappointed it is not better; the biggest increase of any party, despite almost all Lib Dem resources being focused on Richmond Park, but they must be slightly disappointed the RP momentum didn't really carry through. They must have been hoping for 15%.
Labour - this is just dreadful; barely 10% of the vote when they should have been able to campaign strongly; they weren't really distracted by RP and this seat is only an hour from some of their heartlands (Hull, South Yorkshire, etc)
|
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,782
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on Dec 9, 2016 9:22:18 GMT
Good result for Tories, will calm their nerves after Richmond Park. Their strategy is holding for Leavers.
Okay result for UKIP. Clinging on to second was important, but losing vote-share in a seat like this means they are unlikely to threaten the Tories anywhere. Operation "get Labour" could be on though.
Good result for Lib Dems. Taking 3rd and the leading "progressive" party with little effort and with the Green Party having endorsed another party this time is excellent, % could have been higher though.
Very poor for Labour. No excuses. At least they didn't come 5th, that might have triggered more party warfare.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Dec 9, 2016 9:25:03 GMT
We were third in 2015 so we didn't 'cling on to second' and were not 'the main opposition'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2016 9:29:20 GMT
Good result for Tories, will calm their nerves after Richmond Park. Their strategy is holding for Leavers. Okay result for UKIP. Clinging on to second was important, but losing vote-share in a seat like this means they are unlikely to threaten the Tories anywhere. Operation "get Labour" could be on though. Good result for Lib Dems. Taking 3rd and the leading "progressive" party with little effort and with the Green Party having endorsed another party this time is excellent, % could have been higher though. Very poor for Labour. No excuses. At least they didn't come 5th, that might have triggered more party warfare. Lib Lab voters alliance on where there are half decent candidates I should think, clearly Labour leadership are on a mission and the people of Sleaford & North Hykeham do not understand the gains from a true socialist, but they do understand how to pick an alternative candidate |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,977 
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Dec 9, 2016 9:32:18 GMT
Good result for Tories, will calm their nerves after Richmond Park. Their strategy is holding for Leavers. Okay result for UKIP. Clinging on to second was important, but losing vote-share in a seat like this means they are unlikely to threaten the Tories anywhere. Operation "get Labour" could be on though. Good result for Lib Dems. Taking 3rd and the leading "progressive" party with little effort and with the Green Party having endorsed another party this time is excellent, % could have been higher though. Very poor for Labour. No excuses. At least they didn't come 5th, that might have triggered more party warfare. And thus at first sight a great pity that they did not get pushed just into 5th. Yet, do any of us want Labour prompted into appropriate action? Not me. Having Corbyn in place through 2020 is excellent and nothing could better that. No decided policy on anything; piss poor opposition; dissension in the ranks; continued plotting; back stabbing; deselections; spoiler press briefings; faction fights; Momentum marching in more than one direction. Love it. Could not have designed it better myself. Somebody 'up there' really does hate them! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2016 9:35:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Dec 9, 2016 9:37:12 GMT
Us anoraks all know that this was an excellent result for the Conservatives. However the fact that their vote went down (in percentage terms of course) will make it difficult to spin this as a triumph to the general public.
UKIP and Labour both did poorly. As expected (by me anyway) the Liberals did quite well. The wild card was the Lincolnshire Independent. To me this shows that dissatisfaction is not limited to the EU, and the referendum has not acted as a lightning rod to discharge it amongst most of the unhappy and disillusioned.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2016 10:31:43 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2016 10:32:46 GMT
Labour have no effective organisation at all in the constituency, barely even running candidates in district elections. It is this kind if statement.......that makes me want to move there Oh, if quiet rural areas with barely-to-non-existent party politics are your bag, there's plenty to choose from (just avoid the parish councils at all costs) |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,476
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Dec 9, 2016 10:45:55 GMT
I prefer to see it as the realist/rationalist faction and those connected to their voters versus the doctrinaire theory based faction who feel policy and correctness trump the 'mere will of the people'. At essence this is and has always been a crisis of democracy where the 'representatives' have at long last been rumbled and shown up to be false friends by the populists. I think it displays very well the fact that there are all sorts of different positions and trends which exist in the two main parties. They aren't particularly coherent and its nlikely they can be resolved within the traditional 'broad church' |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,967
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 9, 2016 11:07:28 GMT
Labour only 471 votes from fifth place. And barely a thousand votes from 2nd. |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Dec 9, 2016 11:39:57 GMT
Having a local Doctor as the candidate probably helped the Tories a fair bit.
|
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Dec 9, 2016 11:43:16 GMT
The predictions of a lost Labour deposit circulating at the count were a bit odd given that Labour ended up with twice the required vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Dec 9, 2016 12:04:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Dec 9, 2016 12:14:24 GMT
Best ever parliamentary result from the Lincolnshire Independents, on a curious note (8.8%, despite coming 5th). Disappointed about Sarah Stock's performance (just 462 votes). Yes, despite not living up to my prediction, it is a very good result for the Lincs Indies, and particularly for Marianne Overton, who undoubtedly has quite a personal vote in many of the villages. A by-election would normally see the main parties focus their resources and squeeze any votes from Independents or minor parties, so increasing her percentage by 3% is impressive. But it does show that close-knit rural communities are more resilient to by-election campaigning. But surely squeezing is more difficult when it isn't a clear A v B (with C, D and E irrelevant)? |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Dec 9, 2016 12:18:50 GMT
If only there was an appropriate word to describe Michael Crick that rhymed with Crick. Any suggestions? |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,967
|
Post by The Bishop on Dec 9, 2016 12:23:11 GMT
And barely a thousand votes from 2nd. That's almost as good as the party staffer who told a journalist last night that we were proud to have held our deposit! Who knows, there could be a job in the Leader's bunker office for you..... Its a statement of fact - do you have a problem with that?  The reason why our vote fell significantly here and held up rather better in Witney (despite a distinctly bigger push from the LibDems there) is that in that seat we are much better organised and have a significant presence in parts of the constituency. Not so here, as the paucity of even local election candidates demonstrates. I don't dispute we aren't doing pretty dreadfully generally, but lets not read things into this result that aren't there. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Dec 9, 2016 14:10:28 GMT
Only party who will be celebrating tonight is the conservatives. Can the Conservative candidate say this is a result which signals the people have overwhelming vote for Mrs May's brexit plan? Or is that a Lib Dem trait to make ridiculous statements? I hope Sarah Olney has enjoyed her week in the sun; she is now every bit as much "yesterday's news" as her predecessor. Brexit means Brexit and we're going to make a success of it! Well, let's think about it. Richmond Park: Pro-Remain electorate but in a seat where demographics ought to make it one of the safest Tory seats anywhere; held in 2015 with 58% of vote. By-election held due to dispute between party leadership and local MP, with candidate pretending not to be a Tory and an effective electoral pact with UKIP: lost to LDs on a massive swing. Sleaford & North Hykeham: Pro-Leave electorate and demographically a safe rural Tory seat; held in 2015 with 56% of vote. By-election held due to dispute between party leadership and local MP. Retained with reduced vote share. LD vote share, in a seat with no local history, and while vast bulk of party effort being deployed in Richmond, almost doubled (and with an allegedly terrible candidate if you believe Michael Crick, which I don't, but there it is), leapfrogging Labour to establish ourselves in pole positon as the left-of-centre choice for next election, and breathing down the neck in vote share of UKIP whose vote share is also down despite a lot of guff from their candidate about increasing her vote share and challenging the Tories. If the Tories think that those are not both bloody good results for the LDs given the circs and nature of the constituencies, and poor (RP) to middling (S&NH) for the Tories then the future for us is going to be very bright indeed. They are also two by-elections that would not have occurred at all in a party with firm leadership and party discipline. |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,803
|
Post by john07 on Dec 9, 2016 14:11:40 GMT
The predictions of a lost Labour deposit circulating at the count were a bit odd given that Labour ended up with twice the required vote. In my time as a candidate, you needed 12.5%. On that basis only UKIP, of the defeated candidates, would have held their deposit. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,977
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Dec 9, 2016 14:26:56 GMT
I prefer to see it as the realist/rationalist faction and those connected to their voters versus the doctrinaire theory based faction who feel policy and correctness trump the 'mere will of the people'. At essence this is and has always been a crisis of democracy where the 'representatives' have at long last been rumbled and shown up to be false friends by the populists. I think it displays very well the fact that there are all sorts of different positions and trends which exist in the two main parties. They aren't particularly coherent and its nlikely they can be resolved within the traditional 'broad church' I agree with that Mike but see it as an insiders view and not how the uninvolved outsiders have long felt. |
|
