|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 13, 2017 0:47:33 GMT
Given that the Labour councillor had been thrown off for non attendance you can't exactly blame voters for not wanting to elect another one.
Wonder why she didn't just stand down? Or send apologies?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2017 6:04:04 GMT
It would seem that for the LDs at the moment 'The Fart is forgotten'? You must start to fancy your chances in Copeland on this showing. I wonder what is suddenly behind it? Fickle cattle the electorate. The evidence suggests that the Lib Dems are recovering at local government level, but the polls remain stubbornly depressing for them in terms of Westminster voting intention. For UKIP the reverse appears to be true: their modest footholds in local government after 2011 are crumbling, while their national position remains relatively buoyant. Perhaps we are now in a position of having two "none of the above" parties. At local level, the Lib Dems can capitalise on their strong organisation and the fact that they actually appear interested in local government issues, whereas the minority of the public who are inclined to vote in local elections have grasped that neither factor applies to UKIP. If the essentially non-ideological Mr Average wishes to exert leverage on a council that is dominated by Labour or the Conservatives, the Lib Dems offer him a means of doing so. UKIP, however, does have a unique "offer", in terms of national and foreign policy, which potentially continues to have a market in Westminster elections. We became used to the idea that voting behaviour at European elections had become very different from that at other levels of government. Although there has always been some difference between national and local elections, with the Lib Dems usually doing somewhat better at the latter, it may be that we are going to see greater differentiation from now on. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,804
|
Post by right on Jan 13, 2017 7:12:00 GMT
Well I think a lot of us would like to persuade the electorate to reverse the result. But I don't mean to have ago at Labour's position on Brexit, merely to point out that this result does not imply that the voters of Sunderland have changed their minds over it. Â They can easily want Brexit but still vote Labour, they can vote LD on local issues for the local council but still want Brexit, they can passionately want Brexit but stay at home because they don't give a toss about a council by-election, and so on. But I also quarrel with the notion that opposing Brexit dooms the LDs in any area which voted Leave. There's a range of factors at play, including (but definitely not limited to) the one that being the only party to represent 48% can be better than to be one of three vying for 52%. This does bode well for you as weaponising Brexit is doing it no harm in what seems to be a strong Leave area. This does not preclude me from joyfully pointing out opposite evidence should it ever occur. |
|
|
|
Post by bigfatron on Jan 13, 2017 8:25:23 GMT
The evidence suggests that the Lib Dems are recovering at local government level, but the polls remain stubbornly depressing for them in terms of Westminster voting intention. For UKIP the reverse appears to be true: their modest footholds in local government after 2011 are crumbling, while their national position remains relatively buoyant. Except that this is not actually correct according to the polls. The LDem average perked up from 7.5% to 8.5% after Witney, and from 8.5% to around 10% now after Richmond. That might be depressingly low, but the trend is an increasing vote share in the opinion polls, and growing from 7.5% to 10% in two months is a good move in anyone's book, even if 7.5% is an awful place to start. None of the by-elections since the referendum suggest UKIP is now the repository of protest votes - they did nothing at all in Witney, didn't stand in Richmond, and then did nothing at all in Sleaford. It's entirely possible that Copeland will be different, but the evidence we have so far does not indicate any tendency for protest voters at parliamentary elections to jump into the UKIP box, whereas we have quite a lot of evidence that many will jump into the LDem box both locally and at parliamentary by-elections. |
|
markf
Non-Aligned
a victim of IDS
Posts: 318 
|
Post by markf on Jan 13, 2017 8:47:19 GMT
I think Corbyn being Labour leader is a problem for them in Labour areas
|
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 13, 2017 9:08:06 GMT
I think Corbyn being Labour leader is a problem for them in Labour areas More or less what deselected Northumberland councillor Kathy Graham said recently. I'm not sure what quite to make of the Sandhill result. There was no sign of Lib Dem revival in Chopwell & Rowlands Gill in Gateshead a few months ago. It could be that if Corbyn is still leader in 2020 and Labour is therefore not seen as being in serious contention nationally, then there may be some shocks where an "anyone but Labour (or Tory)" candidate might present a serious challenge in some north eastern seats. Still don't think this is likely. |
|
|
|
Post by bigfatron on Jan 13, 2017 9:18:50 GMT
The other possibility is that the underlying seam of 'Labour a mess, UKIP too right-wing, we never vote Tory' is there to be mined but the LDems are patchy in terms of having local resources and commitment to go and mine it.
Where they have people willing to put a shift in, they seem to be able to do something positive; sometimes a steady improvement, sometimes spectacular...
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Cassidy on Jan 13, 2017 9:21:12 GMT
It's a most sensational result. I had no inkling. The comfort for Labour is that they still beat UKIP. It shows how vulnerable Labour is to serious challenge, which in many wards they have never faced. Actually its a truly terrible result for UKIP. Labour vote collapses in exactly the sort of place where UKIP is supposed to scoop up Leave voting white working class voters disillusioned with Labour, UKIP posters on here suggesting that a creditable campaign was run, and the result is... a landslide to the LDs. No idea why, but very bad news for UKIP. At least Labour know that they are currently in the shit. (And most of them know the reason.) I think saying it's 'truly terrible' for UKIP is a bit of an exaggeration. Granted we expected to do better and the branch did have a stab at running a campaign (3 leaflets, no canvassing) but we all know you don't win seats without a continuous and organised campaign. Obviously the Lib Dems have been working this seat for a good while and congratulations to them. The problem with UKIP is still a lack of foot soldiers and resources. UKIP Hartlepool offered to help run part of the campaign but the local Sunderland branch wasn't in a position to make that work. |
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 13, 2017 9:38:44 GMT
The other possibility is that the underlying seam of 'Labour a mess, UKIP too right-wing, we never vote Tory' is there to be mined but the LDems are patchy in terms of having local resources and commitment to go and mine it. Where they have people willing to put a shift in, they seem to be able to do something positive; sometimes a steady improvement, sometimes spectacular... They did "put in a shift", of sorts anyway, in Chopwell & Rowlands Gill, but to no avail. It will be interesting to see what happens in Labour/Lib Dem contests in Durham & Northumberland in May. Perhaps the non-attendance factor was a strong one in Sandhill. Meanwhille, Corbyn's position gets ever weaker, though if the Corbyn-supported candidate is selected and then elected in Copeland he will get an undeserved boost. |
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 13, 2017 9:47:47 GMT
The Lib Dems also think that Labour's campaign in Sandhill, which included a fake Lib-Dem leaflet, gave them credibility and helped them squeeze the others.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonnymorris on Jan 13, 2017 10:00:51 GMT
The other possibility is that the underlying seam of 'Labour a mess, UKIP too right-wing, we never vote Tory' is there to be mined but the LDems are patchy in terms of having local resources and commitment to go and mine it. Where they have people willing to put a shift in, they seem to be able to do something positive; sometimes a steady improvement, sometimes spectacular... They did "put in a shift", of sorts anyway, in Chopwell & Rowlands Gill, but to no avail. It will be interesting to see what happens in Labour/Lib Dem contests in Durham & Northumberland in May. Perhaps the non-attendance factor was a strong one in Sandhill. Meanwhille, Corbyn's position gets ever weaker, though if the Corbyn-supported candidate is selected and then elected in Copeland he will get an undeserved boost. La Fontaine. He won't be selected, it's an all-woman shortlist. labourlist.org/2017/01/labour-members-to-pick-from-three-women-for-copeland-by-election/ |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 13, 2017 10:31:37 GMT
They did "put in a shift", of sorts anyway, in Chopwell & Rowlands Gill, but to no avail. It will be interesting to see what happens in Labour/Lib Dem contests in Durham & Northumberland in May. Perhaps the non-attendance factor was a strong one in Sandhill. Meanwhille, Corbyn's position gets ever weaker, though if the Corbyn-supported candidate is selected and then elected in Copeland he will get an undeserved boost. La Fontaine. He won't be selected, it's an all-woman shortlist. labourlist.org/2017/01/labour-members-to-pick-from-three-women-for-copeland-by-election/Rachel Holliday is the Corbyn candidate |
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 13, 2017 10:36:22 GMT
I think Corbyn being Labour leader is a problem for them in Labour areas More or less what deselected Northumberland councillor Kathy Graham said recently. Yes, but she would, wouldn't she? In this seat the sitting councillor was thrown off for non-attendance. There is just no excuse for this - it certainly indicates that they weren't doing anything in the area either. |
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Jan 13, 2017 10:48:32 GMT
More or less what deselected Northumberland councillor Kathy Graham said recently. Yes, but she would, wouldn't she? In this seat the sitting councillor was thrown off for non-attendance. There is just no excuse for this - it certainly indicates that they weren't doing anything in the area either. I could have said "It's what people tell me and what I overhear." |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 13, 2017 11:24:30 GMT
Rachel Holliday is the Corbyn candidate There is an attempt to portray her as such, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jan 13, 2017 13:03:52 GMT
Given that the Labour councillor had been thrown off for non attendance you can't exactly blame voters for not wanting to elect another one. Wonder why she didn't just stand down? Or send apologies? It doesn't work like that. Though the Labour Group could have "saved" her by using Section 85 of the 1972 LGA. I wonder why they didn't? Perhaps they don't know the law? Or don't like her ... In any event, in my experience disqualification for non-attendance isn't necessarily a big drag on the vote. Unless there's a competing party which chooses to make it an issue and is effective at doing so. Which may well have been the case here.  |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
|
Post by mboy on Jan 13, 2017 13:11:48 GMT
I think it's usually not so much the disqualification that hit the vote, but the fact that most cllrs disqualified for non-attendance have also done f*** all for years beforehand. That means the "You've been neglected" accusations hit home.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jan 13, 2017 13:13:02 GMT
Given that the Labour councillor had been thrown off for non attendance you can't exactly blame voters for not wanting to elect another one. Wonder why she didn't just stand down? Or send apologies? It doesn't work like that. Though the Labour Group could have "saved" her by using Section 85 of the 1972 LGA. I wonder why they didn't? Perhaps they don't know the law? Or don't like her ... In any event, in my experience disqualification for non-attendance isn't necessarily a big drag on the vote. Unless there's a competing party which chooses to make it an issue and is effective at doing so. Which may well have been the case here. Frankly, if I was fighting a seat where the sitting councillor had been thrown out in this fashion I'd certainly make it an issue, because it is an issue! |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 13, 2017 13:22:32 GMT
There is an attempt to portray her as such, yes. An attempt by herself and Momentum. I would imagine that the Vicar of Bray Bishop will be voting for Holliday in the selection Grow up. (that applies to those who "liked" this childish post as well) |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 13, 2017 13:55:16 GMT
There is an attempt to portray her as such, yes. An attempt by herself and Momentum. I would imagine that the Vicar of Bray Bishop will be voting for Holliday in the selection See what I posted in the Copeland thread, and don't take my observations on this topic at least in bad faith. Thanks. |
|
