Copeland est e pluribus unum for Labour in the long-term

[greenhert]

In the similar way in which the Mitcham & Morden by-election of 1982 predicted more Conservative gains in seats similar in character to it in the 1983 general election (Edmonton and Hayes & Harlington, for example), I believe the Copeland by-election of 2017 will do the same for similar seats to it (i.e. ex-industrial/ex-mining seats that have been considered to be reliably Labour for decades): greensocialistalan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/my-analysis-of-local-by-election.html

[Tom]

It will be interesting to see what happens in London. Will demographic change allow Labour to retain lots of seats they would otherwise lose?

[Richard Allen]

The comparison is flawed. The Mitcham and Morden by election was only a year before the 1983 general election and result was mostly a result of the Labour / SDP split (The Tories vote share dropped slightly) which obviously was a big factor in some of the Tory gains in 1983.

Unless we get an early election we are still over 3 years away from the next general election. We have no idea who will lead Labour into that election or what the political landscape will be like at the time.

[AdminSTB]

I do think greenhert is onto something though. And he says "long-term" in the thread title.

The Conservatives seem to have a better long-term potential in seats such as Copeland, North East Derbyshire, Newcastle-under-Lyme and Bishop Auckland (not forgetting possible boundary changes) than in seats such as Exeter, Eltham, Mitcham & Morden and Slough - all of which were probably lost forever in 1997.

[Richard Allen]

Feb 26, 2017 9:20:19 GMT AdminSTB said:

I do think greenhert is onto something though. And he says "long-term" in the thread title.

The Conservatives seem to have a better long-term potential in seats such as Copeland, North East Derbyshire, Newcastle-under-Lyme and Bishop Auckland (not forgetting possible boundary changes) than in seats such as Exeter, Eltham, Mitcham & Morden and Slough - all of which were probably lost forever in 1997.

Well yes, but that has been obvious for some time.

[Sibboleth]

Are there many Labour constituencies in which the local economy is dominated by the nuclear power industry and sees its economic future as dependent on its renewal? But I guess Albert Owen will finally lose if Corbyn leads Labour into the next election, which would be a shame.

[finsobruce]

Feb 26, 2017 23:27:33 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

Feb 26, 2017 0:04:34 GMT Richard Allen said:

The comparison is flawed. The Mitcham and Morden by election was only a year before the 1983 general election and result was mostly a result of the Labour / SDP split (The Tories vote share dropped slightly) which obviously was a big factor in some of the Tory gains in 1983.

Unless we get an early election we are still over 3 years away from the next general election. We have no idea who will lead Labour into that election or what the political landscape will be like at the time.

If I was Theresa May I would be tempted to go soon if I could engineer it. Labour in disarray and with no money. It's too good to miss.

Like you say...anything could happen in three years. At the moment you would have to ask who the hell she could possibly lose to?

Unlike Wilson in '66 her majority though small, is secure. The only risk is that people would take umbrage at being sent to the polls to increase a majority, but it probably isn't much of a risk.

[Lord Twaddleford]

Feb 26, 2017 23:41:16 GMT Sibboleth said:

Are there many Labour constituencies in which the local economy is dominated by the nuclear power industry and sees its economic future as dependent on its renewal? But I guess Albert Owen will finally lose if Corbyn leads Labour into the next election, which would be a shame.

I think even before Copeland, polling has been heavily suggesting that Owen will lose his seat at the next election, which would be a great shame. The party most likely to unseat him, Plaid Cymru, is for the most part rather anti-nuclear energy, except perhaps where Wylfa is concerned...

[Deleted]

Feb 25, 2017 19:33:42 GMT greenhert said:

In the similar way in which the Mitcham & Morden by-election of 1982 predicted more Conservative gains in seats similar in character to it in the 1983 general election (Edmonton and Hayes & Harlington, for example), I believe the Copeland by-election of 2017 will do the same for similar seats to it (i.e. ex-industrial/ex-mining seats that have been considered to be reliably Labour for decades): greensocialistalan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/my-analysis-of-local-by-election.html

I certainly hope that the long term trend in Copeland mirrors that of Mitcham & Morden, Edmonton and Hayes & Harlington which are now of course among our best seats. But I guess you didn't mean it quite like that...

[greenhert]

No, @strinity, I did not. I meant they might go Conservative and then not return to Labour for the foreseeable future outside of triple-figure landslide victories (assuming we still have FPTP by then).

[carlton43]

Feb 27, 2017 12:59:24 GMT @strinity said:

Feb 25, 2017 19:33:42 GMT greenhert said:

In the similar way in which the Mitcham & Morden by-election of 1982 predicted more Conservative gains in seats similar in character to it in the 1983 general election (Edmonton and Hayes & Harlington, for example), I believe the Copeland by-election of 2017 will do the same for similar seats to it (i.e. ex-industrial/ex-mining seats that have been considered to be reliably Labour for decades): greensocialistalan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/my-analysis-of-local-by-election.html

I certainly hope that the long term trend in Copeland mirrors that of Mitcham & Morden, Edmonton and Hayes & Harlington which are now of course among our best seats. But I guess you didn't mean it quite like that...

Many of your very best seats used to be in Scotland!!!