Galloway returns to Parliament in sensational win in Bradford West - Labour/Coalition smashed

[treelover]

'http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/30/george-galloway-bradford-west'

Young Lanre's view on the victory in the Guardian, some on here (well two of you) might find his conclusions 'racist'

 

[articul8]

Christ you're quick - I had that edited in seconds

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Just to check, because nobody objected when I said it above.

Do we really think this is a 37% swing to the left from Labour?

After all, despite some of the rhetoric, Labour were the ones running a Pakistani candidate with strong connections to the local old boy networks. So I'm not at all convinced that identity politics was what won it for GG (as the Torygraph seems to want to claim) and there does seem to be a certain amount of anedotal evidence that people were voting for GG and against the local old boy network on something not a million miles from class issues, end to austerity policies, privatisation etc.

 

[chilango]

(Call it 'Pakistani community' if you prefer, or even 'Kashmiri community'.)

I think that would be a more valid starting point...

 

[Pickman's model]

'http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/30/george-galloway-bradford-west'

Young Lanre's view on the victory in the Guardian, some on here (well two of you) might find his conclusions 'racist'

galloway's a cunt, end of. and there's no way he'll do bradford any favours, he'll leave it a worse place than he found it.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

UNITE is very well placed to use its dominance of Labour's funding to bring influence to bear.

Why doesn't it, then? Why does Labour systematically disregard the interests of the unions that fund it, that it is supposed to represent. A labour leader speaking at the TUC conference is as likely to be booed as cheered, no? Why is that? As far as I can tell, as soon as people move from the unions into labour to become politicians, they mostly cease to act in the interests of the unions.

 

[Pickman's model]

Christ you're quick - I had that edited in seconds

i don't piss about.

 

[articul8]

Do we really think this is a 37% swing to the left from Labour?

After all, despite some of the rhetoric, Labour were the ones running a Pakistani candidate with strong connections to the local old boy networks. So I'm not at all convinced that identity politics was what won it for GG (as the Torygraph seems to want to claim) and there does seem to be a certain amount of anedotal evidence that people were voting for GG and against the local old boy network on something not a million miles from class issues, end to austerity policies, privatisation etc.

populist opportunism - a bit of identity politics where it helps ("I don't drink") a bit of a left swerve for another audience

 

[articul8]

i don't piss about.

It's customary to begin sentences with capital letters though

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's customary to begin sentences with capital letters though

It's customary to end sentences with a full stop. Buy hey ho.

 

[Pickman's model]

It's customary to begin sentences with capital letters though

what, like you in post 398?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

populist opportunism - a bit of identity politics where it helps ("I don't drink") a bit of a left swerve for another audience

... and that accounts for a 37% swing to the left does it?

 

[butchersapron]

populist opportunism - a bit of identity politics where it helps ("I don't drink") a bit of a left swerve for another audience

No lessons for your party - no lessons for anyone.

 

[butchersapron]

... and that accounts for a 37% swing to the left does it?

NO lessons, it's not scaleable.

 

[belboid]

'http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/30/george-galloway-bradford-west'

Young Lanre's view on the victory in the Guardian, some on here (well two of you) might find his conclusions 'racist'

Why? It quite explicitly rejects the idiotic argument put forward by 'some'

"The real decisive move was securing the services of Naweed Hussain, the former campaign manager of Marsha Singh, who knew the location of Labour's weak spots and what the pressure points were for voters in Bradford West."

The article severely lets itself down with the third to last paragraph:
For all the talk of a Bradford spring, Iraq and the West Bank, is Galloway actually going to muddy his hands at the stalled Westfield shopping centre site which has left a huge hole in the city centre? Is he going to bother himself with the fight over the city's Odeon cinema or battle to get the city's main library up and running again?

At least two of which GG has already spoken out on.

 

[articul8]

Why doesn't it, then? Why does Labour systematically disregard the interests of the unions that fund it, that it is supposed to represent. A labour leader speaking at the TUC conference is as likely to be booed as cheered, no? Why is that? As far as I can tell, as soon as people move from the unions into labour to become politicians, they mostly cease to act in the interests of the unions.

They are under an illusion that people's ideas of unions are mirror images of tabloid headlines from the late 70s - you need to win the "middle ground" by pissing off your own supporters. Blair's terrible autobiog doesn't have a good word to say for unions, period. The unions thought they had to suck it up as the price of not having the Tories shafting them even more.

 

[articul8]

... and that accounts for a 37% swing to the left does it?

"swing" is a bit misleading - it's a least in part about differential turnout.

 

[Delroy Booth]

populist opportunism - a bit of identity politics where it helps ("I don't drink") a bit of a left swerve for another audience

How do you account for the fact that Galloway also trounced Labour in all the majority white wards in the seat as well as the majority Muslim ones? Did he appeal to the "idenity politics" of white voters in Bradford by claiming he's never drank alcohol in his life?

 

[Pickman's model]

How do you account for the fact that Galloway also trounced Labour in all the majority white wards in the seat as well as the majority Muslim ones? Did he appeal to the "idenity politics" of white voters in Bradford by claiming he's never drank alcohol in his life?

that'll be electoral fraud *taps nose*

 

[articul8]

No, that's where his left swerve will have served him. More to the point is why Labour voters stayed at home.

 

[Pickman's model]

"swing" is a bit misleading - it's a least in part about differential turnout.

this is getting fucking desperate

 

[belboid]

"swing" is a bit misleading - it's a least in part about differential turnout.

no it isnt. turnout was down a surprisingly small amount. Whether some (usual) labour may have stayed at home, that still leads to a swing, an actual swing, of 37%

 

[Pickman's model]

No, that's where his left swerve will have served him. More to the point is why Labour voters stayed at home.

51%'s quite high for a by-election, isn't it?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

They are under an illusion that people's ideas of unions are mirror images of tabloid headlines from the late 70s - you need to win the "middle ground" by pissing off your own supporters. Blair's terrible autobiog doesn't have a good word to say for unions, period. The unions thought they had to suck it up as the price of not having the Tories shafting them even more.

So Labour since Blair have betrayed the unions, then? And more importantly betrayed union members? They are funded by them, yet do not even pretend to represent them any more?

What is the point of supporting a party that has betrayed the principles on which it was founded?

 

[articul8]

Not everyone who voted Galloway was previously Labour. And not all the votes "lost" by Labour went to Galloway.

 

[butchersapron]

They are under an illusion that people's ideas of unions are mirror images of tabloid headlines from the late 70s - you need to win the "middle ground" by pissing off your own supporters. Blair's terrible autobiog doesn't have a good word to say for unions, period. The unions thought they had to suck it up as the price of not having the Tories shafting them even more.

Who are?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

not all the votes "lost" by Labour went to Galloway.

Just most of them.

 

[Pickman's model]

Not everyone who voted Galloway was previously Labour. And not all the votes "lost" by Labour went to Galloway.

they didn't go to eg the lib dems did they? or to the tories. so where did the previous labour votes go? can't all have stopped at home, surely.

 

[butchersapron]

How do you account for the fact that Galloway also trounced Labour in all the majority white wards in the seat as well as the majority Muslim ones? Did he appeal to the "idenity politics" of white voters in Bradford by claiming he's never drank alcohol in his life?

You have figures for this?

 

[belboid]

Not everyone who voted Galloway was previously Labour. And not all the votes "lost" by Labour went to Galloway.

you do know how swing is calculated, dont you? the above sentence is, to be kind, irrelevant