|
|
Post by thirdchill on Feb 24, 2017 13:35:12 GMT
I await the excuses with morbid curiosity.  Here's one from a non-parody account (although a parody account is frequently more sensible): |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Feb 24, 2017 13:47:10 GMT
In 2010 there was (virtually) no UKIP and the Lib Dems were on over 20% in the polls. I think it is pretty impatient to expect more than the national % in seats that polled well below the national % in 2015, and where the Lib Dems were the 4th horse in a two horse race.. Stoke in particular was a hiding to nothing as the anti-UKIP vote coalesced around Labour And where was Remainer outrage expressed in either of these votes?? Certainly not in the Stoke turnout... Why would Remainer outrage express itself in Stoke where the two Parties tipped to win were trying to outdo each other in their Brexitness?? While the only Party presenting a Remain were said repeatedly to have no chance of winning or were completely ignored by the media. Meanwhile many people seem to have voted Labour as "the lesser of two weevils". Some of them were no doubt Remainers |
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Feb 24, 2017 14:14:17 GMT
Great result for Conservatives in both seats, Labour can have some comfort they won Stoke, but to lose a seat you have held since 1935 to a mid term Conservative government when in opposition gives no hope on Corbyn's chances for winning 2020. What I found rather irritating from the commentariat was the constant repetition of 'this has been Labour for 80 years' message. In truth , the constituency has only existed in its present form since 2010 - when the town of Keswick and three rural wards were added to the predecessor seat. It is far from clear that the Tories would have won the seat yesterday on its pre-2010 boundaries. Equally the Tories would have won the seat on its present boundaries in 1983 - and probably 1987. |
|
tcpb
Conservative
Libertarian
Posts: 27 
|
Post by tcpb on Feb 24, 2017 14:18:39 GMT
I rate Eastbourne a better chance than most on your list. I don't see Colchester or Brecon being at all easy. I was careful to say "or move into a strong second". Most of those seats need further improvement in the LD poll rating for them actually to win. I was trying to classify Con-LD seats in terms of 3rd party squeeze.. (which does inevitably correlate somewhat with Leave vs Remain, since the UKIP votes were almost always higher in Leave seats) Are you overlooking the first time incumbency rule where a successful MP gets an increased lead at the second election? LDs often do badly when standing again in a seat they lost. Newbury and Guildford for example. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Feb 24, 2017 14:26:20 GMT
In the context of close by-elections where they weren't in contention to get an increase in vote share in both was a decent result for the lds. Apart from the tories i would have thought they would be the only ones who can feel more happy than not at the results. Ukip probably just did well enough in holding second in stoke for it not be calamitous, but not well enough to turn around the current decline. We did as badly as expected but at least we had candidates this time. I didn't expect much from the Greens (these are by-elections after all...) but even in that context I thought both results were diabolical bearing in mind we were level pegging with you in both constituencies last time. One difference being that last time was pretty much your worst ever result in either constituency (at least worst for a long time) and our best ever. They were poor results for us but predictably so in constituencies where we've never had much presence. The drop in copeland was about what i'd expect. Stoke perhaps a bit more, but with all the attention on ukip i suspect some people who may otherwise have considered a green vote voted labour. |
|
|
|
Post by Antiochian on Feb 24, 2017 14:30:45 GMT
That's a good reason to drive the leftovers (the Remainers) into the arms of the LibDems or Greens.. surely? Being a LibDem for Leave I am agnostic but the theory in the party is that our campaign for second Referendum blah blah should drive the passionate Remainers into a frenzy. Instead they seem to have remained glued to their TVs. Or did they regard Corbyn as a Remainer? In which case they haven't been looking much at his actions or his statements...
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 24, 2017 14:32:41 GMT
Brexit was barely an issue in Copeland at all (save for Mr Tony's ham-fisted intervention, perhaps) and less so than some predicted (or wanted) in Stoke.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,005
|
Post by Khunanup on Feb 24, 2017 14:35:33 GMT
Here's one from a non-parody account (although a parody account is frequently more sensible): Though there's a lot of nonsense in the article (including the bit that gives the headline) there's some clear headed stuff in there about how Labour should approach Brexit and the coalition that Labour needs to win power again. If you cut those bits out and posted them alone it'd be useful to the Labour Party, but it's Paul Mason so large swathes of the party will just ignore them. More fool them... |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 24, 2017 14:37:36 GMT
Mason has always been a strangely compelling mix of sharp insights and arrant nonsense, and probably always will be. You can take the boy out of the SWP etc etc  |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,005
|
Post by Khunanup on Feb 24, 2017 14:45:22 GMT
I didn't expect much from the Greens (these are by-elections after all...) but even in that context I thought both results were diabolical bearing in mind we were level pegging with you in both constituencies last time. One difference being that last time was pretty much your worst ever result in either constituency (at least worst for a long time) and our best ever. They were poor results for us but predictably so in constituencies where we've never had much presence. The drop in copeland was about what i'd expect. Stoke perhaps a bit more, but with all the attention on ukip i suspect some people who may otherwise have considered a green vote voted labour. I only highlighted the fact that ourselves and the GPEW were effectively level in both constituencies to show in sharp relief the corresponding fortunes notwithstanding the nature of our respective results in 2015. But I do think there's a white flag that goes up from Greens whenever there's a by-election. Always excuses, never disappointment (and far worse with GPEW as opposed to SGP which has it's own self inflicted problems by being avowedly pro-independence which is a self inflicted wound). |
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 12,005
|
Post by Khunanup on Feb 24, 2017 14:51:20 GMT
That's a good reason to drive the leftovers (the Remainers) into the arms of the LibDems or Greens.. surely? Being a LibDem for Leave I am agnostic but the theory in the party is that our campaign for second Referendum blah blah should drive the passionate Remainers into a frenzy. Instead they seem to have remained glued to their TVs. Or did they regard Corbyn as a Remainer? In which case they haven't been looking much at his actions or his statements... We got well squeezed in both constituencies. It's not terrible surprising but despite that we still more than doubled our vote in both. I do think the Remain/Brexit divide in constituencies only really comes to the fore when there is the binary choice between the primary opponents (as in Richmond Park). Otherwise stopping UKIP (as in Stoke), or stopping Labour/Tories in Copeland will trump it. Ultimately by-elections are fought on the ground that at least one of the two largest parties make it about, lesser reasons just give you voters almost by osmosis. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 15:09:43 GMT
as opposed to SGP which has it's own self inflicted problems by being avowedly pro-independence which is a self inflicted wound). Except it really hasn't been a 'wound' at all. Whatever anyone thinks about independence, if we'd ignored the referendum, we'd still have about a thousand members (instead of about nine thousand) and thus far less money, far fewer staff, and probably still two MSPs at most. It may well put off some potential supporters, but we didn't invent the constitutional divide. |
|
tcpb
Conservative
Libertarian
Posts: 27
|
Post by tcpb on Feb 24, 2017 15:22:32 GMT
as opposed to SGP which has it's own self inflicted problems by being avowedly pro-independence which is a self inflicted wound). Except it really hasn't been a 'wound' at all. Whatever anyone thinks about independence, if we'd ignored the referendum, we'd still have about a thousand members (instead of about nine thousand) and thus far less money, far fewer staff, and probably still two MSPs at most. It may well put off some potential supporters, but we didn't invent the constitutional divide. I was surprised that you had a full time paid agent for Stoke just to get 2,000 votes. With leaflet costs and outside support, I doubt if the bill is much under £20,000 expended or am I wrong? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2017 15:28:34 GMT
I was surprised that you had a full time paid agent for Stoke just to get 2,000 votes. With leaflet costs and outside support, I doubt if the bill is much under £20,000 expended or am I wrong? No idea, I have no involvement with the GPEW. |
|
|
|
Post by pepperminttea on Feb 24, 2017 16:12:09 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 I rate Eastbourne a better chance than most on your list. I don't see Colchester or Brecon being at all easy. I agree, Colchester and Brecon had very well known Lib Dem incumbents who won't be standing again next time. The Lib Dems will have to deal with the evaporation of their personal votes which will make them much more difficult to gain. Though I guess running Kirsty Williams in Brecon (I have no idea if she plans to stand) would deal with the personal vote issue. Incidentally does anyone have an idea which former Lib Dem MPs plan to run again? Loss of incumbency and personal votes could well be the hidden problem for the Lib Dems in 2020, historically when they lose a seat they tend to go backwards. The danger is that gains in their national vote share will mostly be wasted going from lost deposit territory to the mid to high single digits/low teens in the likes of Copeland and Stoke whilst standing still or going backwards in constituencies that were lost last time. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 24, 2017 16:15:34 GMT
Mark Hunter in Cheadle has definitely been reselected. I'm not impressed by his inability to reply to a perfectly polite email asking him to raise a matter about parking, though (he is my councillor).
|
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Feb 24, 2017 16:18:31 GMT
I rate Eastbourne a better chance than most on your list. I don't see Colchester or Brecon being at all easy. I agree Colchester and Brecon had very well known Lib Dem incumbents who won't be standing again next time. The Lib Dems will have to deal with the evaporation of their personal votes which will make them much more difficult to gain. Though I guess running Kirsty Williams in Brecon (I have no idea if she plans to stand) would deal with the personal vote issue. Incidentally does anyone have an idea which former Lib Dem MPs plan to run again? Loss of incumbency and personal votes could well be the hidden problem for the Lib Dems in 2020, historically when they lose a seat they tend to go backwards. The danger is that gains in their national vote share will mostly be wasted going from lost deposit territory to the mid to high single digits/low teens in the likes of Copeland and Stoke whilst standing still or going backwards in constituencies that were lost last time. I'm pretty sure that Julian Huppert in Cambridge has already been reselected. If there was only 1 LD gain at the next election - my money would be on Cambridge. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Feb 24, 2017 16:21:46 GMT
I was surprised that you had a full time paid agent for Stoke just to get 2,000 votes. With leaflet costs and outside support, I doubt if the bill is much under £20,000 expended or am I wrong? No idea, I have no involvement with the GPEW. I assume this refers to the Lib Dems and not GPEW - who got nowhere near 2000 votes and I'd be amazed if they had a paid agent. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 24, 2017 16:33:07 GMT
Paul Mason is a loon.
He can bang on about how the country wants radical leftism all he wants. The same page in the Guardian makes it fairly clear than in Copeland at least, that's not what Labour voters want. That's as valid an observation as his.
The Copeland electorate have not just voted Tory because Corbyn isn't left wing enough!
|
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Feb 24, 2017 16:54:01 GMT
Except it really hasn't been a 'wound' at all. Whatever anyone thinks about independence, if we'd ignored the referendum, we'd still have about a thousand members (instead of about nine thousand) and thus far less money, far fewer staff, and probably still two MSPs at most. It may well put off some potential supporters, but we didn't invent the constitutional divide. I was surprised that you had a full time paid agent for Stoke just to get 2,000 votes. With leaflet costs and outside support, I doubt if the bill is much under £20,000 expended or am I wrong? We had a full time paid agent (if that's what he was) not to get 2,000 votes but to avoid being squeezed into lost deposit territory as was our fate in various 2010-15 byelections. I suspect we spent more than £20k. I also suspect we received more than £20k in Stoke-specific donations. |
|
