Oldham West and Royton by-election
Discussion
Why Oldham West could be just the start of Labour’s worries
I think this sums up Labour's problems, specifically: Like most European social-democratic groupings, Labour is an uneasy coalition between its industrial or ex-industrial core and what Michael Frayn called “the Herbivores”: “do-gooders . . . readers of the News Chronicle, the Guardian and the Observer . . . signers of petitions, the backbone of the BBC”.
There is a wide and growing (especially in the last 5/10 years) gulf between the old manual working Labour voter and the trendy lefty university educated Labour voter. The gulf IMO is in social attitudes, not economic position.
I think this sums up Labour's problems, specifically: Like most European social-democratic groupings, Labour is an uneasy coalition between its industrial or ex-industrial core and what Michael Frayn called “the Herbivores”: “do-gooders . . . readers of the News Chronicle, the Guardian and the Observer . . . signers of petitions, the backbone of the BBC”.
There is a wide and growing (especially in the last 5/10 years) gulf between the old manual working Labour voter and the trendy lefty university educated Labour voter. The gulf IMO is in social attitudes, not economic position.
woowahwoo said:
"old manual working Labour voter" - Isn't that description at least 30 years out of date?
Probably to an extent, however I don't think that identity is dead.Steel refineries only recently closing... Do you think manual labour is an unsuitable description for the job of working on a car production line for example?
Axionknight said:
rs1952 said:
As we have seen in the recent past when a certain Reckless Mark couldn't even hold the seat in a GE that he previously won as a tory and then took as the UKIP candidate in a by-election, UKIP are primarily seen by many of the electorate as a party for a protest vote. Some on here may think otherwise, but the evidence doesn't appear to back them up.
There are people around who see UKIP as BNP-lite, and they aren't going to loge their protest vote with them. Other protest vote candidates are available.
When does a party stop being a protest vote party out of interest? Is there an arbitrary figure at a general election and if so how close is 3,881,129 votes to it?There are people around who see UKIP as BNP-lite, and they aren't going to loge their protest vote with them. Other protest vote candidates are available.
I'll see your 3,881,129 votes and raise you 7,780,949 (the number that voted for the liberal/ SDP alliance in 1983) http://www.ukpolitical.info/1983.htm
If you think that's too long ago, have 6,838, 198 instead (the number of vote cast for the lib dems in 2010) http://www.ukpolitical.info/2010.htm
The answer to your question is not found in a number, but how solid the supporters are in backing their party. The lib dems found out the hard way after 2010 that you can't be all things to all men and get away with it when you get into a position of power.
I wonder how a UKIP government would fare when either immigration continued to rise, or people started dying because of a lack of immigrant doctors...
s2art said:
You are confusing protest voting with tactical voting. For a Tory to vote for UKIP to keep Labour out is tactical voting and has nothing to do with protest voting.
Lets think this one through.The Tories currently have a majority in parliament, and whatever happens in Oldham West & Royton they will still have a majority after the result has been announced.
Labour is the main part of opposition (in England at least) and the worst that can happen for them is that they have one less MP to oppose the Tories with.
Voting tactically will achieve nothing practical whatsoever in this by-election. That makes it 100% protest vote territory.
Oh, and by the way - whatever happens after the polls close tonight, my money would be on labour winning the seat in the 2020 GE
rs1952 said:
s2art said:
You are confusing protest voting with tactical voting. For a Tory to vote for UKIP to keep Labour out is tactical voting and has nothing to do with protest voting.
Lets think this one through.The Tories currently have a majority in parliament, and whatever happens in Oldham West & Royton they will still have a majority after the result has been announced.
Labour is the main part of opposition (in England at least) and the worst that can happen for them is that they have one less MP to oppose the Tories with.
Voting tactically will achieve nothing practical whatsoever in this by-election. That makes it 100% protest vote territory.
Oh, and by the way - whatever happens after the polls close tonight, my money would be on labour winning the seat in the 2020 GE
I would even put money on Labour existing in its current form by 2020, let alone predicting it winning the seat.
Esseesse said:
johnxjsc1985 said:
woowahwoo said:
"old manual working Labour voter" - Isn't that description at least 30 years out of date?
yes get with the plan its now "hard working Labour voter"
Farage doesn't sound very confident.
thesun said:
"Farage: We’d have walked Oldham if it hadn’t been for Asian vote"
Speaking to The Sun ahead of the close of polls, Mr Farage said: “If this by-election was in one of dozens of other constituencies in Northern England, we would have won it comfortably.”
He added: “The reason it is close and the reason I can’t be confident about the postal votes is because in this constituency there is a particular block vote that is a very difficult demographic for UKIP.”
http://www.sunnation.co.uk/farage-wed-have-won-this-if-it-hadnt-have-been-for-asians/Speaking to The Sun ahead of the close of polls, Mr Farage said: “If this by-election was in one of dozens of other constituencies in Northern England, we would have won it comfortably.”
He added: “The reason it is close and the reason I can’t be confident about the postal votes is because in this constituency there is a particular block vote that is a very difficult demographic for UKIP.”
rs1952 said:
Axionknight said:
rs1952 said:
As we have seen in the recent past when a certain Reckless Mark couldn't even hold the seat in a GE that he previously won as a tory and then took as the UKIP candidate in a by-election, UKIP are primarily seen by many of the electorate as a party for a protest vote. Some on here may think otherwise, but the evidence doesn't appear to back them up.
There are people around who see UKIP as BNP-lite, and they aren't going to loge their protest vote with them. Other protest vote candidates are available.
When does a party stop being a protest vote party out of interest? Is there an arbitrary figure at a general election and if so how close is 3,881,129 votes to it?There are people around who see UKIP as BNP-lite, and they aren't going to loge their protest vote with them. Other protest vote candidates are available.
I'll see your 3,881,129 votes and raise you 7,780,949 (the number that voted for the liberal/ SDP alliance in 1983) http://www.ukpolitical.info/1983.htm
If you think that's too long ago, have 6,838, 198 instead (the number of vote cast for the lib dems in 2010) http://www.ukpolitical.info/2010.htm
The answer to your question is not found in a number, but how solid the supporters are in backing their party. The lib dems found out the hard way after 2010 that you can't be all things to all men and get away with it when you get into a position of power.
I wonder how a UKIP government would fare when either immigration continued to rise, or people started dying because of a lack of immigrant doctors...
As for migrant doctors, I suggest that you read their 2015 manifesto because you obviously don't know what you're talking about. No migrant doctors - who campaigned for that?
Axionknight said:
Every one of those was a protest vote was it? I doubt it.
I don't know whether you are referring to the UKIP vote in 2015 or the lib/SDP votes in 1983 and 2010, but its the same answer for any of them.Of course not every vote for UKIP is a protest vote and nobody said it was, any more than every vote for the libs or the SDP was in the other two elections. The point was that their vote did not stay with them when push came to shove.
The lib dem vote in 2015 fell to 2,418,888. That, in round figures, was a drop of 4,000,000 or two-thirds. I would say that the 2.4m they got in 2015 is more or less their core vote. What do you think the UKIP core vote is? (Hint - it's not 3.8m)
Axionknight said:
As for migrant doctors, I suggest that you read their 2015 manifesto because you obviously don't know what you're talking about. No migrant doctors - who campaigned for that?
This isn't the UKIP thread but I'll add a couple of sentences on the matter.What is or was in the 2015 UKIP manifesto is of no consequence now because it was rejected by the voters (by which I mean they didn't give UKIP the chance to form a government). What will be in their 2020 manifesto will be of consequence in the future, and we know from previous experience, not just with UKIP but will all parties, that manifestos change over time. We will see what they come up with and fight the 2020 election on closer to the time.
There is, however. such a thing as the law of unintended consequences. We often hear UKIP banging on about stopping mass migration and only allowing people in that we need. This does of course rely on those people wanting to come here, and in the case of the medical profession there is a lot of competition from elsewhere in the world.
If UKIP get the tag of the "eeny meeny miny mo" party as far as immigration is concerned, some of those people that we need to cover our own skill shortages may just take the view "Well stuff you then" and take their skills elsewhere. There are plenty of medical vacancies in the rest of Europe, the USA, Canada and South Africa to name just a few.
Be careful what you wish for...
Yeah lets not derail the thread too much, I agree, obviously we'll have to agree to disagree on the other issues for now - after all the proof is on your side, clearly many professional migrants shun countries that apply stricter policies, nobody wants to go to Australia or New Zealand for example - their pick and choose policy turns 'em right off!
Any news on when the result is due? Been a quiet one compared to by elections of late, with the Syria coverage taking up so much of the news' interest.
Any news on when the result is due? Been a quiet one compared to by elections of late, with the Syria coverage taking up so much of the news' interest.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff