Oldham West and Royton by-election

[jjlynn27]

This thread just keeps giving. Comedy gold. 'It's a fraud!!!'



brenfly777, I disagree with you on politics, but excellent post.

[DaveCWK]

Is there a breakdown available yet of the postal votes? Just wondering if the percentages gained for each party overall roughly tally with the postal votes if they were to be taken in isolation. And if not, why not.

[Dog Star]

BOR said:

What a walk over.

Lots of egg on lots of hard-right faces today. How could you get it so wrong ?

Errrr.... I've been using the Guardian as my source of info on this one and they were just as wrong - not the "little bit wrong" that they were in the GE (predicting another coalition), but totally and monumentally wrong (in "their" favour, mind you). Similarly reputable pollsters like YouGov.

How can they all get it so wrong? Did the journos and people on the streets just sit in the boozer and invent everything?

[Esseesse]

DaveCWK said:

Is there a breakdown available yet of the postal votes? Just wondering if the percentages gained for each party overall roughly tally with the postal votes if they were to be taken in isolation. And if not, why not.

I read something to suggest that parties get to see a breakdown by ward immediately, but often (though not always) the postal vote details are released a week or two later.

[Esseesse]

Dog Star said:

BOR said:

What a walk over.

Lots of egg on lots of hard-right faces today. How could you get it so wrong ?

Errrr.... I've been using the Guardian as my source of info on this one and they were just as wrong - not the "little bit wrong" that they were in the GE (predicting another coalition), but totally and monumentally wrong (in "their" favour, mind you). Similarly reputable pollsters like YouGov.

How can they all get it so wrong? Did the journos and people on the streets just sit in the boozer and invent everything?

They were potentially quite accurate about the vote on the day, that's how.

[brenflys777]

jjlynn27 said:

brenfly777, I disagree with you on politics, but excellent post.

Thanks for that, it should be possible to disagree but see the value in someone else's point but at the moment politics seems to be becoming even more intolerant and nasty. I found myself wishing the case for non intervention in Syria was being championed by anyone else but Corbyn, unfortunately Farage championing the issues of voter postal fraud is I fear equally as uncomfortable for many, but its a case that needs making.

[brenflys777]

Esseesse said:

They were potentially quite accurate about the vote on the day, that's how.

There were several Labour activists twittering about the poor reception they were getting and complaining about the Corbyn effect on the Labour voters. Equally lots of UKIP campaigners apparently buoyant about their feedback. I'm not surprised Labour won and growing up in the neighbouring Middleton ward I knew lots of people who were Labour because thats what they'd always been, but you only have to see the limited interaction Corbyn has had in the election to see that its been an unusual set of circumstances.

http://www.sunnation.co.uk/corbyn-gets-the-train-u...

The disconnect between predicted votes and the result might be down to lots of other factors but postal voting needs to be scrutinised if its shown to be unrepresentative of the turnout on the day. It might be innocent and be as a result of more people who are infirm or unable to get there in person preferring Labour policies on disabilities etc… or it could be as Farage has intimated a result of widespread fraud in the way postal votes are collected and filled in by community leaders. It needs dealing with and either proving or disproving the accusations because faith in our democratic process is essential.

[Pesty]

jjlynn27 said:

This thread just keeps giving. Comedy gold. 'It's a fraud!!!'



brenfly777, I disagree with you on politics, but excellent post.

It's funny how some people never accept that these things happen although we know precisely that they do. Then find it amusing that people actually have noticed it happen and have memories.

It might not be in this case but it has been in others so it's not exactly a stretch. Postal voting should be for disabled / abroad only.

[roachcoach]

[irocfan]

BigMon said:

However, the chances of me voting for a Labour party with Jeremy Corbyn at the helm are the same as Elvis crash landing a UFO on top of the Loch Ness monster.

we're doomed... doomed I tell ye

Edited by irocfan on Friday 4th December 14:56

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

DragsterRR said:

I lived in Oldham for the first 35 years of my life.
Always been a tory. Never bothered to vote there.
The way the wards are organised there isn't a hope in hell of anyone other than labour winning.

Plus, Coldhurst, Westwood, Glodwick are only ever going to vote one way no matter what happens politically.

Good points which reminded me that at national level the MP/Constituency/Boundary changes proposed by the Conservatives are now likely to go ahead after winning a vote in the Lords, and this levelling of the playing field will add to the national drop in Labour support to reduce any existing chance that Corbyn's Labour Party had of getting anywhere in 2020. On a positive note, Osborne has steered the economy well over the past 6 years. There's no reason for this not to continue and more people over time will appreciate it.

I think, when points like this are raised, that the system needs a larger change.

The Conservatives got 331 seats with 11.3 million votes - 29 seats per million.

UKIP got 1 seat with 3.8 million votes - 0.26 per million.

How is that a reflective system?

[jjlynn27]

Pesty said:

It's funny how some people never accept that these things happen although we know precisely that they do. Then find it amusing that people actually have noticed it happen and have memories.

It might not be in this case but it has been in others so it's not exactly a stretch. Postal voting should be for disabled / abroad only.

Pesty,

We had the whole, oh UKIP will win this, UKIP will surprise everyone with their stellar performance at the GE, oh wait, just wait for another election. They did surprise mostly themselves by getting 1 (one) MP, who have won despite being UKIP not because of it. Leader was forced to do embarrassing, obvious to anyone but most die hard kippers, u-turn with 'uhm I resigned, but they didn't accept my resignation, so I had to accept their non-acceptance'. And now it's postal fraud. And before that was MSM conspiracy to keep UKIP out of the news.
Even if every single postal vote was fraudulent, and you'd have to be pretty special to believe that, it would still have zero impact on the result.

Maybe, just maybe UKIP should start looking inwards for the answers as to why they've performed so poorly. Or they can continue to whine how everything is unfair.

Postal voting is convenient for multitude of reasons, and be honest with yourself, would you call for it to be for 'disabled / abroad only' if the result was 100% UKIP support?

[Digga]

jjlynn27 said:

And before that was MSM conspiracy to keep UKIP out of the news.

I do think the MSM is very heavily biased toward, and partisan to, the main two UK parties at the expense of any others.

It makes a massive difference to the publicity of a party to be regularly spoken of as a major player. Given the size of the UKIP vote as the GE, the level of coverage does not represent the volume of votes, but merely reflects the obscurity of the present voting system, itself something that a free and impartial press should be questioning.

[Halb]

jjlynn27 said:

aybe, just maybe UKIP should start looking inwards for the answers as to why they've performed so poorly. Or they can continue to whine how everything is unfair.

Rather amusing last night on This Week.
UKiPs woman admitted the awful false Labour leaflet (politics of fear, besmirching and nastiness) was theirs, saying politics is a nasty business (yeah 'cas of people like you, yer !) and then went onto say in the same breath that people are fed up with it and it turns people away...exactly you stupid twunt, so don't do it!!!!!
Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stick.

[Derek Smith]

jjlynn27 said:

We had the whole, oh UKIP will win this, UKIP will surprise everyone with their stellar performance at the GE, oh wait, just wait for another election. They did surprise mostly themselves by getting 1 (one) MP, who have won despite being UKIP not because of it. Leader was forced to do embarrassing, obvious to anyone but most die hard kippers, u-turn with 'uhm I resigned, but they didn't accept my resignation, so I had to accept their non-acceptance'. And now it's postal fraud. And before that was MSM conspiracy to keep UKIP out of the news.
Even if every single postal vote was fraudulent, and you'd have to be pretty special to believe that, it would still have zero impact on the result.

Maybe, just maybe UKIP should start looking inwards for the answers as to why they've performed so poorly. Or they can continue to whine how everything is unfair.

Postal voting is convenient for multitude of reasons, and be honest with yourself, would you call for it to be for 'disabled / abroad only' if the result was 100% UKIP support?

The problem for the UKIP is that Cameron has stolen his clothes. The referendum has taken away the UKIP's main support. If they want to become a new political party they need to find some other proposition to gain attention. But what?

The only substantial new party in my lifetime was the well-supported SDP, gaining 40% support in some polls, and yet they disappeared in less than 7 years.

[jjlynn27]

Digga said:

do think the MSM is very heavily biased toward, and partisan to, the main two UK parties at the expense of any others.

It makes a massive difference to the publicity of a party to be regularly spoken of as a major player. Given the size of the UKIP vote as the GE, the level of coverage does not represent the volume of votes, but merely reflects the obscurity of the present voting system, itself something that a free and impartial press should be questioning.

Digga,

They are biased, because it's what sells and/or who is behind them. Judging by the number of links, in now defunct 'UKIP the future' threads, express and, the PH's favourite, breitbart, are heavily biased towards UKIP, and I'd imagine that there are others too. What kippers seem to fail to realize, probably as a consequence of surrounding themselves with like-minded (!) people, is that for vast majority they are irrelevance, something to joke about. What makes this thread entertaining for me, is that there is always a reason, and that reason is always someone else. It's the well rehearsed base for any conspiracy. As much as I dislike the snivelling, whining tit that is Nigel, he is not stupid. He knows that his followers will accept anything that he dishes out without any thought. Everyone else will laugh, but that doesn't matter, as they'd never vote for ukip to start with.

JC's comments about this by-election are equally laughable.

[Pesty]

jjlynn27 said:

Pesty,

We had the whole, oh UKIP will win this, UKIP will surprise everyone with their stellar performance at the GE, oh wait, just wait for another election. They did surprise mostly themselves by getting 1 (one) MP, who have won despite being UKIP not because of it. Leader was forced to do embarrassing, obvious to anyone but most die hard kippers, u-turn with 'uhm I resigned, but they didn't accept my resignation, so I had to accept their non-acceptance'. And now it's postal fraud. And before that was MSM conspiracy to keep UKIP out of the news.
Even if every single postal vote was fraudulent, and you'd have to be pretty special to believe that, it would still have zero impact on the result.

Maybe, just maybe UKIP should start looking inwards for the answers as to why they've performed so poorly. Or they can continue to whine how everything is unfair.

Postal voting is convenient for multitude of reasons, and be honest with yourself, would you call for it to be for 'disabled / abroad only' if the result was 100% UKIP support?

performed poorly? they came second that's huge for a party that was nowhere a few years ago. a few polls said ukip would be second which they were.
almost every northerner and specifically locals on here said labour would win including me by the way.

its convenient for fraud and block voting by people going around collecting them from their communities and some other reasons which can be gotten around.

electoral fraud is a problem, being overlooked of course but it is a problem. yes absolutely i would and it speaks to your chip to even question that or even think its normal that people would want to keep it if it went their way, projection maybe because its helping parties you support possibly?

im all for democracy its the best of the worst systems as they say. its why we are the country we are today and I place a huge amount of importance on it being 100% fair which ever way that tips things. it should be clamped down on hard. otherwise it just becomes a sham and we might as well not bother. not that there are not other issues id also prefer proportional representation.

im not a ukip 'supporter' either i did sling a vote their way this last election which here is a waste of time. i like some of their policies and i like farage but most of the party is full of Muppets. in fact im not even sure who i want in power they are all a bunch of s if you ask me. farage is the best of the worst for some policies i even like corbyn for others

[turbobloke]

Pesty said:

performed poorly? they came second that's huge for a party that was nowhere a few years ago

That's the second positive takeaway from the by election result, the first being that Corbyn is now more likely to remain as 'leader' of Labour through to the 2020 election.

I've never voted UKIP, but any result that has UKIP in second place to Labour in a Labour heartland is good news, just as seeing UKIP demolish the LibDims into middle single figure insignificance in national polls is good news.

[Digga]

jjlynn27 said:

Digga,

They are biased, because it's what sells and/or who is behind them. Judging by the number of links, in now defunct 'UKIP the future' threads, express and, the PH's favourite, breitbart, are heavily biased towards UKIP, and I'd imagine that there are others too.

'Owning' the media is a clever trick. Berlusconi was good at that, as is Erdogan. A good, truly free press is a bulwark for democracy, but having the mainstream media on-side for a two-party, flip-coin type of politics (which ensures neither party loses too often or for long - see USA) is not at all democratic IMHO.

[turbobloke]

jjlynn27 said:

They are biased, because it's what sells and/or who is behind them. Judging by the number of links, in now defunct 'UKIP the future' threads, express and, the PH's favourite, breitbart, are heavily biased towards UKIP, and I'd imagine that there are others too.

It depends.

Yes newspapers are biased in their outlook as a brief glance at The Guardian will confirm.

However this cannot be used to dismiss whatever any newspaper may publish, including The Guardian or any source you mention.

If the material concerns information or data from a primary source other than the newspaper, if any bias is present it's not newspaper bias as the newspaper or media source is simply the secondary source, the messenger. Shooting the messenger is silly but sometimes convenient to those who don't like to see what the message says.

Frequently if not almost always the information in hard copy or online media items that left-liberal people take exception to is also present in newspapers or media sources with the opposite leaning, e.g. a lot of Daily Mail content criticised by lefties is also in The Guardian, being based on government or ONS or OBR data or think tank analysis, and if the information or data is negative to the Left and not covered in e.g. The Guardian then omitting to publish it is bias in itself.

So, it depends.