I think that's an even worse result than the national polls suggest. Terrifying.
Politics at Westminster | BREAKING: UKIP
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
It looks like they lost because of remainers going to LD as much as anything else.
Sounds like nuclear industry beat NHS. The Conservative candidate Trudy Harrison said she and her four daughters were born at the local maternity ward that's apparently in trouble, while rubbishing talk of closure, while Corbyn's opposition to the only big source of jobs in the area may well have told.
Indeed, with Labour's going to the Lib Dems rather than Ukip.
Indeed, with Labour's going to the Lib Dems rather than Ukip.
John Curtice said as much earlier tonight, UKIP's barking up the wrong tree with most of Labours base having voted remain. They basically left an open goal for the Tories to pick up their voters.
Just wait until she meets their party leader, she'll kick herself.
Is this their Michael Howard or David Cameron moment though? Cooper, or Lewis/Nandy/Umunna?
Yes quite possibly, but I bet it played well on the doorstep along with her telling the people of Copeland Corbyn's thoughts on their only industry.
Yes, it exposes the fundamental contradiction in labours votes (remainders in big cities, leave everywhere else) yet again, this time fatally. The referendum was a one way ticket to hell from the start no matter the result.
A lot depends on whether McDonnell gets his proposal through to dramatically reduce the MP threshold to be nominated for leader. If it does, Corbyn's self-nominated heir will just win again.
Unfortunately, I think it's much worse. As bad as Howard was, Cameron was always a rising star. I don't see that in the Labour party. I also think the likes of Umunna could be disastrous. Wouldn't be averse to Lewis, but he's probably a bit to close to the left to be credible.
David fecking Miliband. I hate the man, but that's the sort of cretin Labour probably needs now. He has the benefit of being removed from shambolic policy issues of the last couple of years. Trigger a by-election and get him in.
I'm sure the constituents' complaints will be suitably quiet when they get the party they voted for.
Or she'll just try to be a good constituency MP who campaigns for local healthcare. That is what happened near me, when Labour began the process of cutting A&E and maternity care. Later, the policy was continued by the Coalition, and the Tory MP protested against his own party. If the individual is worthy enough, they can build up a reputation which transcends their nominal allegiance.
John Curtice's analysis (BBC's resident psephology bod) is that Labour votes in the referendum were relatively uniform (around 60-40 remain) across the country, it gets muddied because in many Labour seats opposition parties are more heavily Leave-y, so the constituencies themselves went Leave.
The gutless fecking cnuts at the top of the Tory party couldn't even stand up for the £350m for the NHS shit they lauded when they got the chance. Suddenly this non-entity is going to come in and make them change their health policy? The appeaser wouldn't even say if she opposed the downgrade of services when she was lauding the Tory candidates campaign trail for crying out loud. I've got a really famous bridge for sale if you fancy it.
Last edited:
So he's saying that labour voters in most seats voted remain 3-2, but the 2 are now defecting?
Interesting. Definitely doesn't fit the geographic narrative I'd read a lot about.
Well, my opinion is that Labour properly screwed the pooch on their Brexit response and have served to convince Remainers they're pro-Brexit, and Leavers that they're not, so they're taking on water at both ends.
Copeland though has local factors like the nuclear industry, of which Corbyn is historically a vocal opponent.
John's point was that if UKIP want to capitalise on Brexit voters they should target the Tory vote. It's actually remainers who are leaving labour, given the official position is that Brexit will go ahead, so the Brexit Labour vote is happy.
Holistic plan
The gutless fecking cnuts at the top of the Tory party couldn't even stand up for the £350m for the NHS shit they lauded when they got the chance. Suddenly this non-entity is going to come in and make them change their health policy? I've got a really famous bridge for sale if you fancy it.
I didn't say Harrison would secure a reversal of the decision, so your reply bears little relevance. But if enough local voters believe that she speaks an acts for them, the seat might be held. The Government might make limited concessions to support her case, it happens you know.
Here's the actual blog he put up with some figures - http://whatukthinks.org/eu/is-labours-brexit-dilemma-being-misunderstood/
So whilst there's a trend towards euroscepticism across the board further north, the Labour vote itself is still clearly for remaining wherever you go.
So whilst there's a trend towards euroscepticism across the board further north, the Labour vote itself is still clearly for remaining wherever you go.
The leader of the party wouldn't even make 'limited concessions' when they were trying to win the seat. This is a Tory party and health secretary that has gone to the court of appeal in attempting to downgrade hospital services for crying out loud!
Another bunch of turkeys voting for Christmas. Now comes shifting the blame onto foreigners, rinsing and repeating.
I'm not sure that's a good political strategy. A party led by ex-Tories promising a Tory manifesto and crafting its appeal to traditional Tory voters -- why not vote for the real thing then? There might be more numbers in terms of Euroscpetic Tories, but why wouldn't they be perfectly pleased with what they have in their own, fairly strongly Eurosceptic, party?
It's clearly an incomplete strategy that's he suggesting though.
By taking a hard-remain stance, Labour would have pissed off 33-43% of its non-London voters, while gaining some (of the already few) Libdem voters, at a time when both parties are historically low. It may not have bled as badly as now but it wouldn't have improved for sure. Plus you can imagine the tabloids if they obstructed, killing off any chance of a comeback.
Edit: I'm not saying they did the right thing. There was no good option.
Yet come 2020, Brexit matters will be joined by economic policy and a dash of healthcare. From what i recall, Labour still isn't performing well as regards economic competence.
FTFY
As I mentioned previously, I think right now they have the worst of both worlds. But it's not overly surprising, the leader doesn't really care much about the EU one way or the other.
Very surprising margin of victory (to me at least). Well done to Snell and the local activists.
But that's abysmal.
Hopeful positive for 2020 - Labour may not lose so many of their 'Brexit constituencies' to UKIP.
Negative - Overturning any Lab/Con marginal looks very unlikely, much more likely to lose a bunch.
Labour are doomed, with or without Corbs. I'm torn between thinking we need to be rid of him asap to gain some credibility back, or that his loony supporters are only going to back down after an electoral disaster. His level of support is obviously much lower than it was a year ago but I worry that he would still 'thrive' in the comfort blanket of a hustings voted on by the membership.
Oh well. Maybe the "real fight starts now".
So a mixed bag for Labour. Nice to see UKIP beginning to unravel.
Don't see how this is a mixed bag. Weighing everything up, it's poor and shows there's trouble ahead.
Credit Trudy Harrison for an absolutely dreadful victory speech, indicative of the general calibre of Tory MPs at the moment.
"You'd have to go back more than a century to find a by-election victory like this"
Errr 1982? I mean it's a long time ago, but ahh never mind. It's not like it will be repeated as the clip on the front page of the BBC without correction. Oh wait.
"You'd have to go back more than a century to find a by-election victory like this"
Errr 1982? I mean it's a long time ago, but ahh never mind. It's not like it will be repeated as the clip on the front page of the BBC without correction. Oh wait.
To be fair Mitcham and Morden 1982 was a special case in that the Labour incumbent had switched to the SDP so split the Labour vote allowing the governing Tories in. Before then in the 1960s there were two (I think, going off what was said on the byelection special last night) with tiny majorities that switched to the government and before then it was the 1940s. So not 'more than a century' by any stretch but I can see why it's classed as more historic than 30 odd or even 50 odd years.
Yeah as @12OunceEpilogue says, she's kind of right. Either they were special circumstances or hyper-marginal seats.
Thanks for going deeper into this. I just had a look at Liverpool Scotland 1929 and that was pretty weird too: the incumbent died and his party didn't put up a candidate, and nor did anyone else bar Labour, so the seat changed party control even though the election was technically unopposed. There's certainly some truth to Harrison's claim.
Whichever way you look at it Copeland was a huge result. I've had a score or so of Corbyn supporters on my Facebook (scientific I know) publicly questioning his leadership for the first time.
Last edited:
That is of course your opinion. But i still remain positive that Corbyn will turn things around.The real test for the Tories as not begun to happen yet.
I still can't believe they lost Copeland. They're headed for the low 20s in a GE.
Blimey.
Emily Thornberry doing her best Baghdad Bob impression on Newsnight.
Christ, it really is Labour - The Moyes Years.