Richmond Park by-election.
Discussion
Sarah Olney in her victory speech said:
The people of Richmond Park and North Kingston have sent a shockwave through this Conservative Brexit government and our message is clear: we do not want a hard Brexit, we do not want to be pulled out of the single market and we will not let intolerance, division and fear win.
This isn't a shockwave or indeed new information. Anyone that looked at the Ref. results would have easily predicted this.
CaptainSlow said:
El stovey said:
CaptainSlow said:
I don't think you understand what is being said, nobody is suggesting this.
You said she was a leave candidate and her election shows the country has moved towards wanting a hard Brexit. It's the complete opposite. She even says so herself.
The Leave candidate I was referring to was JG...the swing from the Referendum to the By-Election...70% to just under 50%.
It was the Brexit result that made her get involved in the first place.
CaptainSlow said:
Sarah Olney in her victory speech said:
The people of Richmond Park and North Kingston have sent a shockwave through this Conservative Brexit government and our message is clear: we do not want a hard Brexit, we do not want to be pulled out of the single market and we will not let intolerance, division and fear win.
This isn't a shockwave or indeed new information. Anyone that looked at the Ref. results would have easily predicted this.
ClaphamGT3 said:
RYH64E said:
Ironically, the reason for the referendum being called in the first place was an attempt to placate the eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Party and head off the threat of UKIP, however it looks to have created more divisions than it healed. There's now a significant percentage of long standing Conservative voters, myself included, whose vote can no longer be relied upon.
I tend to agree with this. It is this sentiment that could just see Corbyn in Downing St in 2020 (or before).I have been a Tory all my adult life but Theresa May's Tory party has never felt less like my party. I - and a large number of people that I know, are erring much more towards the Lib Dems. I don't think that it is entirely unreasonable to envisage the situation where a shift of the of the middle class professional Tory vote to the Lib Dems and shift of the more working class Tory vote towards UKIP or labour could see Corbyn in Downing St, albeit probably as head of a Lib Dem/Labour coalition
I have been a life long conservative voter, no longer.
CaptainSlow said:
El stovey said:
Look this is pointless. She's obviously not pro Brexit. This isn't a pro Brexit result.
FFS, I haven't said she is Pro-Brexit, she and her party are Pro-Remain!!!!CaptainSlow said:
Rubbish.
As this was a 70% Remain area it actually swung towards a Leave candidate. So a clear statement that the people of Richmond Park have moved towards a Leave view. A clear statement that the country wants a Hard Brexit.
As this was a 70% Remain area it actually swung towards a Leave candidate. So a clear statement that the people of Richmond Park have moved towards a Leave view. A clear statement that the country wants a Hard Brexit.
El stovey said:
CaptainSlow said:
Sarah Olney in her victory speech said:
The people of Richmond Park and North Kingston have sent a shockwave through this Conservative Brexit government and our message is clear: we do not want a hard Brexit, we do not want to be pulled out of the single market and we will not let intolerance, division and fear win.
This isn't a shockwave or indeed new information. Anyone that looked at the Ref. results would have easily predicted this.
This by-election campaign seemingly revolves around two issues - Heathrow expansion and the EU ref.
All candidates were against 3rd runway, thereby cancelling the influence of Heathrow on the vote.
In the ref, that constituency seems to have voted 70/30 remain.
The winner was the only candidate opposing Brexit. She got under 50% of the vote.
So, if it comes down to two issues, one of which was nullified, then the other issue appears to have shifted from 70% pro remain to under 50% pro remain in the period since June.
Not suggesting I agree, I haven't lived in the area for too long to have paid too much interest. My first ever GE vote was in the newly formed constituency, my second at the next GE I was of voting age for was 60+ miles away. However, that's the reasoning I picked up in the suggestion that there's been a swing to Leave displayed.
Sway said:
To hopefully clarify the point being made:
This by-election campaign seemingly revolves around two issues - Heathrow expansion and the EU ref.
All candidates were against 3rd runway, thereby cancelling the influence of Heathrow on the vote.
In the ref, that constituency seems to have voted 70/30 remain.
The winner was the only candidate opposing Brexit. She got under 50% of the vote.
So, if it comes down to two issues, one of which was nullified, then the other issue appears to have shifted from 70% pro remain to under 50% pro remain in the period since June.
Not suggesting I agree, I haven't lived in the area for too long to have paid too much interest. My first ever GE vote was in the newly formed constituency, my second at the next GE I was of voting age for was 60+ miles away. However, that's the reasoning I picked up in the suggestion that there's been a swing to Leave displayed.
Thanks for that. I'm not sure how anyone can view this as a clear indication anyone is swinging towards a hard Brexit. This by-election campaign seemingly revolves around two issues - Heathrow expansion and the EU ref.
All candidates were against 3rd runway, thereby cancelling the influence of Heathrow on the vote.
In the ref, that constituency seems to have voted 70/30 remain.
The winner was the only candidate opposing Brexit. She got under 50% of the vote.
So, if it comes down to two issues, one of which was nullified, then the other issue appears to have shifted from 70% pro remain to under 50% pro remain in the period since June.
Not suggesting I agree, I haven't lived in the area for too long to have paid too much interest. My first ever GE vote was in the newly formed constituency, my second at the next GE I was of voting age for was 60+ miles away. However, that's the reasoning I picked up in the suggestion that there's been a swing to Leave displayed.
jonnyb said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
RYH64E said:
Ironically, the reason for the referendum being called in the first place was an attempt to placate the eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Party and head off the threat of UKIP, however it looks to have created more divisions than it healed. There's now a significant percentage of long standing Conservative voters, myself included, whose vote can no longer be relied upon.
I tend to agree with this. It is this sentiment that could just see Corbyn in Downing St in 2020 (or before).I have been a Tory all my adult life but Theresa May's Tory party has never felt less like my party. I - and a large number of people that I know, are erring much more towards the Lib Dems. I don't think that it is entirely unreasonable to envisage the situation where a shift of the of the middle class professional Tory vote to the Lib Dems and shift of the more working class Tory vote towards UKIP or labour could see Corbyn in Downing St, albeit probably as head of a Lib Dem/Labour coalition
I have been a life long conservative voter, no longer.
As on the other side will be Corbyn threatening to inflict his version of Cuban style socialism.
Sway said:
El stovey said:
CaptainSlow said:
Sarah Olney in her victory speech said:
The people of Richmond Park and North Kingston have sent a shockwave through this Conservative Brexit government and our message is clear: we do not want a hard Brexit, we do not want to be pulled out of the single market and we will not let intolerance, division and fear win.
This isn't a shockwave or indeed new information. Anyone that looked at the Ref. results would have easily predicted this.
This by-election campaign seemingly revolves around two issues - Heathrow expansion and the EU ref.
All candidates were against 3rd runway, thereby cancelling the influence of Heathrow on the vote.
In the ref, that constituency seems to have voted 70/30 remain.
The winner was the only candidate opposing Brexit. She got under 50% of the vote.
So, if it comes down to two issues, one of which was nullified, then the other issue appears to have shifted from 70% pro remain to under 50% pro remain in the period since June.
Not suggesting I agree, I haven't lived in the area for too long to have paid too much interest. My first ever GE vote was in the newly formed constituency, my second at the next GE I was of voting age for was 60+ miles away. However, that's the reasoning I picked up in the suggestion that there's been a swing to Leave displayed.
Alistair Campbell would be proud of that level of spin!
El stovey said:
CaptainSlow said:
Sway said:
stuff
Thanks, if this doesn't work I'll get the crayons out.However, there was a 30% to 46% swing towards the Brexit cause on a single issue vote.
EddieSteadyGo said:
jonnyb said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
RYH64E said:
Ironically, the reason for the referendum being called in the first place was an attempt to placate the eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Party and head off the threat of UKIP, however it looks to have created more divisions than it healed. There's now a significant percentage of long standing Conservative voters, myself included, whose vote can no longer be relied upon.
I tend to agree with this. It is this sentiment that could just see Corbyn in Downing St in 2020 (or before).I have been a Tory all my adult life but Theresa May's Tory party has never felt less like my party. I - and a large number of people that I know, are erring much more towards the Lib Dems. I don't think that it is entirely unreasonable to envisage the situation where a shift of the of the middle class professional Tory vote to the Lib Dems and shift of the more working class Tory vote towards UKIP or labour could see Corbyn in Downing St, albeit probably as head of a Lib Dem/Labour coalition
I have been a life long conservative voter, no longer.
As on the other side will be Corbyn threatening to inflict his version of Cuban style socialism.
My hope would be to force a re run of the 2010 coalition government, probably one of the best governments I have seen.
Am I missing something?
If the inference from the Lib Dems and the BBC is that this was turned into a Brexit/Remain vote, it doesn't look good for the remainers.
During the referendum 70% voted remain.
Last night the Lib Dems won the seat with 50%.
That's a 20% drop in support for remaining.
Apparently.
Why are the Lib Dems and the BBC trumpeting this as a tidalwave of support for a non-hard Brexit? (Whatever that is actually supposed to mean)
ETA - I notice a few others above have asked the same question.
If the inference from the Lib Dems and the BBC is that this was turned into a Brexit/Remain vote, it doesn't look good for the remainers.
During the referendum 70% voted remain.
Last night the Lib Dems won the seat with 50%.
That's a 20% drop in support for remaining.
Apparently.
Why are the Lib Dems and the BBC trumpeting this as a tidalwave of support for a non-hard Brexit? (Whatever that is actually supposed to mean)
ETA - I notice a few others above have asked the same question.
Edited by Piersman2 on Friday 2nd December 09:39
Piersman2 said:
Am I missing something?
If the inference from the Lib Dems and the BBC is that this was turned into a Brexit/Remain vote, it doesn't look good for the remainers.
During the referendum 70% voted remain.
Last night the Lib Dems won the seat with 50%.
That's a 20% drop in support for remaining.
Apparently.
Why are the Lib Dems and the BBC trumpeting this as a tidalwave of support for a non-hard Brexit? (Whatever that is actually supposed to mean)
ETA - I notice a few others above have asked the same question.
Because BBCIf the inference from the Lib Dems and the BBC is that this was turned into a Brexit/Remain vote, it doesn't look good for the remainers.
During the referendum 70% voted remain.
Last night the Lib Dems won the seat with 50%.
That's a 20% drop in support for remaining.
Apparently.
Why are the Lib Dems and the BBC trumpeting this as a tidalwave of support for a non-hard Brexit? (Whatever that is actually supposed to mean)
ETA - I notice a few others above have asked the same question.
Edited by Piersman2 on Friday 2nd December 09:39
jonnyb said:
Sway said:
El stovey said:
CaptainSlow said:
Sarah Olney in her victory speech said:
The people of Richmond Park and North Kingston have sent a shockwave through this Conservative Brexit government and our message is clear: we do not want a hard Brexit, we do not want to be pulled out of the single market and we will not let intolerance, division and fear win.
This isn't a shockwave or indeed new information. Anyone that looked at the Ref. results would have easily predicted this.
This by-election campaign seemingly revolves around two issues - Heathrow expansion and the EU ref.
All candidates were against 3rd runway, thereby cancelling the influence of Heathrow on the vote.
In the ref, that constituency seems to have voted 70/30 remain.
The winner was the only candidate opposing Brexit. She got under 50% of the vote.
So, if it comes down to two issues, one of which was nullified, then the other issue appears to have shifted from 70% pro remain to under 50% pro remain in the period since June.
Not suggesting I agree, I haven't lived in the area for too long to have paid too much interest. My first ever GE vote was in the newly formed constituency, my second at the next GE I was of voting age for was 60+ miles away. However, that's the reasoning I picked up in the suggestion that there's been a swing to Leave displayed.
Alistair Campbell would be proud of that level of spin!
If the assumptions I've made about the campaign and voter's reasoning are flawed, they should be easy to knock down by anyone with more recent than mine local experience.
Was there other grounds for the campaign?
Were there personality influences on voter's decisions?
Or, was it, as widely reported, a vote on two issues - the runway and Brexit.
If so, then the argument stands logical assessment.
CaptainSlow said:
El stovey said:
CaptainSlow said:
Sway said:
stuff
Thanks, if this doesn't work I'll get the crayons out.However, there was a 30% to 46% swing towards the Brexit cause on a single issue vote.
1) Turnout was only 54%
2) The Conservative party didn't field a candidate and so their party machine wasn't properly engaged
3) The Lib Dems threw everything they had and more at it. And when you have a by-election like this the main focus is just on getting your vote out, not trying to persuade anyone to your point of view.
The real conclusion here is that Zac Goldsmith overestimated his "personal" vote.
And now we can all see he acted in a self important and pompous way. If he had fought as a Conservative, he would have won.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff