Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

butchersapron said:
Push comes to shove - articul8 - on the other side. Red pepper, please be different harriet.
Click to expand...
Fuck off - I'm just looking beyond today's headlines and pious hopes that Galloway has broken the dam for a flood of independents and socialists to flow through. Allahu Akhbar!!
 
articul8 said:
I'm sorry, you don't understand how swing is calculated if you don't recognise it assumes that turnout effects all parties proportionately. You'd need a much more substantial psephological model to really factor in differential turnout.
Click to expand...
utter, utter, rubbish. How has everyone else (apart from you, alone in the world) has managed to calculate it then? The people who didnt vote, didnt vote. It is as simple as that.

Tell me, what is the'normal' swing, and the 'differential' swing in the following case:
Election 1 has A winning 50%, B 30% and C 20%. In the following election, A's vote precisely halves. B and C's remain exactly the same.
 
Delroy Booth said:
Yes it's real. Two things. Galloway's an opportunist prick who can play on the cultural loyalties like a violinist and that letter was sent out to muslim residents in the wards as a direct response to Labour phoning up households going "How can you vote for a non-muslim? Don't you know the Labour party candidate is a real muslim, as supported by x, y and z in the local community?"

Believe it or not Galloway's not the only one who's an opportunistic gobshite with low morals in this by-election. Labour were being even more "communalist" in their persuit of an imaginary muslim block vote than even Galloway was! The Tories only canvassed white wards the entire election, with really thinly veiled anti-immigrant leaflets, basically reducing themselves to trying to win over the residual BNP vote in these areas.
Click to expand...
an election communication without the required 'on behalf of's? Most peculiar
 
belboid said:
Tell me, what is the'normal' swing, and the 'differential' swing in the following case:
Election 1 has A winning 50%, B 30% and C 20%. In the following election, A's vote precisely halves. B and C's remain exactly the same.
Click to expand...

Don't embarrass yourself. You don't understand. Fair enough - but don't inflict this bollocks about it not making any difference whose voters are staying at home on us ffs.
 
articul8 said:
Don't embarrass yourself. You don't understand. Fair enough - but don't inflict this bollocks about it not making any difference whose voters are staying at home on us ffs.
Click to expand...

I do understand. Everyone except you understands. Tell me what the swings are in the above case?
 
belboid said:
an election communication without the required 'on behalf of's? Most peculiar
Click to expand...

Not if your George Galloway!

Btw I'm not here to defend every thing Galloway does and says in order to get elected. I think any sensible left-winger knows well by now to keep their distance from Galloway, he's politcally poisonous.

The fact remains however, if a clown like Galloway can win, then what happens when sensible anti-war and anti-cuts candidates start campaigning in seats like these?
 
belboid said:
I do understand. Everyone except you understands. Tell me what the swings are in the above case?
Click to expand...
This isn't even about "swings" - "swings" are calculated on the assumption of proportionally consistent turnouts. I'm saying raw data about swings needs to be complemented by a more sophisticated model of how turnout is unevenly distributed.
 
articul8 said:
This isn't even about "swings" - "swings" are calculated on the assumption of proportionally consistent turnouts. I'm saying raw data about swings needs to be complemented by a more sophisticated model of how turnout is unevenly distributed.
Click to expand...
lol, starting to change your tune :) It's a 37% swing
 
DotCommunist said:
no, the EDL will just continue to die on its arse slowly
Click to expand...

There was some EDL (like one loud one, his gopher, and another admirer who wasn't wearing the T-Shirt) in a pub in my home town the other week. Probably the proliest pub in a very proley town, yet most people were just rolling their eyes at what they saw as typical dickheads. And these are the sort of punters who pass as casual racist types.
 
labour's take on why they lost: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/the-no...ge-galloway-bradford-byelection-simon-danczuk

In Labour circles George Galloway's byelection victory was greeted with complete and utter incredulity. I lost count of the number of tweets I read from people saying they simply couldn't believe he'd won. Activists were shocked, stunned, gobsmacked. But they shouldn't have been.

Byelections are furious, competitive affairs packed with high drama. It's always a bumpy ride and the golden rule is that playing safe is probably the most dangerous thing in the world. This was Labour's cardinal error.

Buoyed by Cameron's calamitous week of petrol and pasty mishaps, and the backlash from Osborne's disastrous Budget, we thought we could take our feet off the pedals and freewheel to victory. As soon as it emerged that Galloway was standing we should have known it was never going to be plain sailing.
Click to expand...
 
That gaurdian article by Gorgeous is making me laugh. He is really in the vinegars

A 5,000 Labour majority was transformed into a 10,000 majority for Respect – the same total vote for me as the outgoing MP had in a general election – winning across every ward in the constituency. It was the most spectacular byelection result in British political history.
Click to expand...
 
butchersapron said:
Yeah, who on here?
Click to expand...
Frogwoman has been hinting at it none too subtly - the idea that the national trend will be bucked on a frequent basis from now on etc. You have been drawing conclusions, while not necessarily electoral, are a bit more than this one result justifies
 
articul8 said:
Frogwoman has been hinting at it none too subtly - the idea that the national trend will be bucked on a frequent basis from now on etc. You have been drawing conclusions, while not necessarily electoral, are a bit more than this one result justifies
Click to expand...
Well, you need more than hints. You have none.
 
butchersapron said:
What have you learnt as a labour party member looking to return a labour vote articul8 from this?
Click to expand...
1) Labour needs to establish a clear difference on the cuts re the coalition
2) Labour needs to show that where it runs local councils it is resisting the cuts
3) Labour needs to demonstrate it understands the catastrophic nature of the Blair/Brown foreign policy by calling for withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan

etc.
 
articul8 said:
This is what I've been saying all along :facepalm: that the swing figure is misleading
Click to expand...
rubbish. it was that came out with the nonsense about 'differential' swing, floundering desperately. Sayng it wasnt really a 37% swing.

What you are trying to claim is nothing to with actual psephology, its a Labourite rationalisation about how the seat can be re-won. If those 10,000 labour votes that disappeared went straight to Respect, you are going to have a harder job getting them back than if they just didnt vote. You are trying to put those ex-labour voters into some third camp, pretendng they are still labour voters who need turning out. But they're not, they're ex-labour voters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tim
Natalie Elphicke defecates to Labour
2 3 4 5
Replies
127
Views
5K
two sheds
two sheds
hitmouse
Unions and Labour
Replies
20
Views
952
Fedayn
Fedayn
Humberto
Home Building Labour guff
Replies
1
Views
270
Humberto
Humberto
P
In Blackpool South, did people vote because they are head over heals with Labour
Replies
27
Views
992
A380
A380
Kid_Eternity
New Labour government - legislative agenda
26 27 28 29 30
Replies
892
Views
28K
Thaw
Thaw
Back
Top Bottom