|
I would be surprised if Copeland didn't go Tory. Barrow and Furness was a solid safe seat for Labour until last time round with the Trident scaremongering which reduced their majority significantly. That was with Labour under Miliband banging the drum for Trident. In Copeland you've got Gillian Troughton who deflects everything regarding the loving huge nuclear project which is the only thing paying decent wages there into something about the local hospital. That hospital is hosed either way. Bacon Terrorist fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Feb 24, 2017 |
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 20:42 |
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:Oh never mind, lost to the government Yes, but that isn't what I said to be fair.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Paxman posted:Yes, but that isn't what I said to be fair. It's what I said, in the post you replied to, that he replied to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
This byelection is mostly interesting to me because I want to see what happens to Big UKIP and Labour in a strong leave zone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
There's no denial that losing Copeland would be a disaster. For Britain and for Labour.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
Copeland turnout is 51.35%. In context to recent generals: 2015: 63.8% (39631) Majority 6.5% (2564) 2010: 67.6% (42787) Majority 8.9% (3,833) 2005: 62.3% (33757) Majority 18.7% (6320) 2001: 64.9% (34750) Majority 14.3%(4964) Still fairly good for a by-election.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
Will skip take a bite out of the main parties, will flaps give any credit to my lad corbs
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
38% turnout in Stoke. Which could have been worse I guess.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:There's no denial that losing Copeland would be a disaster. For Britain and for Labour. While it would indeed suck for Copeland, I'm not sure it would especially change the overall narrative at the moment at a national level.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
For a byelection held during a huge storm those seem like OK turnouts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
jabby posted:While it would indeed suck for Copeland, I'm not sure it would especially change the overall narrative at the moment at a national level. Well yes, that's why it's a disaster. The status quo is abysmal for Labour.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
If we're doing predictions I bet Labour increase vote share in Stoke but just lose Copeland, meaning there is no decisive conclusion to anything and the Corbyn conversation spins outward into eternity, turning and turning in the widening gyre, the falcon cannot hear the falconer, things fall apart, mere anarchy is loosed upon the world etc etc
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:If we're doing predictions I bet Labour increase vote share in Stoke but just lose Copeland, meaning there is no decisive conclusion to anything and the Corbyn conversation spins outward into eternity, turning and turning in the widening gyre, the falcon cannot hear the falconer, things fall apart, mere anarchy is loosed upon the world etc etc Your prediction would be a disastrous result for labour.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Your prediction would be a disastrous result for labour. You believe that Labour will definitely lose the next election massively because of Corbyn, but also that he should definitely lead Labour into the next election. If you really believe that then explain how today's results matter at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Your prediction would be a disastrous result for labour. But good for your quality posting, our only solace in this dark and stormy hour
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:35
|
|
|
jabby posted:You believe that Labour will definitely lose the next election massively because of Corbyn, but also that he should definitely lead Labour into the next election. Parliamentary elections matter if you're somebody who thinks that who the party of government is matters. I think it's important that Corbyn leads Labour into the next election as its now too late to undo the damage he has done in time for it - Corbyn supporters cannot be allowed the opportunity to weasel out of the consequences of what they have done. They and Corbyn have hosed Labour. Any change before then will just lead to endless rounds of 'Corbyn would have won it' with no gain for the Labour party.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:36
|
|
|
Tony Blair and New Labour are to blame for Labours problems in the North
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
Very scientific evidence of Labour being ahead in Stoke. https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/834927032106639362
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
Pantsuit posted:Tony Blair and New Labour are to blame for Labours problems in the North The guy that was leader ten years ago delivering labour governments is the problem. Not the leader now. I see.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Corbyn spent a lot of time being undermined by his shadow cabinet after the guy they proposed as a joke actually won because he wasn't a blairite/brownite rehash of things that lost 2010 and 2015. So either way people are going to say that Corbyn could have won.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:50
|
|
|
Namtab posted:So either way people are going to say that Corbyn could have won. The people that say this are deluded and/or liars.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Ukip man on BBC 1 now complaining that their party leader is great but the unfair media refuses to tell everyone how great he is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Paxman posted:Ukip man on BBC 1 now complaining that their party leader is great but the unfair media refuses to tell everyone how great he is. Sounds a bit like another leader I know of?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
The newspapers aren't calling Nuttal a lying bag of poo poo, how much more favorable courage do they want?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:The people that say this are deluded and/or liars. Nah they're actually correct
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Namtab posted:Corbyn spent a lot of time being undermined by his shadow cabinet after the guy they proposed as a joke actually won because he wasn't a blairite/brownite rehash of things that lost 2010 and 2015. So either way people are going to say that Corbyn could have won. I really don't get this complaint about losing in 2010. Labour won three elections in a row with good majorities in 1997, 2001 and 2005 which is it's best run of results ever. Complaining they then lost in 2010 is complaining that they couldn't make it four in a row, but that's not a very sensible complaint?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
What I'm trying to say is that Labours bad reputation is down to New Labour. Listen to what these people say. Seek it out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:07
|
|
|
Results when
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:18
|
|
|
I just want to say that regardless of whatever the results are, nothing matters
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:22
|
|
|
I think Labour's current predicament can be blamed on many things both past and present. Biggest to me would be New Labour taking the working class for granted and playing up to fears on immigration. Now there's a heavy amount of white working classes where they don't trust Labour after 13 years of feeling ignored while they were in power and have bought into the anti immigration rhetoric. It's a fault of Corbyn for not only being unable to undo some of this harm but to actively make people turn away from him. Yeah he's not been given a fair shake and his strangled birth of a run as leader is going to end up a self fulfilling prophecy for both his doubters and his fans but ultimately any leftwing leader is going to have people trying to stick the knives in straight away and Corbyn hasn't performed to a competent standard. Having said that I'll still end up voting for him as leader so long as the other option to run Labour is some fuckwit talking about controls on immigration.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:24
|
|
|
U can't achieve change through parliamentary politics drat
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
Pantsuit posted:U can't achieve change through parliamentary politics drat Quite. That's the one positive to take away from the Corbyn experiment. We gave it a good go but parliamentary socialism in the 21st century is pie in the sky.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
*looks at last 7 years* oh wait you can lol
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
Labour's bad reputation now is because the long term failings of neo-liberal, triangulating centrism didn't really come home to roost for over a decade, and most of the poo poo we're facing now is because of it. The job flight, the poverty gap increases, almost all of it. People have lived through both the gains and losses of that kind of centrism, and the generations that have will never vote for it again on a local (possibly like this by-election) or national (like the utter failure of Ed Milliband's Labour or the US Democratic Party ) again. At least not unless they are outright lied to and propagandised to by the media. Kokoro Wish fucked around with this message at 03:13 on Feb 24, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
"Shame parliamentary politics has no effect", complain people who previously lambasted the Tories over things they have done through parliament, such as the bedroom tax and laying off hundreds of thousands of people, mostly women, from the public sector.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
tony blair also joined a literal crusade against islam which just might have something to do with not only the creation of the refugee crisis but the general demonisation of brown people and foreigns.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:"Shame parliamentary politics has no effect", complain people who previously lambasted the Tories over things they have done through parliament, such as the bedroom tax and laying off hundreds of thousands of people, mostly women, from the public sector. I think they meant "It's impossible to achieve socialist goals through parliamentary politics". It's practically built for conservative politics.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:"Shame parliamentary politics has no effect", complain people who previously lambasted the Tories over things they have done through parliament, such as the bedroom tax and laying off hundreds of thousands of people, mostly women, from the public sector. Not all change is good. In fact, change is often bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:tony blair also joined a literal crusade against islam which just might have something to do with not only the creation of the refugee crisis but the general demonisation of brown people and foreigns. Corbyn is soft on the pro-Crusade angle, showing his true distance from the working class, who want nothing better than to sack Byzantium
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 20:42 |
|
|
Hey, remember when the NHS was created, colonialism was (slowly) dismantled, millions of houses were built, industries were nationalised, and a tax rate of 98% occurred due to the agitation of Tarquin and Jemimah's SWSS splinter vanguard?
|
|
#
?
Feb 24, 2017 02:46
|
|