|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Stoke by-election
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Any thoughts from Shipmates on the upcoming by-election in Stoke? Current wisdom seems to be that UKIP are too disorganised to take it, but current wisdom seems to be pretty flaky these days. What do y'all reckon?
I think there's also a by-election coming up in Cumbria where Labour are thought to be vulnerable to the Conservatives. Any thoughts on that one?
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I honestly have no idea what will happen, so much depends on the turnout. I think there are a couple of interesting questions to be asked about Stoke: e.g. will the apparent popularity of UKIP as a party translate as a vote for Nuttall himself? Have UKIP committed to many gaffes to be credible? Now that the EU Referendum has passed, will the Kippers bother to vote, or even transfer to the Tories? Will Labourites rise up en masse to stop UKIP winning? What specifically local issues may sway the campaign? Will aliens swoop down and purloin the ballot boxes? It's all to play for.
In Cumbria (which seems to be receiving far less media coverage), I have a hunch that the LibDems may take quite a lot of votes from Labour, thus opening the door for the Tories to win. On the other hand, ruling parties tend to do badly in by-elections.
In both cases, everything depends on turnout and on the changed situation since the Referendum.
[ 19. February 2017, 13:51: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jack the Lass
Ship's airhead
# 3415
|
Posted
I don't know much about either constituency, but I understand that both voted to leave the EU in last year's referendum. Judging from the soundbites and vox pops on the news from both, I suspect that if they are representative (big if, I know) then Labour are screwed in both, and Corbyn's position as leader will become even more tenuous.
A couple of days ago on the radio news I heard a piece from Stoke, where they interviewed voters on the streets. From that, there was no mention at all of Paul Nuttall and his utter lack of credibility, but nearly everyone was saying that they wanted out of Europe, that they wouldn't vote for a candidate who had favoured Remain (the position of the current Labour candidate, for one), and of those who expressed a party preference all said UKIP rather than the Tories. The presenter of that piece indicated a common suspicion that the Tories were concentrating efforts and resources on the Cumbrian constituency as a more realistic prospect (at the last election, Stoke was Labour 1st, UKIP 2nd about 5K votes behind, and then the Tories 3rd just 55 votes behind UKIP. In Copeland, the Tories were 2nd last time).
I genuinely wouldn't be surprised if Paul Nuttall is elected MP, despite his incompetence, lack of credibility and that he was parachuted into the constituency despite having no links to it. I fear it will be Gorgeous George all over again, and the people that lose out most will be the electors of Stoke, who will end up pretty much unrepresented for the duration.
--------------------
"My body is a temple - it's big and doesn't move." (Jo Brand)
wiblog blipfoto blog
Posts: 5767 | From: the land of the deep-fried Mars Bar | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Anonymous Labour MPs are apparently reasonably positive about the response they're getting on the doorstep in Stoke... and of course they're prepping the ground so that if they lose it will be Corbyn's fault and if they win then he'll have had nothing to do with it.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
I think Labour will hold on. The fact that there is any uncertainty about that speaks volumes; in normal political times this seat should be safe as houses but these are far from normal times.
People campaigning in the constituency report that Labour is running a very good ground game whereas UKIP are disorganised. Labour supporters on the doorstep mainly staying loyal despite no great love for Corbyn. Nuttall not really cutting through. Turnout likely to be very low.
This is the sort of seat where Corbyn's policy of accepting the decision on Brexit/rolling over and playing dead, should shore up the Labour vote.
Let's face it, UKIP are a one-issue party who now lack an issue, with only one well-known personality.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I have to say that I was intrigued to hear Douglas Carswell (not the person you were thinking of, I know) on "Any Questions" yesterday. Although I don't agree with him on a lot of things, he is an intelligent man with a nuanced approach to things. Why on earth did he defect to UKIP?
[ 19. February 2017, 14:45: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
In all normal circumstances, Nuttall ought to be unelectable even to a Parish Council. Since the Trump result, I think he is bound to win.
It would be nice to think otherwise, but 2016 has taken away any faith I had in politics or the wisdom of electorates.
[ 19. February 2017, 14:53: Message edited by: Enoch ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
I think Carswell mainly defected to UKIP as he is a fully paid-up member of the awkward squad. AIR he is a libertarian free-trader who believes that anyone should be allowed to live and work wherever they can better themselves.
He possible assumed that the referendum result would be a remain win, and therefore UKIP would have continuing appeal.
Well known that he and Farage can't stand one another.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Both should have been fairly safe Labour seats. But, in the current climate I guess all bets are off.
Copeland is the one I'm more familiar with, mainly because I keep an eye on nuclear related news. The largest local employer, by a long way, is Sellafield - which makes the leave vote in the referendum quite anomalous since generally support for Leave was weaker among communities with a higher proportion of higher educated voters and immigrants. The constituency is also one of the likely sites for a new nuclear power station at Moorside (just outside Sellafield), which will be a very substantial boost to the local economy.
Last week Mrs May was in town talking about how important new nuclear power stations are to the UK, and that only the Conservatives have the commitment to new build and will ensure that Moorside is built. At almost exactly the same time, Toshiba (the major investor in the project) was stating that uncertainty over UK membership of Euratom (Mrs May had slipped a comment that the UK would be leaving Euratom into a footnote of the bill authorising her to call Article 50) was of grave concern - and without assurances that the UK nuclear industry will remain within the safety and security provisions of Euratom they would be too concerned about safety issues to invest in UK nuclear industry. Plus, of course, in common with any major technological investment they would need access to the European workforce. I'm not sure how much the electorate in the area realised the extent to which the economy and future investment of the area is tied in with EU membership, with Euratom membership in particular (but, there had been no mention of leaving Euratom prior to a few weeks ago anyway, so that wasn't something that the people of Copeland have expressed their views on yet anyway). I would expect the likelihood of a £10-15 billion invest disappearing is the sort of thing that may well affect minds when it comes to voting.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Last week Mrs May was in town
Which I think tells you how the Copeland result will go. Stoke Central, not so sure.
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
The Liberal Dems are being bullish in Stoke but that's the way they are at the moment, with a surge in membership since the Referendum. I'm not too convinced they have grounds to be and even if they have it could weaken the Labour vote and give Nuttall a chance.
Stoke's an interesting one as, although natural Labour territory, many Labour voters feel let down - and it's not simply a Brexit thing. Tristram Hunt was never very popular in Stoke and the Labour run city council is legendary for its inefficiency - 'Broke and Bent' not Stoke on Trent.
The Stokies deserve better. Their city has been battered for years through no fault of their own. They deserve an even break. Sadly, many see UKIP as a potential answer. My hope would be that there'll be sufficient residual loyalty to Labour to see off Nuttall and his cronies.
The Kippers couldn't organise the proverbial. I'm involved in local politics just up the road from Stoke as the Deep Red gives way to a thin strip of yellow before you get the Deep Blue if Tory Cheshire. So I'm in a liminal place. From what little I've seen of UKIP on the ground they are full of bluster but never follow through - they are as disorganised as disorganised can be.
I just hope that Stoke puts two fingers up to Nuttall. He is a nasty piece of work. A thug.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The Liberal Dems are being bullish in Stoke but that's the way they are at the moment, with a surge in membership since the Referendum. I'm not too convinced they have grounds to be and even if they have it could weaken the Labour vote and give Nuttall a chance.
Now, how come the Lib Dems are apparently experiencing a surge in membership, but not really in prospective vote share? They seem stuck on about 11% nationwide. Are they just preaching hard to the converted?
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
Latest odds:
Copeland: Conservative 2/5 Lab 5/2 Rest 40/1 or worse
Stoke: Labour 4/7 UKIP 13/8 Rest 25/1 or worse
Updates here.
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
My understanding is that Stoke-on-Trent has shown a fair bit of support for the extreme right over the years and UKIP could well profit from this. My hope is therefore that the Tory vote holds up and keeping UKIP out while making the election a fight between Labour, who are reluctant supporters of Brexit and the LibDems, who are dead against it.
There's just a chance here, as anywhere that with only one anti-Brexit party, the LibDems could win the seat. It is a by-election after all.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
There's just a chance here, as anywhere that with only one anti-Brexit party, the LibDems could win the seat. It is a by-election after all.
Well, not the only anti-Brexit party. There are also the Greens, and (not relevant everywhere) the SNP, Plaid and probably some of the NI parties. But, in England I'd concede that in most places the LibDems are by far the strongest anti-Brexit party.
This could be a seat winner for them. If 20% of the electorate in a constituency feel very strongly against Brexit and therefore turn out to vote LibDem that would be a very strong position - with a 50% turnout, 40% of the vote would win most elections. But, it's probably pushing it to get half those who voted Remain to feel so strongly that they'll vote for any party that stands against Brexit; a sizeable proportion of Remain voters have swallowed the "it was the will of the people" lie and consider it a done deal, and therefore will have other criteria to use to decide where to put their cross on the ballot paper.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
That's what the Lib Dems are hoping for and word is that they are getting a good reception on the doors - but then, the Christian People's Alliance are saying the same. Stoke's a friendly place and people are willing to talk politics ... Although social media round here can get rather fraught.
Most Stokies I know are staunch Labour or else independent ...
But I've not been in to help with the campaign - and I'm Lib Dem in case you're wondering ... Not sure I can this week coming either.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The Liberal Dems are being bullish in Stoke but that's the way they are at the moment, with a surge in membership since the Referendum. I'm not too convinced they have grounds to be and even if they have it could weaken the Labour vote and give Nuttall a chance.
Now, how come the Lib Dems are apparently experiencing a surge in membership, but not really in prospective vote share? They seem stuck on about 11% nationwide. Are they just preaching hard to the converted?
They still suffer from the scars of collaborating with the enemy in 2010 and betraying our children who want a university education. We have to balance this against the Labour party betraying our children who want to be Europeans. Those of us who want to support them on Europe, still remember how badly we were let down by them.
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Labour, who are reluctant supporters of Brexit
I wouldn't call their 3-line whip reluctant. I'd call it opportunistic - playing to the next by-election, never mind the impact on the country.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
I find it interesting that some people are still assuming that UKIP voters who no longer want to vote for that party would go to the Tories (or vice-versa). There's strong evidence that - especially in places like Stoke - most UKIP voters are actually disgruntled Labour voters.
Basically, in UK politics as it stands right now, the Tories are the establishment party, Labour are the party that thinks it's for the common people but is being abandoned by them in droves because it's failed them too many times, and UKIP is the populist, anti-establishment party that says all the things those disaffected former Labour voters want to hear. A simple left-right axis may be OK for discussing political theory, but it doesn't really work when it comes to analysing shifts in voter intentions.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Now, how come the Lib Dems are apparently experiencing a surge in membership, but not really in prospective vote share? They seem stuck on about 11% nationwide. Are they just preaching hard to the converted?
They still suffer from the scars of collaborating with the enemy in 2010 and betraying our children who want a university education. We have to balance this against the Labour party betraying our children who want to be Europeans. Those of us who want to support them on Europe, still remember how badly we were let down by them.
Though, as it becomes clearer how they moderated some of the worst evils of the Tories (eg: on welfare reform) I think many of us are moving towards giving them another chance to redeem themselves over tuition fees. If I didn't have the option of voting SNP I'd certainly be thinking about voting LibDem again.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I find it interesting that some people are still assuming that UKIP voters who no longer want to vote for that party would go to the Tories (or vice-versa). There's strong evidence that - especially in places like Stoke - most UKIP voters are actually disgruntled Labour voters.
Which is why people (most recently Sioni) are saying that a collapse in UKIP support (eg: over the conflicting statements about Hillsborough) is good for everyone - because those disgruntled UKIP voters will not be moving to just one party. Although I expect it won't be all that good for LibDems or Greens, as neither of them are likely to be attractive to former-UKIPers (who would probably object to pro-EU, pro-immigration policies).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Now, how come the Lib Dems are apparently experiencing a surge in membership, but not really in prospective vote share? They seem stuck on about 11% nationwide. Are they just preaching hard to the converted?
They still suffer from the scars of collaborating with the enemy in 2010 and betraying our children who want a university education. We have to balance this against the Labour party betraying our children who want to be Europeans. Those of us who want to support them on Europe, still remember how badly we were let down by them.
Though, as it becomes clearer how they moderated some of the worst evils of the Tories (eg: on welfare reform) I think many of us are moving towards giving them another chance to redeem themselves over tuition fees. If I didn't have the option of voting SNP I'd certainly be thinking about voting LibDem again.
Although ICM in the last hour have got them -2 at 8%, Tories 44 (+2), UKIP 13 (+1), Green 4 (-), and Labour 26 (-1).
YouGov last week had Con 40 (-), Lab 24 (-2), LibDem 11 (-), UKIP 14 (+2), Green 4 (-).
I'm not sure what's going on anymore but other than people who've always voted LibDem anyway signing up to actually join the party it doesn't look much like a movement in their direction.
FWIW you can now get 12/1 on the Tories taking both seats. Don't think it will happen myself, but there's been a big movement in that direction on the betting markets this morning.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
I'm not sure what's going on anymore but other than people who've always voted LibDem anyway signing up to actually join the party it doesn't look much like a movement in their direction.
Yes, I think at present it's mostly LibDem voters joining (or, possibly re-joining) the party rather than any significant number of floating voters moving over to support the LibDems. But, membership is an important step forward - it creates resources to be tapped for election campaigns, more people to knock on doors and get the party noticed. The problem with national polling at the moment is that people aren't generally thinking about how they would vote since it's 3 years 'til the next election. Whereas people actually making a definite choice to do something (like join a party, or leave) may be a much better indicator of how things are swinging.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Whereas people actually making a definite choice to do something (like join a party, or leave) may be a much better indicator of how things are swinging.
Whilst I agree with you there is the massive caveat of course that most people just don't join a political party in the first place. The number of people (on either side) who care either way, even about Brexit, is probably alarmingly small when it comes down to it.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
FWIW you can now get 12/1 on the Tories taking both seats. Don't think it will happen myself, but there's been a big movement in that direction on the betting markets this morning.
Me neither but it's a good 12/1 shot, or even 8/1. If it pisses with rain in Stoke then the turn-out factor will do it.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Last week Mrs May was in town
Which I think tells you how the Copeland result will go. Stoke Central, not so sure.
To the surprise of the media, Mrs May has apparently turned up in Stoke this afternoon....
Odds on the Tories winning there are now 10/1 having been out at 33/1 over the weekend.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
To the surprise of the media, Mrs May has apparently turned up in Stoke this afternoon....
Odds on the Tories winning there are now 10/1 having been out at 33/1 over the weekend.
Does this mean she employs doubles like the late Saddam Hussein? I've just seen on the television news here, a picture of her sitting in on the House of Lords debate on Article 50 this afternoon, to make sure their lordships don't think of defying her.
Which one do you think is the real one?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Now, how come the Lib Dems are apparently experiencing a surge in membership, but not really in prospective vote share? They seem stuck on about 11% nationwide. Are they just preaching hard to the converted?
ISTM it's the difference between breadth and depth so to speak - if you take a position which is strongly ideologically focused, then people who believe fervently in that position will support you fervently. If you have a broader position that's a compromise between what different people believe, then you will probably not find many individuals who are rapturously enthusiastic about your programme, but in the aggregate more people will be willing to give it a go.
It's the same dynamic that allows Mr Corbyn to draw massed crowds to his rallies, and to make the Labour Party the largest party by membership in Europe, at the same time as Labour and Mr Corbyn sink like stones in the polls.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
To the surprise of the media, Mrs May has apparently turned up in Stoke this afternoon....
Odds on the Tories winning there are now 10/1 having been out at 33/1 over the weekend.
Does this mean she employs doubles like the late Saddam Hussein? I've just seen on the television news here, a picture of her sitting in on the House of Lords debate on Article 50 this afternoon, to make sure their lordships don't think of defying her.
Which one do you think is the real one?
No, she was indeed in both places. Another reason not to be a politician - the lunatic daily schedules. AIUI she was in the Lords just long enough to ensure her photo got taken.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
To the surprise of the media, Mrs May has apparently turned up in Stoke this afternoon....
Odds on the Tories winning there are now 10/1 having been out at 33/1 over the weekend.
Does this mean she employs doubles like the late Saddam Hussein? I've just seen on the television news here, a picture of her sitting in on the House of Lords debate on Article 50 this afternoon, to make sure their lordships don't think of defying her.
Which one do you think is the real one?
No, she was indeed in both places. Another reason not to be a politician - the lunatic daily schedules. AIUI she was in the Lords just long enough to ensure her photo got taken.
Stoke to London Euston only 90 minutes on the faster trains....
Stoke went quite big for the BNP at a local level in the late 2000s, before they faded away again in the couple of years after the 2010 general election.
I remember being at a district synod in Stoke just after one of the local elections and everyone cheered when it was announced the BNP hadn't won any seats.
This page gives a good account of the BNP in Stoke
As for Copeland, Corbyn's opposition to nuclear seems to be a big factor, on account of it being heavily dependent on that industry.
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cenobite
Shipmate
# 14853
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
The Liberal Dems are being bullish in Stoke but that's the way they are at the moment, with a surge in membership since the Referendum. I'm not too convinced they have grounds to be and even if they have it could weaken the Labour vote and give Nuttall a chance.
Stoke's an interesting one as, although natural Labour territory, many Labour voters feel let down - and it's not simply a Brexit thing. Tristram Hunt was never very popular in Stoke and the Labour run city council is legendary for its inefficiency - 'Broke and Bent' not Stoke on Trent.
The Stokies deserve better. Their city has been battered for years through no fault of their own. They deserve an even break. Sadly, many see UKIP as a potential answer. My hope would be that there'll be sufficient residual loyalty to Labour to see off Nuttall and his cronies.
The Kippers couldn't organise the proverbial. I'm involved in local politics just up the road from Stoke as the Deep Red gives way to a thin strip of yellow before you get the Deep Blue if Tory Cheshire. So I'm in a liminal place. From what little I've seen of UKIP on the ground they are full of bluster but never follow through - they are as disorganised as disorganised can be.
I just hope that Stoke puts two fingers up to Nuttall. He is a nasty piece of work. A thug.
One reason Tristram Hunt was never popular here is because he was 'parachuted' in as the candidate. Stokies (and I know, being married to one!) are generally more likely to vote for a local person than someone who is seen (whether fairly or not) as an opportunist after a 'safe' seat.
Which is why I think that, although there is a lot of media attention on Nuttall, and a significant amount of Stoke-on-Trent voted for Brexit, Gareth Snell's local roots, combined with this being traditional Labour heartland, will be enough to see Labour win the seat.
--------------------
Cenobite: means "Common Life"; cenobites lived in community, serving one another and the rest of humanity.
Posts: 109 | From: On a journey of discovery. | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
Strong winds and heavy rain forecast for Thursday. That'll help the Tories, who I predict will walk both elections. May still looks strong to the uneducated eye, something which cannot be said of any other leader. They'll win both seats.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I read that as the Tories "walking TO" both elections and wondered why that would affect the result so beneficially!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I do not believe there are a sufficient number of Conservative votes in Stoke to win it. I predict a UKIP victory.
I believe there are a sufficient number of Conservative votes in Copeland to win it and I think that is what will happen.
I suspect that Jeremy Corbyn is not super-interested in increasing Labour's vote share. I suspect he is by inclination SR rather than SD, albeit in a mild sort of way. I suspect this is not a strategy that will yield great dividends, except perhaps to UKIP.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
What do SR and SD stand for please?
Apart from that, I agree. I think noxious Nuttall will win in Stoke and the Conservatives in Copeland. In both the turnout will be low and the majorities will not be very large. Nuttall's victory will be determined as much by the number of normal Labour voters who decline to vote at all as by the number that actually switch to him. It's quite touch and go who will come second in Stoke.
[ 22. February 2017, 19:34: Message edited by: Enoch ]
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Erm... I may be using terms rather loosely here, but by SR I mean a socialist revolutionary in contrast to a social democrat or SD.
I think Corbyn (and Momentum) believe that change will come not primarily by Parliamentary means but by means of a mass external movement (perhaps based around the unions and/or Labour party). Hence the apparent half-heartedness about seeking electoral success.
I think such an approach would be very unlikely to succeed - the grassroots zeal, I believe, just isn't there in the same way as it might have been 100 years ago.
Anyway, I could be completely wrong - maybe he doesn't think like that at all.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Normally, when a government has a slim majority, we talk about that majority being eroded by by-elections until the government loses the confidence of the house.
The fact that we're seriously entertaining the possibility of May's majority being increased by a by-election shows what bizarre times we are living through, and how unequal to those times the current opposition leader is.
Sounds like Copeland may well be lost. I still think Labour will hold Stoke, just, and Corbyn will continue to bumble along. That would be the dream result for May - if Stoke falls to UKIP, even Corbyn might finally throw in the towel, and she won't want that.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
decampagne
Shipmate
# 17012
|
Posted
It seems probable - not quite certain - that the Tories will win Copeland - which in many ways would an extraordinary event, historically; in terms of how seldom governing parties win by-elections: I think the last time was in 1982.
Stoke? I'd expect Labour to just about retain that, despite their candidate being fairly dreadful: UKIP have run a shocking, embarrassing campaign, with their candididate, the party's newly elected leader, revealed to have rather a lose grip on truth. (So much so, in fact, that I'd not rule out Nigel Farage returning, yet again, as the party's leader within a few months). The Tories have not been putting so much effort into campaigning in Stoke as they have been in Copeland - it would be even more extraordinary were they to win such an urban, deprived, seat, at this time. The fact that Theresa May has been there (as she has to Copeland) this week suggests there could be an outside chance of Tory victory though. But i think the most likely outcome is a close result, with Labour first, UKIP 2nd, Tories 3rd, everyone else a long way behind.
Corbyn will almost certainly stay where he is either way.
Posts: 86 | From: Oxfordshire | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I do not believe there are a sufficient number of Conservative votes in Stoke to win it. I predict a UKIP victory.
I believe there are a sufficient number of Conservative votes in Copeland to win it and I think that is what will happen.
If everyone turned out to vote in the Stoke by-election then the Tories would not win it, not between now and The Second Coming. If however, the Tories vote while the Labour and UKIP vote sit at home grumbling then they could well win it.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Sounds like Copeland may well be lost. I still think Labour will hold Stoke, just, and Corbyn will continue to bumble along. That would be the dream result for May - if Stoke falls to UKIP, even Corbyn might finally throw in the towel, and she won't want that.
The prospect of a govenrment led by Arthur Calwell was worth many votes to the Liberal Party under Robert Menzies. Calwell was for the most part (not in his support for the White Australia policy) a decent and honourable man but electoral disaster.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I do not believe there are a sufficient number of Conservative votes in Stoke to win it. I predict a UKIP victory.
I believe there are a sufficient number of Conservative votes in Copeland to win it and I think that is what will happen.
If everyone turned out to vote in the Stoke by-election then the Tories would not win it, not between now and The Second Coming. If however, the Tories vote while the Labour and UKIP vote sit at home grumbling then they could well win it.
It's interesting how the mood in Tory circles has changed over the last few weeks. Two or three weeks ago, most were saying that we can win Copeland but Stoke is a lost cause. Today, the general mood seems to be that both are very much in play. We'll see...
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Sounds like Copeland may well be lost. I still think Labour will hold Stoke, just, and Corbyn will continue to bumble along. That would be the dream result for May - if Stoke falls to UKIP, even Corbyn might finally throw in the towel, and she won't want that.
And you were right. The Tories won Copeland:
- Trudy Harrison (C) 13,748 (44.25%, +8.46%)
- Gillian Troughton (Lab) 11,601 (37.34%, -4.92%)
and Labour keep Stoke
- Gareth Snell (Lab) 7,853 (37.09%, -2.22%)
- Paul Nuttall (UKIP) 5,233 (24.72%, +2.07%)
- Jack Brereton (C) 5,154 (24.35%, +1.80%)
- Zulfiqar Ali (LD) 2,083 (9.84%, +5.67%)
General story? The Lib Dems gained back some of the votes they lost in their 2015 shellacking. Other than that, Stoke was close to a re-run of the 2015 election, whereas in Copeland the Conservatives were big winners, and Labour and the Kippers both big losers (Labour lost 5 points; UKIP lost 9 points).
A pretty good day for Mrs. May, really.
[ 24. February 2017, 05:37: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Cenobite was right. I heard similar comments from local Labour activists here over the last day or two. They were pretty confident from the reception they were getting on the doors.
Yes, their percentage was down but a good result for Labour and for Stoke itself I think, even though Labour hasn't done very well by The Potteries in recent years.
I do wonder whether Nuttall's holed below the waterline ...
May will be pleased with the result. The Tories always knew they wouldn't be able to take Stoke but they'll be bolstered by Copeland.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Usual caveats about extrapolating by-election results to national politics apply, but it's difficult to see this as anything but very good news indeed for the Tories.
Terrible for Labour and UKIP. The Lib Dems will be pleased about beating UKIP in Copeland, and not being annihilated in Stoke, the "capital of Brexit".
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
I despair. Politically I have nowhere to go. Labour in disarray, no other credible alternatives. For now the Right have won the propaganda war and we just have to wait until enough people have been shafted by them and actually realise it instead of blaming Europe and Schroedinger's Immigrant.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Usual caveats about extrapolating by-election results to national politics apply, but it's difficult to see this as anything but very good news indeed for the Tories.
Indeed - the turnout in Stoke was utterly abysmal though - something like 1 in 3 voters.
What's really interesting is that the Tories managed to run a 25 year old paper candidate to within 70-odd votes of UKIP without really trying.
Plan A had been to focus on Copeland and quietly play down Stoke so as to keep Corbyn in place (and because rationally the Tories were unlikely to win there anyway).
Apparently on the doorsteps the Tories in Stoke were getting their best hearing for years so suddenly people got a bit more optimistic. Creditable third without money or manpower being used will gee up Tories standing in Labour marginals no end I would have thought.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Though no outstanding success for UKIP can only be a good thing, it makes practically little difference while Mrs May leads the Tories into becoming UKIP clones. And, that this racist inspired little-Englander narrow minded stupidity is an election winning formula is a depressing thought, and is not a good thing for the country. I just hope the country wakes up and gains some common sense come 2020, though that will also need a credible Labour leader (and, much as I admire his political views, Corbyn has been a failure when it comes to inspiring confidence in his leadership).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I do wonder to what extent the Copeland folk were worried by Corbyn's anti-nuclear stance (which FWIW I support)? After all, Sellafield is the big employer in the area and people are frightened of losing their jobs?
Same thing would be true around Barrow-in-Furness.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I do wonder to what extent the Copeland folk were worried by Corbyn's anti-nuclear stance (which FWIW I support)? After all, Sellafield is the big employer in the area and people are frightened of losing their jobs?
Same thing would be true around Barrow-in-Furness.
Truer in Barrow I think - because they're building nuclear submarines.
Sellafield's a different kettle of fish because you can't just switch off a nuclear site and walk away. Even if they built nothing new in Sellafield, continued decommissioning work on Windscale/Calder Hall and the reprocessing facilities would keep most of them in work for a good few decades yet.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I do wonder to what extent the Copeland folk were worried by Corbyn's anti-nuclear stance (which FWIW I support)? After all, Sellafield is the big employer in the area and people are frightened of losing their jobs?
Same thing would be true around Barrow-in-Furness.
Truer in Barrow I think - because they're building nuclear submarines.
Sellafield's a different kettle of fish because you can't just switch off a nuclear site and walk away. Even if they built nothing new in Sellafield, continued decommissioning work on Windscale/Calder Hall and the reprocessing facilities would keep most of them in work for a good few decades yet.
By the way Alan do please correct me if I've got that wrong - just based on my experience of the naval nuclear scene.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
