what stats are they then? The maps posted tell us which areas the candidates got the most votes from, not speicifically WHO voted for what candidate. The largest working class vote was that which stayed at home.
IWCA statement on BNP
- Thread starter cogg
- Start date
what stats are they then? The maps posted tell us which areas the candidates got the most votes from, not speicifically WHO voted for what candidate. The largest working class vote was that which stayed at home.
well i assume you can use google
but tell me, if these white working class enclaves are not in the east end, lambeth, lewisham, camden, islington or the other wards that voted for ken then where are they?
surbiton?
windsor?
get a grip, its clear from the image showing wards that voted red that working class wards of all ethnic make ups didnt vote for boris
prove it, i'm not the one who made the bizarre claim that the working class voted for boris and so far weve had no evidence except a claim from gilligan which has been shown to be disengenuous
JHE
.
Your second claim is certainly true.
Your first is plausible - or rather could be made plausible if it were first adjusted to take account of the fact that most people didn't vote.
Of those who voted and were born and bred in London, most voted for Boris.
I can't be sure - yes, I think that might well be true.
JHE
.
yeah cos richmond and kingston are full of east end made good types
What a dim Occultist you are.
Richmond & Kingston do not make up most of outer London, Wizard.
Parts of outer London that I have lived in (NE) and parts I have worked in (S & SE) contain LOADS of people who've moved out.
Get back to your tarot cards.
JHE
.
I said I thought it was plausible, twat, not that I was sure.
If you are so fucking interested, see if you can find some relevant figures.
Or try the tarot cards and crystal ball.
Because its plainly obvious. Why would any white working class voter want to vote for Livingstone ? It would be like Turkeys voting for Christmas.
i found some figures, they suggested that in working class areas people overwhelming voted for ken, and even in barking and dagenham where boris won more wards, ken still got in and it turns out the wards boris won were the most affluent in the borough
i cant be arsed to break down every ward result by ethnicity, im a londoner, i know places like barnesbury, somerstown, kentish town are mostly white working class just like i know that areas like newham and parts of tower hamlets are largely asian - although im pretty sure in both the white working class is the dominant group
they all voted overwhelmingly for ken
lots of people on this thread have made claims that boris took a massive section of the white working class vote, or as stoatboy says people who were born and bred in london, by which i presume he offensively means white
im confident in my position, the research i did and have posted backed it up
so anyone, prove me wrong, show me who and where all these white working class boris voters are
i cant be arsed to break down every ward result by ethnicity, im a londoner, i know places like barnesbury, somerstown, kentish town are mostly white working class just like i know that areas like newham and parts of tower hamlets are largely asian - although im pretty sure in both the white working class is the dominant group
they all voted overwhelmingly for ken
lots of people on this thread have made claims that boris took a massive section of the white working class vote, or as stoatboy says people who were born and bred in london, by which i presume he offensively means white
im confident in my position, the research i did and have posted backed it up
so anyone, prove me wrong, show me who and where all these white working class boris voters are
newbie
undisambiguated
trouble with stats is the point gets lost in a welter of numbers and interpretation. What are we to make of B&D, which has less employed people than almost all other areas of the region but is ranked 3rd in the number looking after home/family? Does that indicate it's somehow representative of the GLA area or that it's a bit of a special case? (like everywhere else, really, every area has a character that's different from elsewhere).
Census 2001
theres all kinds of problems with stats but sadly its all weve got
those figures also show that B&D has a very high percentage of retired people btw and relatively average unemployment
when it comes to elections then we get a lot of stats and those show that in working class areas boris didnt do that well, end of, and unless someone can post anything other than a shoddy andrew gilligan quote to prove the opposite then im pretty confident thats the case
its not real surprise that a tory did better in well off areas than working class ones btw, i doubt even boris would have the front to make the claims being made by some on this thread
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
There is also the problem in staring reality in the face-Livingston beat both the Tories and Labour when he stood against them as a left candidate,yet a comical upper buffoon beat him this time. Why was this? Muck raking journalists? Tories moving into London displacing Labour voters? Or evidence that for many former Labour voters that Labour has left them behind? I would takethe latter. The BNP polled well and they advocated the second vote to Boris.The BNP take votes off Labour and this was confirmed in the recent Euro and County elections.
i agree, that combined with the fact many labour voters probably stayed at home
my point is not that there is mass w/c support for ken, there wasnt, but that the idea that there was any mass working class support for boris is bollocks
There was mass white working class support for Boris.
where, barking and dagenham, ah no, they voted for ken
trust me gilligan is nothing if not dilligent and its thats the best he could find i doubt youll find any better evidence
because most white working class voters vote on allegiance to class rather than race and have traditionally voted labour, not tory
why would any working class voter ever vote tory, now thats a turkey voting for christmas
but if you can prove me wrong with any evidence (as opposed to your opinion) im happy to see it
newbie
undisambiguated
ranked 4th regionally for being born in the uk and 6th for being white (though much less than the national average) but they are the least well educated/qualified borough of all, which might indicate that historically they've had less access to resources than they deserve (historically because they're a little older than elsewhere in London).
I don't know the area, too far the wrong side of the river, so I can't draw any conclusions from this, but it does sound a bit like a lot of places used to be, before demographic changes brought younger, better educated people from elsewhere into most of the rest of greater London.
I don't know the area, too far the wrong side of the river, so I can't draw any conclusions from this, but it does sound a bit like a lot of places used to be, before demographic changes brought younger, better educated people from elsewhere into most of the rest of greater London.
newbie
undisambiguated
no, but there's a clear problem with attaching credibility to the muck rakers
it always makes me laugh when people ask for evidence about something so bleedin obvious.....
Do you seriously think that Tory voters are all middle or upper class....
Millions of working class people vote Tory. Ken Livingstone got loads of working class support but like a lot of people on the rainbow left he got loads of support from rich white incomers in inner london not as much from white working class people.
Yeah he did OK in Barking and Dagenham etc but Labour has always been really strong in the borough and many of his voters were probably from ethnicminorities.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
There is a seriously hallucinatory quality to the debate. It is like a re-run of the debate with the trots in around 2002 who stridently insisted that the BNP support was coming from the Tory Party rather than Labour. And that the white working class was four square behind each and multiculural advance. And that the working class are still loyal to Labour even though the party itself was determindly putting distance between itself and its former constituency.
Finally there is the notion that 'Red Ken' was indeed a 'red' or at least pink when he had long ago abandoned any such pretence. Look at his love affair with the City and developers - pre crunch. Now his acolytes in City Hall might have an interest in denied all of the above prior to the election but I'm seriously puzzled why individuals on here are doing so after the election. He lost. Just as Labour will lose the general election. There are deep rooted reasons for all of this and none involve the scribblings of Andrew Gilligan.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Reminds me of the time just after the 2004 euros when one of the now long gone swpers argued that the rise in the UKIP vote was not just accidentally happening to block off the BNP gaining a seat or two that time round, but was actually an explicit conscious anti-BNP vote.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
Said what?!
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
I kid you not - a classic from rebel warrior, the UKIP vote in 2004 was an anti-BNP vote.
Fedayn
Well-Known Member
An intriguing definition of an anti-BNP vote if ever I saw/heard one.....
It's hardly surprising really that their recent call for 'unity' is seen as so ridiculous in the light of some of the ravinmgs of their less secretive and 'insular' members. This however, doe stretch that even further.
The only thing i'm now waiting for is the 'relaunch' of their next anti-fash project on the back of the BNP seats....
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
Barking, I agree but Islington? Camden? they don't look that way to me, and I know them well.
Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
Similar threads
