xftrev
Lib Dem
Post Brexit City State of London
Posts: 183 
|
Post by xftrev on Feb 24, 2017 9:15:49 GMT
Copeland was down to Mandelson and Blair according to McDonnell this morning, in the most graphic display of pathetic denial ever witnessed on national media. This is the problem with Momentum/Corbynista - not only are they inept, incompetent, delusional but completely and utterly stubborn. As the hard Left always was. This is disastrous for the country - May has been able to morph into Farage without an opposition in sight.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,765
|
Post by right on Feb 24, 2017 9:17:15 GMT
Very poor night for Labour. Lost a seat that they held for over 80 years and saw another long-term seat become marginal. Based on this, I think they are at risk of losing seats such as Barrow, Stoke South, Newcastle under Lyme, Wakefield and Darlington at the next GE or at least the successors to those constituencies. One thing has become clear though. UKIP are pretty much done. I can't see where they go from here. Both the LDs' and (even more so) UKIP's success hinge on the Brexit negotiations outcome. Hard Brexit: UKIP are finished, but the Tories lose their majority to Labour and the LDs. They only need to lose 20 seats after all. Soft Brexit: Tories leak votes to UKIP, enough to lose seats to them (Thanet, Thurrock), to the LDs (in the South West), and to Labour (a number of key marginals). Again, the current Conservative majority is a slim one. I suppose that at the next GE, the LDs will fight 20 by-election campaigns, and UKIP will try to do the same - but their fate isn't in their own hands, or only to a very limited extent. It's a view, but the soft Brexit scenario totally ignores Labour's fate. I'm not sure that a hard Brexit will result in a surge of pro-European fervour, but it's a possibility. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,765
|
Post by right on Feb 24, 2017 9:18:03 GMT
Copeland was down to Mandelson and Blair according to McDonnell this morning, in the most graphic display of pathetic denial ever witnessed on national media. This is the problem with Momentum/Corbynista - not only are they inept, incompetent, delusional but completely and utterly stubborn. As the hard Left always was. This is disastrous for the country - May has been able to morph into Farage without an opposition in sight. No-one seems to think that Blair's intervention helped Labour in either of the two seats. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 9:29:29 GMT
I woupd think the LD's would be disappointed with these two. Although the vote increased in both; surely a minimum 10% would be their base line?
|
|
xftrev
Lib Dem
Post Brexit City State of London
Posts: 183
|
Post by xftrev on Feb 24, 2017 9:32:51 GMT
Copeland was down to Mandelson and Blair according to McDonnell this morning, in the most graphic display of pathetic denial ever witnessed on national media. This is the problem with Momentum/Corbynista - not only are they inept, incompetent, delusional but completely and utterly stubborn. As the hard Left always was. This is disastrous for the country - May has been able to morph into Farage without an opposition in sight. No-one seems to think that Blair's intervention helped Labour in either of the two seats. I doubt it had more than a miniscule effect. It was a dog whistle to ardent pro Europeans like me, and a reminder that Corbyn whipped (giggle) the A50 vote. To try and blame that pair for the defeat is beyond pathetic. I'd wager it wasn't mentioned once on the doorsteps. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 9:38:56 GMT
Cat Smith. Oh dear. She will be looking for a new job on a Copeland style swing.
|
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Feb 24, 2017 9:43:24 GMT
I await the excuses with morbid curiosity.  With enemies like this who needs friends? |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,765
|
Post by right on Feb 24, 2017 9:51:49 GMT
No-one seems to think that Blair's intervention helped Labour in either of the two seats. I doubt it had more than a miniscule effect. It was a dog whistle to ardent pro Europeans like me, and a reminder that Corbyn whipped (giggle) the A50 vote. To try and blame that pair for the defeat is beyond pathetic. I'd wager it wasn't mentioned once on the doorsteps. Blair's toxic, so I'd be surprised. The Bishop thought that this could be a problem when this first came out. Perhaps that didn't turn out to be the case, but we are lucky in having two political activists from the constituency and will almost certainly hear detailed reports from both of them. |
|
|
|
Post by mrpastelito on Feb 24, 2017 9:53:09 GMT
Both the LDs' and (even more so) UKIP's success hinge on the Brexit negotiations outcome. Hard Brexit: UKIP are finished, but the Tories lose their majority to Labour and the LDs. They only need to lose 20 seats after all. Soft Brexit: Tories leak votes to UKIP, enough to lose seats to them (Thanet, Thurrock), to the LDs (in the South West), and to Labour (a number of key marginals). Again, the current Conservative majority is a slim one. I suppose that at the next GE, the LDs will fight 20 by-election campaigns, and UKIP will try to do the same - but their fate isn't in their own hands, or only to a very limited extent. It's a view, but the soft Brexit scenario totally ignores Labour's fate. I'm not sure that a hard Brexit will result in a surge of pro-European fervour, but it's a possibility. There won't even have to be a surge of any kind for May to lose her outright majority. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Feb 24, 2017 9:53:21 GMT
OK, my thoughts:
1) I was not at all surprised by the Tory win in Copeland. I said the Tories would win by 2.5-5% on the other thread and the scale of their victory is all down to an effective squeeze of UKIP. It was obvious that The Tory by-election machine had hit the ground running in December and a great deal of phoning was being done throughout the campaign
2) I think Labour picked the wrong candidate - the Health Service campaigner not linked to normal politics would have been better, even if she was the Corbyn choice. The candidate chosen was a solid choice but I looked at her local election results and it did not look like she had enthused the electorate. Meanwhile the Tories picked a very safe candidate withe good local credentials
3) The Lib Dems will be satisfied with that result in one of the worst seats for them in the country historically, a place where there has been no trace of a Lib Dem campaign at any level (other than in Keswick) for many years. I would not be at all surprised to see them take Cumbria County Council seats in Keswick and Cockermouth South (where their candidate is based, and which is partly in Copeland) come May. They may have done enough in some other Remainy parts of the constituency like St Bees to make a breakthrough onto Copeland council in the future. Building from the grass roots is what the Lib Dems are all about. In a Labour-Tory fight making headway in a hard fought parliamentary by-election was always a tall order but they have exceeded what the national polls would predict despite the squeeze, and have clearly gained votes from Labour
4) In Stoke the relentless hyping of UKIP by the media (when will they learn?? It was the same in Oldham and Sleaford!) delivered Labour the win. If the Tories had started in second place they would have won, and if the Lib Dems had started in second they would have won, in my opinion. There is no enthusiasm for Labour in Stoke these days, but there is a lot of hatred for UKIP.
5) The Lib Dems put in a big effort in Stoke and will have hoped for better than 10%, but the reality is that in the context of a Labour-UKIP fight they did well to get an improvement in excess of what the national polls would have predicted. The dominant swing in Stoke was actually Lab to Lib Dem, and that matches the change in national polls since the referendum. What was absent was any significant Lab to UKIP switching - I think that already happened in 2015, and the worry for Labour is that whereas Bluekip voters are going back to the Tories, the Redkip ones are not going back to Labour despite/because of their two-faced Brexit strategy.
6) Some typical ridiculous hyping about Scotland on here! The SNP are a very different opponent to Labour, and the gains the Tories may make from them have already been signalled by the Holyrood elections. These by-elections say nothing new about that since there are no UKIP votes to squeeze in Scotland
7) Squeezing UKIP is good news for the Tories in places like the SW, and for the Lib Dems to regain many seats there they will have to be on 15% plus and the Tories well below 40% by 2020
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 9:58:44 GMT
No comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 24, 2017 10:02:06 GMT
And yet the people of Copeland were happy to trust Jamie Reed. Momentum want the power without the responsibility. The Labour leadership is their toy now. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Feb 24, 2017 10:07:32 GMT
Dimbleby suggests Labour have held Copeland. further proof (if it were needed) that he should retire.... |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Feb 24, 2017 10:11:16 GMT
I should add that the seats that the Lib Dems could win or move back into a strong second if there were a GE tomorrow are places with bigger Labour/Green votes than UKIP votes in 2015. My list for England and Wales (they stand a good chance in NE Fife and Edinburgh West as well)
Bath
Twickenham
Kingston
Colchester
Cheadle
Portsmouth S
Brecon and Radnor
Hazel Grove
Lewes and Eastbourne they are close enough to have a chance too
Plus they should beat Labour in Cambridge and have a chance in Cardiff Central, Burnley and Bermondsey
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 24, 2017 10:21:47 GMT
I await the excuses with morbid curiosity. Is that a parody account? I mean actually beyond the fact that Dennis Skinner is himself an obvious parody |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,765
|
Post by right on Feb 24, 2017 10:23:15 GMT
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,896
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 24, 2017 10:25:18 GMT
So in Stoke the Conservative vote not only held up but improved and completely stalled UKIP. If only we could have pipped them for 2nd place? I forecast a collapse in that UKIP vote at the next GE and very tight result if on these boundaries. Copeland is testimony to jobs in a real dominant industry trumping smears and scares over the NHS. No LD surge and UKIP collapse into the Conservatives. Excellent. UKIP did rather better in Stoke than I expected, and it could be argued that - as so often before - they have survived to fight another day. However, I think I was correct that the Conservatives set out to stymie them, and fought a successful stealth campaign which has done just that. In a year when UKIP faces very unpromising local elections, the party needed something that could be presented as a success, and could be used as a launchpad. A by-election stalemate in which the party leader was subjected to major public embarrassment doesn't meet that criterion. Correct. My Forum Poll vote for UKIP originally was because I at first thought they might pull it off. As the campaign wore on I could see it was impossible and swopped to Conservative. As I made my personal journey back into the Conservative fold I just knew that if I was doing it so were about a million others. That made me switch back to UKIP here because they were the obvious standard bearer for the right and pragmatic right-wingers might support them to stuff Labour. But all the campaign news and the hopeless personal performance by Nuttall soon convinced me all was lost to them. I switched back to Conservative foolishly instead of going straight to Labour. I blame the over-bullish LDs who if doing half as well as they contended must have been bleeding Labour. they weren't. I am a structuralist so this was a Labour hold all the way. In fact it is an adequate Labour hold with a 2015 mirror finish. I should have been sensible and voted Labour first off and stuck to it. This was never a chance because Stoke seats are Red Dwarfs with low power and output but a certain tenacity of longevity. They are difficult to kill off and lack volatility. This was just the worst place for Nuttall to make a stand in any circumstance except the Conservatives standing down. With the blue/purple teams literally even and equal there was a near certainty of out-voting Labour by a lot BUT getting nowhere near winning. Painting this as a chance for either of them was silly and I confess to it. It had a really piss-poor, nasty labour candidate and a lacklustre piss-poor campaign and of course they still won. The Conservatives selected the right type of candidate and very low visibility campaign o do the maximum damage possible in the circumstances. Assuring an apparent weak Labour hold and steady state for themselves in a hostile environment, whilst completely stuffing UKIP was masterly. Nuttall very damaged. UKIP severely damaged. Labour damaged. Corbyn holds it so probably hangs on to 2020? Near perfect. Perfection would have been second place 17-votes ahead of UKIP!! |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,904
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 24, 2017 10:26:04 GMT
Blair's intervention last Friday was, by reliable accounts, mentioned as a reason for not voting Labour in both Stoke and Copeland.
I'm not going to pretend it was the main reason for the latter result in particular. But it didn't help.
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,896
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 24, 2017 10:26:41 GMT
Who is going to be the hard left's scapegoat??? I think they'll probably go for the Blairites working in combination with the Jews, backed up by the establishment. We must hope so, and hope that it turns really nasty in bursts. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,904
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 24, 2017 10:28:37 GMT
Is that a parody account? I mean actually beyond the fact that Dennis Skinner is himself an obvious parody Yes, it is a parody account and this has been known for years now. |
|
