|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Feb 6, 2017 23:40:03 GMT
It's valid if on a direct service. Including BoJ? Grey area. I would argue not- as soon as you break your journey, you are not on a direct service. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Feb 7, 2017 0:44:58 GMT
I think if UKIP don't get within 2,000 votes of winning the seat it would count as a pretty bad result for them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 1:02:00 GMT
I think if UKIP don't get within 2,000 votes of winning the seat it would count as a pretty bad result for them. Imho, any result other than victory is curtains for UKIP. 'It's now or never' time. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 7, 2017 1:06:59 GMT
I think if UKIP don't get within 2,000 votes of winning the seat it would count as a pretty bad result for them. Imho, any result other than victory is curtains for UKIP. 'It's now or never' time. You set the bar high! The position is indeed desperate ..................But not yet serious. You Will Sur-Vive! |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Feb 7, 2017 1:19:48 GMT
I think if UKIP don't get within 2,000 votes of winning the seat it would count as a pretty bad result for them. Imho, any result other than victory is curtains for UKIP. 'It's now or never' time. If UKIP get within 500 votes of winning a seat which has been Labour since 1922 with one exception in 1931, I wouldn't describe that as a disaster for the party. Certainly disappointing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 1:25:23 GMT
Imho, any result other than victory is curtains for UKIP. 'It's now or never' time. If UKIP get within 500 votes of winning a seat which has been Labour since 1922 with one exception in 1931, I wouldn't describe that as a disaster for the party. Certainly disappointing. Stoke central is UKIP's twelfth most 'winnable' seat. The chances of an even better prospect coming up in a byelection seem pretty remote. Clearly, if we can't win here in a byelection, then where? Winning is an existential issue for UKIP. Win, and we are contenders in a hundred or so Labour heartland seats. Lose, and we become an irrelevance. |
|
Adrian
Co-operative Party
Posts: 1,742 
|
Post by Adrian on Feb 7, 2017 3:01:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Feb 7, 2017 3:06:08 GMT
I'm not surprised if that's what she's finding. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 4:24:36 GMT
It is in her best interests to write "UKIP is winning".
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 7, 2017 7:44:48 GMT
It is in her best interests to write "UKIP is winning". She loves a good Two Minutes Hate to keep her career alive. |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Feb 7, 2017 8:31:46 GMT
It is in her best interests to write "UKIP is winning". Having been in Stoke yesterday, I can only say there is no visible sign of a UKIP surge. At all. No posters, no window stickers, no canvassers out, no conversations in the supermarket queue. Nothing. And as others have observed up thread, Stoke is not really the unmitigated post-industrial wasteland that some would portray it as. More contentiously, I would also say that I think Nuttall is a very problematic candidate for UKIP in this case. The idea is that he is a big gun, UKIP's best chance of winning a seat; but I don't think anyone outside of political nerks such as us has ever heard of him. Try asking in your supermarket queue if the name means anything to the next person. f course his profile will be higher in Stoke now, but the main story in the media has been the exposure of his non-local status through the home registration stunt. (For me it also exposes his and UKIP's incompetence on basic logistics, but I don't know if that will register much.) To my mind he is neither a local hard-working normal bloke nor a high-profile national figure, the worst of both worlds. But we will see; I just think if UKIP win it will be in spite of him as much as because of him. None of which means that lots of people aren't quietly preparing to vote UKIP and sweep them into Westminster. I just don't feel that Stoke as some sort of Labour vs UKIP Stalingrad is overblown. But the problem with Toynbee is that absolutely bloody everything is seen through the prism of the Labour party. So this story is about "can Labour fend off UKIP among White Working Class voters?" The position of other parties such as Tories, LDs or Greens is ignored, as are the peculiarities of Stoke, where City Independents are such a force in local politics. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 8:36:58 GMT
I think if UKIP don't get within 2,000 votes of winning the seat it would count as a pretty bad result for them. Imho, any result other than victory is curtains for UKIP. 'It's now or never' time. Interesting that so many are saying this. I stick to my original view that UKIP's opinion poll ratings remain much healthier than might be expected, and any increase in vote share could be spun as a success which keeps them in the game. Is the issue that people, including some erstwhile supporters, are simply getting tired of the UKIP saga, and looking for a reason to draw a line under it? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 9:23:16 GMT
Imho, any result other than victory is curtains for UKIP. 'It's now or never' time. Interesting that so many are saying this. I stick to my original view that UKIP's opinion poll ratings remain much healthier than might be expected, and any increase in vote share could be spun as a success which keeps them in the game. Is the issue that people, including some erstwhile supporters, are simply getting tired of the UKIP saga, and looking for a reason to draw a line under it? I think many are actually worried about UKIP winning this and don't want to admit it. The ramifications of a UKIP victory in Stoke Central would be pretty big imo. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 9:35:53 GMT
Interesting that so many are saying this. I stick to my original view that UKIP's opinion poll ratings remain much healthier than might be expected, and any increase in vote share could be spun as a success which keeps them in the game. Is the issue that people, including some erstwhile supporters, are simply getting tired of the UKIP saga, and looking for a reason to draw a line under it? I think many are actually worried about UKIP winning this and don't want to admit it. The ramifications of a UKIP victory in Stoke Central would be pretty big imo. They would indeed. I have no feeling for what is going on in Stoke, as none of my political friends (mostly Conservatives) have yet been there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 9:42:53 GMT
I think many are actually worried about UKIP winning this and don't want to admit it. The ramifications of a UKIP victory in Stoke Central would be pretty big imo. They would indeed. I have no feeling for what is going on in Stoke, as none of my political friends (mostly Conservatives) have yet been there. It's certainly a city where Labour have struggled in recent years, losing control of the council in 2015 while they made advances in cities like Brighton & Hove, Nottingham and others. They also hold the 4 seats covering the Stoke area on their smallest ever majorities, that's quite something, given that these seats have been held by Labour since 1935. UKIP came tantalisingly close to depriving them of many more council seats in 2015 (I'm talking 2- and 3-figure majorities in many of them). This'll be a lot harder to defend than Sheffield, Brightside or Tooting, because Labour are so weak in the city. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2017 9:59:28 GMT
Labour majorities in Stoke-on-Trent 1983/2015:-
Stoke-on-Trent North: 15.4%/12.5%
Stoke-on-Trent Central: 18.7%/16.7%
Stoke-on-Trent South: 14.45%/6.5%
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 7, 2017 10:15:26 GMT
Yes this does have both intrigue and importance. Staffordshire is in long term drift to the right as happened more completely in many other counties earlier. Stoke-Newcastle is both homogenous and diffuse, derelict and renewing, compact and spread out, working class and post working class, old-fashioned and post modern. That is the difficulty we all have. I remember the monolithic all-Labour council and rock-solid Labour constituencies with very low swings. Now the politics are notorious for obtuseness and ever-changing minority mini-surges. This points to a form of dynamic yet to find a new settled state. But the Labour tradition is a long and continuous one and would suggest a modest hold on this occasion. I am leaning more to that opinion. My first vote was for a Conservative gain. I am now on a UKIP gain partially in hope more than expectation.
Unlike AC, I want a UKIP win, because with no regard to wider strategy or tactics, I wish the party I supported for over 5-years to have some success and renewal. I still see a place for it with neither Conservatives nor Labour really catering to the hopes or fears of many people anymore.The Conservatives have made what I consider to be some useful shifts but I would wish to see about the same shift as seen from 2012 to today to be made again before I regard there being no point for UKIP on the Blue Pond. Then there is the Red side of the Pond where there is still real need for UKIP.
I don't know what is going on in the privacy of thousands of heads in Stoke. If the OPs are correct the core UKIP vote is holding up surprisingly well. I think they have models overstating that vote and local election results tend to support my suspicion? This Westminster by-election will give us a better idea. It is a fascinating prospect. I really don't know if this will be a convincing UKIP victory, a neck-and-neck tussle, or a damaging UKIP failure. No one has suggested this is a very vigorous or high profile UKIP barn-storming campaign. It ought to be with the Leader as the candidate and the opportunity to focus every resource there? Is that because the party has shrunk as people like me peel off? Is it lack of cash? Is it lack of Farage? Is it evidence of poor present leadership? I was never in any way impressed with Nuttall, but if he pulls this off he will be fully vindicated.
A labour hold will be a bit of a damp squib all round whatever the position of all other parties. It will not be curtains for UKIP but the decline will continue and there will be more losses of personnel. A UKIP win changes everything. I don't think that is an overstatement. They need this win and in a way so does British Politics. We need the threat of UKIP reminding us that the Leavers are still there and militant to firm up the Conservative resolve over the long haul through the Bexit debates and to worry Labour into not being very oppositional.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 7, 2017 10:22:59 GMT
Labour majorities in Stoke-on-Trent 1983/2015:- Stoke-on-Trent North: 15.4%/12.5% Stoke-on-Trent Central: 18.7%/16.7% Stoke-on-Trent South: 14.45%/6.5% You have chosen to compare the two periods of major Labour distress. It would be more stark on a basis of 1997-2015! |
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Feb 7, 2017 10:25:38 GMT
Labour majorities in Stoke-on-Trent 1983/2015:- Stoke-on-Trent North: 15.4%/12.5% Stoke-on-Trent Central: 18.7%/16.7% Stoke-on-Trent South: 14.45%/6.5% You have chosen to compare the two periods of major Labour distress. It would be more stark on a basis of 1997-2015! All the more valuable for doing so. Worse than 1983 is not good, not good at all. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 7, 2017 10:35:46 GMT
You have chosen to compare the two periods of major Labour distress. It would be more stark on a basis of 1997-2015! All the more valuable for doing so. Worse than 1983 is not good, not good at all. Up to a point Lord Copper! In over 30-years a very modest swing excluding South where there are boundary issues I think. It would be interesting to attempt a meaningful comparison 1945-1959-1966-1979-1982-1997-2015? |
|
