Who will win Stoke-on-Trent Central by-election, 2017

[Dindoit]

Digga said:

Purely that postal votes have been the subject of widespread fraud before and, given their proportional significance in the result, one wonders.

Postal votes were not significant. Remove all the Labour postal votes, let Nuttall keep all his postal votes (because UKIP have a history of never cheating) and UKIP still loses. No rodents to smell in "certain communities", just sour grades.

[Stickyfinger]

Dindoit said:

Postal votes were not significant. Remove all the Labour postal votes, let Nuttall keep all his postal votes (because UKIP have a history of never cheating) and UKIP still loses. No rodents to smell in "certain communities", just sour grades.

We know there are many rodents in Labour
We know there are rodents in UKIP
We know the Liberals are just a laugh outside a few "special" seats

Conservatives will keep going as all the other "parties" are a joke.

[Countdown]

Digga said:

Countdown said:

Because UKIP didn't win and people need an excuse as to why it was unfair/rigged etc.

Not in the least. UKIP lost the election for themselves - had they not screwed up so badly, voter turnout may have been higher, although the untimely arrival of Doris was an unfortunate factor and may well be responsible for lower turnout at the polls.

However...

It's the "However...." that makes me think people need to find a scapegoat.

Occam's razor applies.

[Digga]

Countdown said:

Digga said:

Countdown said:

Because UKIP didn't win and people need an excuse as to why it was unfair/rigged etc.

Not in the least. UKIP lost the election for themselves - had they not screwed up so badly, voter turnout may have been higher, although the untimely arrival of Doris was an unfortunate factor and may well be responsible for lower turnout at the polls.

However...

It's the "However...." that makes me think people need to find a scapegoat.

Occam's razor applies.

Okay, I'll disambiguate:

"However, if postal voting fraud were uncovered, it would not be the first time."

And also, for the record, UKIP lost the lead all by themselves - no fraud, no Doris, nothing can be blamed for it, other than their own utter ineptitude and unsuitability.

Now put that razor down chap.

[Countdown]

Digga said:

Okay, I'll disambiguate:

"However, if postal voting fraud were uncovered, it would not be the first time."

And also, for the record, UKIP lost the lead all by themselves - no fraud, no Doris, nothing can be blamed for it, other than their own utter ineptitude and unsuitability.

Now put that razor down chap.

So, the Copeland bye-election.....is that a "However..." situation as well?

[Digga]

Countdown said:

Digga said:

Okay, I'll disambiguate:

"However, if postal voting fraud were uncovered, it would not be the first time."

And also, for the record, UKIP lost the lead all by themselves - no fraud, no Doris, nothing can be blamed for it, other than their own utter ineptitude and unsuitability.

Now put that razor down chap.

So, the Copeland bye-election.....is that a "However..." situation as well?

Come now. Let's not be silly.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/11/electio...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-ord...

[SKP555]

It wasn't rigged. Labour voters voted Labour, 2000 people who voted UKIP at the GE didn't bother. UKIP failed to attract eithet Tory or Labour voters in sufficient numbers.

I think there is a place for UKIP and the referendum proved it. But they haven't found that place just yet.

IMO they should not be trying to out Labour the Labour party. They need to make small state conservative ideas attractive to the working class.

[Alex]

SKP555 said:

IMO they should not be trying to out Labour the Labour party. They need to make small state conservative ideas attractive to the working class.

Spot on. When UKIP started chasing Labour voters, they started losing natural Tories, like me.

[turbobloke]

Digga said:

Countdown said:

Digga said:

Okay, I'll disambiguate:

"However, if postal voting fraud were uncovered, it would not be the first time."

And also, for the record, UKIP lost the lead all by themselves - no fraud, no Doris, nothing can be blamed for it, other than their own utter ineptitude and unsuitability.

Now put that razor down chap.

So, the Copeland bye-election.....is that a "However..." situation as well?

Come now. Let's not be silly.

Quite.

It's all good news in any case, Labour still look doomed for 2020 and without hope of recovery as long as Corbyn remains at the helm. Long may he remain.

[johnxjsc1985]

I saw a luvvie from the Guardian indicate she thought it was a success because it wasn't as bad as they feared.

[turbobloke]

johnxjsc1985 said:

I saw a luvvie from the Guardian indicate she thought it was a success because it wasn't as bad as they feared.

It won't be as bad in 2020 either, wipe-out rather than annihilation.

[Sylvaforever]

Countdown said:

Digga said:

Countdown said:

Because UKIP didn't win and people need an excuse as to why it was unfair/rigged etc.

Not in the least. UKIP lost the election for themselves - had they not screwed up so badly, voter turnout may have been higher, although the untimely arrival of Doris was an unfortunate factor and may well be responsible for lower turnout at the polls.

However...

It's the "However...." that makes me think people need to find a scapegoat.

Occam's razor applies.

Absolutely However when a significant proportion of the electorate are in instructed/in fear of hell and damnation....

Edited by Sylvaforever on Friday 24th February 18:46

[dbdb]

Alex said:

SKP555 said:

IMO they should not be trying to out Labour the Labour party. They need to make small state conservative ideas attractive to the working class.

Spot on. When UKIP started chasing Labour voters, they started losing natural Tories, like me.

And when the Tories started chasing UKIP, they lost many of their Centrist Remainer voters like me. Politics is in a state of real flux at the moment.

On reflection I am not surprised that Labour held Stoke Central. When I lived there many years ago, I found there was a notable resistance to voting anything other Labour. Coupled with a shambolic UKIP performance, there can be no surprise it has been held.

It is not a good result for Labour, but it leaves me wondering whether Labour is really under any threat in its Brexit-voting seats. I suspect this threat is much exaggerated. This would be especially true if the Brexit process unravels and the economy is damaged by it.

I agree with the poster who said there has never been a better time to establish a new political party. I am certainly looking for one; I cannot see myself voting Conservative again.

[powerstroke]

Alex said:

Spot on. When UKIP started chasing Labour voters, they started losing natural Tories, like me.

Me too , we need a center right small state ,small business friendly party not labour Lite

[turbobloke]

powerstroke said:

Alex said:

Spot on. When UKIP started chasing Labour voters, they started losing natural Tories, like me.

Me too , we need a center right small state ,small business friendly party not labour Lite

Definitely. Blue Labour, Labour Lite, eugh.

Here's hoping that May grabs the business rates fiasco by the pu... balls and sorts it out. It makes the Conservatives look like they're reverting back to the bad old Cameron days where you could be forgiven for wondering when Blair would be given a job by CMD.

[hyphen]

turbobloke said:

Definitely. Blue Labour, Labour Lite, eugh.

Here's hoping that May grabs the business rates fiasco by the pu... balls and sorts it out. It makes the Conservatives look like they're reverting back to the bad old Cameron days where you could be forgiven for wondering when Blair would be given a job by CMD.

Most of the businesses with increases are in the capital, and majority of London constituencies are Lab/Lib.

[JawKnee]

johnxjsc1985 said:

I saw a luvvie from the Guardian indicate she thought it was a success because it wasn't as bad as they feared.

Going by the general consensus on here before the election, it was nowhere near as bad as was being made out.

Nuclear lost it for Labour in Copeland. An issue which holds a lot less sway in the rest of the country. They won Stoke which is good news.

Far from the apocalypse many on here are hoping for.

[turbobloke]

JawKnee said:

johnxjsc1985 said:

I saw a luvvie from the Guardian indicate she thought it was a success because it wasn't as bad as they feared.

Going by the general consensus on here before the election, it was nowhere near as bad as was being made out.

It was yummy for Labour, even more yummy will do fine as they'll be in the political wilderness until 2025 at this rate.

[johnxjsc1985]

JawKnee said:

Going by the general consensus on here before the election, it was nowhere near as bad as was being made out.

Nuclear lost it for Labour in Copeland. An issue which holds a lot less sway in the rest of the country. They won Stoke which is good news.

Far from the apocalypse many on here are hoping for.

losing an election you had previously won for the past 80 years is about as bad as you can get and even worse not to the Liberals or even UKIP but to the Government who happen to be Tory. Wake up your doing Labour no favours spouting the Corbyn ste that will leave the Party and more importantly the opposition decimated in 2020.

[chow pan toon]

JawKnee said:

Going by the general consensus on here before the election, it was nowhere near as bad as was being made out.

Nuclear lost it for Labour in Copeland. An issue which holds a lot less sway in the rest of the country. They won Stoke which is good news.

Far from the apocalypse many on here are hoping for.

I can't speak for anyone else on here but personally the last thing I want is a Labour apocalypse. The results on Thursday were perfect. Funny enough to have a laugh at Corbyn and his merry band but not bad enough so that he ends up out of a job and they have the chance (no matter how small) of finding a better leader.