|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Stoke by-election
|
Charles Had a Splurge on
Shipmate
# 14140
|
Posted
Barrow did go Tory in the 1983 election at the time that the Trident submarines were being built, but that was as much down to the SDP splitting the "socialist" vote as concern for job preservation.
At the time the Shipyard employed about 15,000 people (in a town of about 60,000) but that's now down to about 3,000 - so now it might not be as much of an issue as it was in the eighties.
Labour has been back in control for the last twenty years.
--------------------
"But to live outside the law, you must be honest" R.A. Zimmerman
Posts: 224 | From: What used to be Berkshire | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
More significant than Sellafield, which as noted what will continue to be a big employer for a generation or more, would be Moorside - potential for a new major employer, short term in construction, but with a large workforce for 60+ years.
Whereas Corbyn is strongly opposed to nuclear weapons, his position on nuclear power is less clear. His leadership campaign (first time round) came down as not seeing the need for new nuclear power plants, more recently he's been more favourable to the idea though without specifically backing any particular scheme.
--------------------
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 suspect, though, that you can't rigidly separate the "civil" from "military" uses of nuclear at Sellafield. (I've just been having this conversation with my wife!)
Moorside I didn't know about.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I'm very relieved to have been proved wrong on my foreboding about ghastly Nuttall.
The second story from Stoke, of course is that the turnout was so appalling, 36.7%. That's almost identical (37.1%) to the proportion of those who did vote, who cast for the successful candidate. Mathematically, the first figure is much larger than the second (just over ⅓ voted as against just over ⅓ of ⅓ voted for Mr Snell, a ⅑)
Does one conclude that nearly ⅔ of the population of central Stoke don't care who represents them? Or doesn't think it makes any difference? Or thinks all the candidates, and there were 10 of them, were all such rubbish that they weren't prepared to prefer one over another? Or have chosen to engage in a principled boycott of the poll (a concept that IMHO is a pointless waste of time)? Or what? There is no way of knowing.
Alan, I agree with you if you are implying that you can't see what the point of UKIP is now the Conservatives have pinched their underpants.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Helen-Eva
Shipmate
# 15025
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
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.
I just read that John McDonnell has denied being in denial about Copeland. I can't quite see how Labour's going to get it together any time soon.
--------------------
I thought the radio 3 announcer said "Weber" but it turned out to be Webern. Story of my life.
Posts: 637 | From: London, hopefully in a theatre or concert hall, more likely at work | Registered: Aug 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
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.
I went through the despair a while ago, when the right wing did their revolt against Corbyn. There is nothing to do but wait now. I'm not sure where Labour is going to go, but then I am not sure about anything in politics, or in fact, anything at all! There is a curious comfort in that, I suppose.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Sidiq Khan and rent to buy. In 2026 ... What can May possibly lose on? The electorate vote for a change as often as they punish.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It presumably hinges on Brexit. If it works, more or less, the Tories are home free. If it's a big mess, not. There is also the electoral cycle, which normally projects one main party as unelectable for a period.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Apparently the last time a governing party won an opposition seat in a by-election with a swing of this magnitude was the Worcester by-election of March 1878.
It's not the biggest government win since Thatcher's time, it's the biggest since Disraeli's.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It presumably hinges on Brexit. If it works, more or less, the Tories are home free. If it's a big mess, not. There is also the electoral cycle, which normally projects one main party as unelectable for a period.
FWIW it has worked. Moreover, it has achieved what David Cameron wanted, namely to prevent Tories defecting to UKIP from an overwhelmingly pro-EU Tory party. Maybe it didn't happen quite as he planned, but happen it did.
I'm coming round to the idea that I'll not see anything other than Tory governments in my lifetime.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Aye it has worked. Well said.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I'm very relieved to have been proved wrong on my foreboding about ghastly Nuttall.
The second story from Stoke, of course is that the turnout was so appalling, 36.7%. That's almost identical (37.1%) to the proportion of those who did vote, who cast for the successful candidate. Mathematically, the first figure is much larger than the second (just over ⅓ voted as against just over ⅓ of ⅓ voted for Mr Snell, a ⅑)
Does one conclude that nearly ⅔ of the population of central Stoke don't care who represents them? Or doesn't think it makes any difference? Or thinks all the candidates, and there were 10 of them, were all such rubbish that they weren't prepared to prefer one over another? Or have chosen to engage in a principled boycott of the poll (a concept that IMHO is a pointless waste of time)? Or what? There is no way of knowing.
*snip*
Having in my misspent kyouth campaigned in by-elections, I can suggest two factors you did not mention;
1) that many voters are not aware that there is a byelection-- shocking as this may seem to those of us who are news junkies and who follow public matters, there are many who pay no attention to the news (e.g., I only listen to C&W/hiphop etc) or who are so focussed on their own preoccupations (e.g., I am trying to manage two kids and take care of my mother-in-law and hold down a job-- why do you think I have time for this?); or
2) they do not believe that by-elections are important, as their votes are focussed on either supporting a PM they like, or throwing out one they dislike. Local MPs are never important enough to bother about.
These sectors of the population are rather bigger than we might like to think.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It presumably hinges on Brexit. If it works, more or less, the Tories are home free. If it's a big mess, not. There is also the electoral cycle, which normally projects one main party as unelectable for a period.
FWIW it has worked. Moreover, it has achieved what David Cameron wanted, namely to prevent Tories defecting to UKIP from an overwhelmingly pro-EU Tory party. Maybe it didn't happen quite as he planned, but happen it did.
I'm coming round to the idea that I'll not see anything other than Tory governments in my lifetime.
I am a bit more sanguine. I remember when Blair was winning elections, and journos were writing articles about the Tories being unelectable. I think Mrs May is on a roll, true, much of it smoke and mirrors. But so is everything in politics.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
The second story from Stoke, of course is that the turnout was so appalling, 36.7%.
Stoke hasn't had a turnout much over 50% this century. It had the lowest turnout of the country in 2015. Copeland had a 51% turnout; the 12 point deficit vs the 2015 election was almost the same as Stoke.
By-elections always have bad turnout. Hilary Benn won Leeds Central in '99 on a 19.6% turnout. Lucy Powell won Manchester Central for Labour on 2012 on a 16.4% turnout. Granted, those ones were pretty much dead certs, but even in closely-contested seats, by-election turnout is usually poor.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
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.
I think that's pretty much spot on Karl. The Tories have played a very good game with the EU nonsense. They either leave themselves open to more disarray from the Eurosceptics, or they go with the vote and sell it as "the will of the people". The Euro-enthusiasts, with only one exception, have sacrificed Europe for a united party. In doing so, they've exposed the split in the Labour party.
The opposition either has to re-group and start pulling together (and in the opposite direction from the government), or we have to start again with a new party of opposition. Neither of those things seem possible before the 2020 GE. It now looks like we will actually have left the EU by that date, and we'll probably get an early election to take advantage of the honeymoon before the reality sets in: with a Tory landslide.
I can only echo Karl: I despair.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Surely you should get behind the Lib Dems then?
[ 24. February 2017, 16:45: Message edited by: TurquoiseTastic ]
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
If you think EU membership is the most important issue facing the UK today, then Mr Corbyn has never been your man. This is the guy who voted against Maastricht, voted against Lisbon, and went on holibobs at the critical part of the referendum campaign.
--------------------
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
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Surely you should get behind the Lib Dems then?
4th place with less than 10% in Stoke; 7.25% in Copeland. Hardly compelling. At least they've got the guts to stand up for the 75% who didn't vote to leave the EU, but UKIP have far more power than the Libdems, even without any mps or an effective leader.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
I'm starting to think that Brexit has been "priced in", and people are looking for a reassuring leader in difficult times.
More by luck than judgement, the Tories have found someone whose dour, no-nonsense demeanour is going down well with most sections of the electorate. Sick of Blair and Blair clones like Cameron, the British people seem to quite like May. Even if (when?) the economy turns bad, even if (when?) Brexit turns out to be a disaster, there's a sort of Dunkirk spirit abroad and May has captured it brilliantly.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Humble Servant
Shipmate
# 18391
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
there's a sort of Dunkirk spirit abroad and May has captured it brilliantly.
That's the most depressing bit...
Posts: 241 | Registered: Apr 2015
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
I'm starting to think that Brexit has been "priced in", and people are looking for a reassuring leader in difficult times.
More by luck than judgement, the Tories have found someone whose dour, no-nonsense demeanour is going down well with most sections of the electorate. Sick of Blair and Blair clones like Cameron, the British people seem to quite like May. Even if (when?) the economy turns bad, even if (when?) Brexit turns out to be a disaster, there's a sort of Dunkirk spirit abroad and May has captured it brilliantly.
That's insightful. I sometimes think that some people hope that Brexit is fucking uncomfortable, because the English are good at that! Cold showers, cold beds, lumpy porridge, being caned for being late - ah, it's the nostalgia that gets me.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
That's insightful. I sometimes think that some people hope that Brexit is fucking uncomfortable, because the English are good at that! Cold showers, cold beds, lumpy porridge, being caned for being late - ah, it's the nostalgia that gets me.
I've heard Liam Fox say as much - a man who's consistently even wronger than Boris, if such be possible.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Humble Servant:
It now looks like we will actually have left the EU by that date [2020], and we'll probably get an early election to take advantage of the honeymoon before the reality sets in: with a Tory landslide.
It is looking more and more like any chance of slowing Brexit, let alone reversing the fascist agenda that May has set, has evaporated. Not a single amendment from the Lords, a very perfunctory "debate" in the Commons, not even a decent length white paper for us to mull over. So, being out of the EU by 2020 is a depressingly certain event.
But, having said that the only realistic chance of an early general election is before Brexit, as an opportunity for the UK electorate to have a say on the intentions of the current government - which we deserve, having both been denied a direct say in a referendum on the particular plan and having been let down by our elected representatives refusal to actually debate the issue. If the government don't call a pre-Brexit general election for us to have our say then they have nothing to justify anything other than sticking with the fixed term. Would a year after Brexit still be considered a honeymoon? Or would it be obvious by then what an unmitigated disaster it all is (of course, many of us can see that even now) and a LibDem/SNP/PC/Green platform of re-entering the EU would look very attractive? Certainly if we do actually leave the EU then any party seeking to re-enter the EU asap would have my vote.
--------------------
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
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
having both been denied a direct say in a referendum on the particular plan and having been let down by our elected representatives refusal to actually debate the issue.
I wouldn't hope for a general election any time soon if I were you. The likes of the discredited Tony Blair and the oily shyster Peter Mandelson claim, as you do, that there was no mandate for the type of Brexit which the Prime Minister is proposing. I disagree, but would you doubt that Mrs May would secure a hefty endorsement of her position were she to call an election soon? Look at Copeland! She'd sweep the board.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I'm not sure where Labour is going to go
Well it isn't heading for power unless it dumps its loony left leadership. It's being reported that many potential voters said, on the doorsteps, that they will never vote Labour while Corbyn is in charge. It's a pity that Labour hasn't learned from its own history. After near oblivion in 1983, it ditched its numpty leader Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock began the process of rehabilitating the party be expelling the Marxist Militant Tendency. But it still took them more than a decade to return to power. The reason isn't difficult to see. Corbyn may be the darling of his grass roots supporters, but to the rest of us, he's unelectible, and always will be, as was Foot. It isn't rocket science to see this.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulTH*:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
having both been denied a direct say in a referendum on the particular plan and having been let down by our elected representatives refusal to actually debate the issue.
I wouldn't hope for a general election any time soon if I were you. The likes of the discredited Tony Blair and the oily shyster Peter Mandelson claim, as you do, that there was no mandate for the type of Brexit which the Prime Minister is proposing. I disagree, but would you doubt that Mrs May would secure a hefty endorsement of her position were she to call an election soon? Look at Copeland! She'd sweep the board.
Oh, I know. Without an Opposition capable of opposing and providing an alternative to the government position - even a different version of Brexit, let alone the stay in the EU option - then an election will be a foregone conclusion. But, at least it will mean that we'll get to discuss the issues, a general election campaign being too short to do it justice but it's better than nothing.
--------------------
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
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
But, at least it will mean that we'll get to discuss the issues, a general election campaign being too short to do it justice
I've thought, ever since Mrs May became Prime Minister, that she should call a general election, because she has no personal mandate as Prime Minister. It isn't, of course, required. Gordon Brown took over from Tony Blair without an election, as did Jim Callaghan from Harold Wilson. But now that I am convinced that she'd win a landslide, I see her small parliamentary majority as the best option for holding the government to account, both in Brexit and all other government legislation.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
A small majority is more than adequate when the Opposition doesn't oppose.
--------------------
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
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
But, at least it will mean that we'll get to discuss the issues
The last six or seven months have hardly suffered a lack of discussion of the various issues around Brexit. Quite the reverse, in fact.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
But, at least it will mean that we'll get to discuss the issues
The last six or seven months have hardly suffered a lack of discussion of the various issues around Brexit. Quite the reverse, in fact.
Rather a shame then that all this serious debate has taken place after the vote. The complacency of the Remain campaign did nothing to persuade people of the disadvantages of leaving the EU, let alone the falsehoods put about by the Leave campaign.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
Nigel Farage says UKIP failed to win in Stoke because they didn't campaign enough on immigration. That tells us something about UKIP, but even more about Farage.
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
But, at least it will mean that we'll get to discuss the issues
The last six or seven months have hardly suffered a lack of discussion of the various issues around Brexit. Quite the reverse, in fact.
Rather a shame then that all this serious debate has taken place after the vote. The complacency of the Remain campaign did nothing to persuade people of the disadvantages of leaving the EU, let alone the falsehoods put about by the Leave campaign.
We've not really had much serious discussion since the referendum. Trying to get those who support Leave to engage in discussion without them making exclamations of "you lost, get over it" or calling us Remoaners has not been easy, and that's even the case when the discussion is over whether a particular form of Brexit is better than another let alone what happens when you point out that the referendum result must (by virtue of being so close) mean that the Remain vote would be larger than the fraction of Leave voters who would have supported any particular version of Brexit. There have been lots of words said and written, but a dearth of dialogue. The discussion in newspaper/blog comments has been important, but we also need a decent Parliamentary discussion - in which the option of "if no Leave plan works then we stay" is on the table. Much, much more than the few hours so far.
As far as the pre-referendum discussion, it suffered several problems (which affected both sides), most importantly insufficient time. Without a significant political or popular movement for leaving the EU (ie: it was the view of a few fringe political parties, and a few known rebels in the Tories) we hadn't had the years and decades of discussion through the processes of the election cycle. This meant that we had no real idea of what Leave would look like (or, rather what Leave wanted it to look like) - so, nothing solid for the Leave campaign to promote, and a constantly moving target Remain couldn't hit. I don't think anyone can seriously fault the Remain campaign for failing to point out the disadvantages of Leaving - it wouldn't have picked up the 'Project Fear' tag so easily if it had. Not to forget the lies, I'm not sure anyone could have believed that there would be £350m for the NHS after the amount of information provided that showed a) there was £350m anyway and b) even if there was there would be other areas which would need UK tax money to replace EU funds. Where the main Remain campaign failed was in presenting the advantages of EU membership - which should have been easier as this is known, compared to trying to hit the moving target of the latest Leave ideas.
Part of the problem was, of course, that both sides had swallowed wholesale the lies repeated for a decade or more that immigration is a problem - as is often said, a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth. The Tories in particular have tied their wagon to an arbitrary and economically/socially damaging immigration cap - and then had no answer to the fact that remaining in the EU would make achieving that cap almost impossible.
--------------------
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
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
So long as people think too much immigration is a problem then it's a problem.
The significant thing with both these by Elections is the pitifully low turnout. The Electorate disconnect which caused the Brexit vote (70% turnout) is still there. If TM isn't able to take a tough line on immigration then chances are it will come to bite the Tory butt eventually.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Hmmm - the word "it's" is slippery there, rolyn. You should say: "As long as people think immigration is a problem, that thought is a problem".
It may or may not be the case that levels of immigration are a problem. But even if immigration were cut to zero, or were sub-zero, a lot of people would still think that immigration was a problem and would complain about immigration.
Those thoughts would remain a problem.
(Partly, they would switch to complaining about immigration that has already happened. I guess they would want that reversed.)
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Where the main Remain campaign failed was in presenting the advantages of EU membership -
The problem here is that the Remain campaign was lead (nominally) by David Cameron, who had hardly been an unqualified enthusiast for the EU during his 10 years as Tory leader. For him to suddenly come over all Euro-smitten would have been a pose too far, even for that cynical belief-free faker.
To return to topic, Corbyn's apparent indifference to electoral disaster is starting to annoy me intensely. It is becoming clear that he and his cronies don't regard parliamentary democracy as the main route to effecting change in this country. In which case they should resign their parliamentary seats, go off and be community organisers or some such, and leave the grown-up stuff to people who care a damn.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Hmmm - the word "it's" is slippery there, rolyn. You should say: "As long as people think immigration is a problem, that thought is a problem".
It may or may not be the case that levels of immigration are a problem. But even if immigration were cut to zero, or were sub-zero, a lot of people would still think that immigration was a problem and would complain about immigration.
Those thoughts would remain a problem.
(Partly, they would switch to complaining about immigration that has already happened. I guess they would want that reversed.)
I agree with your analysis.
It's the fact that the *thought* is out there, has been planted there, or whatever. And the problem is that it has found populist favour and that feeling will be very hard to shift.
I'm sure we haven't seen the last of a rebranded Nigel F yet.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I don't think there has been all that much discussion, post-referendum. How many people understand what the single market, EEA, the customs union, harmonization of regulations, divergence of regulations, mean?
The government are not busting a gut to inform people, and neither the opposition.
I do wonder if the people doing the negotiations will be well-informed, you have to hope so.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
To return to topic, Corbyn's apparent indifference to electoral disaster is starting to annoy me intensely. It is becoming clear that he and his cronies don't regard parliamentary democracy as the main route to effecting change in this country. In which case they should resign their parliamentary seats, go off and be community organisers or some such, and leave the grown-up stuff to people who care a damn.
It's interesting that you're starting to think this now. Was it not clear to you (in some way or other) when he was first elected?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I've expressed views on Corbyn on these threads before. Nothing has happened in recent months to change those views. IMHO, 'complete waste of space' is being unfairly complimentary. The fact that he seems to regard quite a clever point he recently thought he'd made about funding and Surrey County Council as the big issue of the moment says so much about him. It's a complete blind for all the things that a real opposition would be doing and he isn't interested in.
I also don't see where the idea that he's a man of high principles comes from - or is 'high principles' nothing to do with the moral calibre of one's life and just a euphemism for being unimaginatively dogmatic?
--------------------
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
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
To return to topic, Corbyn's apparent indifference to electoral disaster is starting to annoy me intensely. It is becoming clear that he and his cronies don't regard parliamentary democracy as the main route to effecting change in this country. In which case they should resign their parliamentary seats, go off and be community organisers or some such, and leave the grown-up stuff to people who care a damn.
It's interesting that you're starting to think this now. Was it not clear to you (in some way or other) when he was first elected?
When he first became leader I was willing to give him a chance to make a go of it. That chance expired around the time of the referendum result; his ham-fisted speech calling for article 50 to be triggered immediately was the last straw for me.
These by-elections are proof, if any more were needed, that Labour cannot win under Corbyn. More than that, there is growing evidence that Corbyn doesn't care that Labour can't win under Corbyn.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I've expressed views on Corbyn on these threads before. Nothing has happened in recent months to change those views. IMHO, 'complete waste of space' is being unfairly complimentary. The fact that he seems to regard quite a clever point he recently thought he'd made about funding and Surrey County Council as the big issue of the moment says so much about him. It's a complete blind for all the things that a real opposition would be doing and he isn't interested in.
Nailing the tories to the wall on health and social care ought to be the big issue of the day, but for whatever reason the public don't seem to care.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
Nailing the tories to the wall on health and social care ought to be the big issue of the day, but for whatever reason the public don't seem to care.
The main reason is that he's so deathly silent and unconvincing on Brexit that it makes even the valid points he makes about other things look trivial, fiddling while Rome burns, an assortment of distraction mechanisms.
--------------------
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
Yes. I wonder why. It would have been much better for him to come out strongly one way, or the other, or at least to state his own position forcefully.
Perhaps he really doesn't know what he thinks about it.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sarah G
Shipmate
# 11669
|
Posted
If Copeland proves to be an electoral canary in a coal mine for Labour, what should they do after Corbyn?
Steady as she goes on the policy front under a different leader (McDonnell? Abbot?) or move back towards the centre?
Posts: 514 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Go back to the Blairite look and wait for the Electorate to grow weary of the Tories. Hardly principled politics, but if that really is the only way to win the hearts and minds of the voting majority then what choice is there?
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulTH*
Shipmate
# 320
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Go back to the Blairite look and wait for the Electorate to grow weary of the Tories.
This is Labour's only pathway back to power. It just depends how long it takes them to acknowledge the need to repeat the cleansing process they went through in the 1980's and 90's. The way in which Tony Blair eventually disgraced himself makes it easy to overlook how immensely popular he was in his honeymoon years. I haven't always voted Labour, but I was at the most ecstatic in my whole life, politically speaking, when Blair won in 1997. Labour can and will do it again, but not until it purges itself of its current leadership, and I would certainly include McDonnel and Abbott in that purge.
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Paul
Posts: 6387 | From: White Cliffs Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sarah G:
If Copeland proves to be an electoral canary in a coal mine for Labour, what should they do after Corbyn?
Steady as she goes on the policy front under a different leader (McDonnell? Abbot?) or move back towards the centre?
These results really are the canary keeling over. I would be the first to say that by-elections have little to do with national politics, and yet...the swings away from Labour in both seats are pretty much what you'd expect given Labour's dire national poll standing.
Previous election results under Corbyn were not as bad as his opponents made them out to be. A couple of anaemic by-election performances, and a mixed bag of locals last year.
Copeland and Stoke are that bad. They are comet hitting the Earth, extinction-level event catastrophic. If there is a general election this spring (and you can bet that May is seriously considering one), Labour are likely to be reduced to a rump of 140-150 MPs, and the Tories will be in power for a generation. By 2022 (May will be hoping), the worst Brexit dust will have settled and our new free-trading, free wheeling economy will be motoring along. (lol)
Personally I would favour a trusted caretaker (Keir Starmer?) who understood that his/her role was to lead the party to defeat (rather than catastrophe) at the next election, whilst bringing on the next generation of leaders. Hopefully Labour would then have several viable candidates who would be able to take advantage of the next electoral cycle. No party stays in power for ever, Labour is currently going through its Ian Duncan Smith phase.
All this is best-case stuff, and is contingent on Corbyn going or being removed, I think when his union backers see how bad things are and see that there are competent left-leaning candidates who could lead the party, they may start putting pressure on him.
The above will be in May's thoughts as well, and add up to more reasons why she should go for a snap post-article 50 election whilst Corbyn is still the leader.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
A question and a thought.
1. Knowing that the Coalition brought in 5-year fixed term Governments, does May have the freedom to call a snap election?
2. The huge difference between Labour's present situation and both its own in the Foot years and the Tories' in the IDS years, is surely the rise of the SNP. This means that Labour are almost inevitably doomed to lose any future national election, irrespective of leader, unless they get a 1945-style landslide. ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rocinante
Shipmate
# 18541
|
Posted
Lord Desai introduced a bill to repeal the fixed-term parliament act in the Lords last September. I don't know what the story is with this, and it has yet to have a second reading, but presumably if it received full government backing it could be fast-tracked into law.
However it is done, the FTPA was very much of its time: it was brought in to prevent either of the coalition parties pulling the rug from under the other. Parliament passed it and parliament could repeal it.
Posts: 384 | From: UK | Registered: Jan 2016
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Well, yes, an Act of Parliament can repeal the fixed term act. But, at present the fixed term act is in effect - and, an act moving slowly through the Lords not withstanding I'm seeing no real desire among politicians to repeal it.
There was commentary in the summer to the effect that Parliament could quite rapidly pass a one-time exemption to allow an early election without actually repealing the act. But, that would be under extraordinary circumstances - the one under discussion in the summer was to give the voters a say on who would take forward a major constitutional change that was not included in the manifesto of either government nor opposition parties, and would not be easily reversed by future governments (ie: leaving the EU). The government rejected the option of an early general election then, it's too late to try for an early general election on those grounds now (even though I personally consider it to be a sound option). My guess would be a vote of no-confidence in the government could be quickly followed by a vote calling for an early election - but since the total incompetence with which the current government have gone about things hasn't resulted in such an outcome I would consider that to be highly unlikely.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
