Rochester & Strood by-election

[JTG]

Kelly Tolhurst seems to be quite pro-Palestine going by her tweets.

I hate Steve Bell's cartoons btw

 

[brogdale]

Smithson thinks the primary data is smelly....

Looks like some 1600 burghers of R&S took the opportunity of the freepost reply to tell the vermin what they are.
So, instead of 'trumpeted' "victory of democracy" represented by the 7.5% returns figure, the actual turnout to engage with the process was 5.3% of the electorate.

The scum need to STFU about union ballots being undemocratic on 30 to 40%.

That was an odd way to present the figures. Why not , as in the 2009 primaries, give the full numbers with the total of spoilt papers? The fact that we are not getting this detail raises my suspicions.

1. 
   Could it be that Hardman’s original 4,000 figure was the correct number of valid votes and that it was decided to present the outcome as being a little bit better for the party by talking of the number of ballots returned with the actual candidate totals presented as percentages.

If the turnout is based on number of valid votes then 4,000 would make it about 5.3% not the 7.5% that talking about ballots returned suggests.

Given the controversy surrounding the whole election and the primary itself it would not be surprising if Rochester voters hostile to the Tories spoilt their ballots before popping them in the return paid envelopes and posting them.

It would have been far better for the party to have come clean about the actual numbers last night rather than allow these questions to be raised.

 

[Dogsauce]

I hope they got sent lots of turds and wasps.

 

[brogdale]

Kelly Tolhurst seems to be quite pro-Palestine going by her tweets.

I hate Steve Bell's cartoons btw

She must have made a judgement, back in the summer, that such a position would be popular with the residents of the ward she represents. Little did she know that circumstances would propel her into a position of standing as a candidate to become an MP of the pro-Israeli government.

 

[brogdale]

...and another few % points for Reckless...

Nigel Farage has claimed that David Cameron will be forced to pay out an extra £1.7 billion into the EU budget by the end of next month despite the government saying the extra demand was not acceptable....
Farage said that Cameron will have little chance but to go along with the demand, which will have to be paid in December.

“Of course he will pay up. These are the rules, the contributions to the European Union was a very complex formula and part of it is a measurement of your GDP against everybody else’s. There’s nothing he can do,” he said.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/24/eu-contribution-cameron-pay-extra-funds-farage

 

[William of Walworth]

Kelly Tolhurst seems to be quite pro-Palestine going by her tweets.

I hate Steve Bell's cartoons btw

You're nothing to me now ...

 

[butchersapron]

Another UKIP win here, huge labour-->shift to fuck cameron. And all the labour panickers will jump on the OMG we're going to lose the general election! and underestimating labour (and other) voters political savvy.

 

[andysays]

Another UKIP win here, huge labour-->shift to fuck cameron. And all the labour panickers will jump on the OMG we're going to lose the general election! and underestimating labour (and other) voters political savvy.

Can you expand/explain what you mean by this?

It appears to mean* that if UKIP win in Rochester, previous Labour voters elsewhere will think UKIP is a better bet than Labour to fuck up Cameron, and therefore switch their voting intentions in significant numbers.

* but we all know how I sometimes struggle to understand your posts

 

[Dogsauce]

Labour should possibly be more worried by the apparent rise of the greens, which is where some of the former lib dem votes are heading, though that probably isn't an issue in the heartlands.

 

[butchersapron]

Can you expand/explain what you mean by this?

It appears to mean* that if UKIP win in Rochester, previous Labour voters elsewhere will think UKIP is a better bet than Labour to fuck up Cameron, and therefore switch their voting intentions in significant numbers.

* but we all know how I sometimes struggle to understand your posts

It means that trad labour voters will switch to UKIP this time to put further pressure on cameron - there are already suggestions of forcing a vote of no confidence if he loses another seat to UKIP, and other tory Mps in similar seats willbe further emboldened to jump ship. Labour voters know they're not going to win this one - the leadership have also recognised this and put in very few resources, almost as nod and wink to vote UKIP. So what's best next - damage the tories. This i expect to be done without any ideological commitment to UKIP and a recognition of the use that can be made of UKIPs current momentum. This is not going to mean labour voters everywhere flocking to UKIP come the GE - there's a reason they are labour voters after all - beyond not being tories.

 

[andysays]

It means that trad labour voters will switch to UKIP this time to put further pressure on cameron - there are already suggestions of forcing a vote of no confidence if he loses another seat to UKIP, and other tory Mps in similar seats willbe further emboldened to jump ship. Labour voters know they're not going to win this one - the leadership have also recognised this and put in very few resources, almost as nod and wink to vote UKIP. So what's best next - damage the tories. This i expect to be done without any ideological commitment to UKIP and a recognition of the use that can be made of UKIPs current momentum. This is not going to mean labour voters everywhere flocking to UKIP come the GE - there's a reason they are labour voters after all - beyond not being tories.

By this time you mean in this by-election in Rochester?

 

[butchersapron]

Yep.

 

[andysays]

Yep.

Right, that makes sense now, and I agree.

I read your previous as probably meaning

"Another UKIP win here, will result in a future huge labour-->shift to fuck cameron beyond Rochester"

rather than

"Another UKIP win here, as a result of a huge labour-->shift to fuck cameron in Rochester"

So it's just as well I checked before misrepresenting you again

 

[belboid]

well, apparently nick Long of Lewisham People Before Profit will be standing

 

[brogdale]

well, apparently nick Long of Lewisham People Before Profit will be standing

Better get a move on if wants to; deadline for candidature is 4.00pm according to Medway.

Fair play and all that, but that'll split the 52 votes for TUSC.

 

[William of Walworth]

well, apparently nick Long of Lewisham People Before Profit will be standing

Ideal candidate for those lefties who might find the Class War candidate** too bolshy and sweary?

**Is she still standing btw?

 

[belboid]

Ideal candidate for those lefties who might find the Class War candidate** too bolshy and sweary?

**Is she still standing btw?

still got an hour to get it in!

The Green is apparently a bit of a conspiraloon, and has done nowt to oppose cuts.

 

[newbie]

It means that trad labour voters will switch to UKIP this time to put further pressure on cameron - there are already suggestions of forcing a vote of no confidence if he loses another seat to UKIP, and other tory Mps in similar seats willbe further emboldened to jump ship. Labour voters know they're not going to win this one - the leadership have also recognised this and put in very few resources, almost as nod and wink to vote UKIP. So what's best next - damage the tories. This i expect to be done without any ideological commitment to UKIP and a recognition of the use that can be made of UKIPs current momentum. This is not going to mean labour voters everywhere flocking to UKIP come the GE - there's a reason they are labour voters after all - beyond not being tories.

Up at the top of the thread I asked where the Labour tactical vote would go, because I don't think it's simple.

A UKIP scrape-through by-election win will have some impact but nothing like as much as a resounding win, like in Clacton where there was a major collapse of the Labour vote, down from 11,000 to 4,000.

There won't be a vote of no confidence in Cameron this side of the GE, and afterwards he's toast unless he gets a decent or outright majority. Which is most unlikely, based on the polls. So it doesn't look like voting UKIP will achieve that much except extra nails in coffin.

However, no Labour tactical voter will want to promote UKIP so much they can cause real damage to Labour in the GE. Currently there is UKIP momentum which is encouraging belief that they can defeat sitting MPs in heartlands, including Labour. That may not be fully realistic right now, but in a few months time with additional boosts from another big by-election win, including another collapsed Labour vote, and possible defections encouraged by the win, that belief might really come to pass (especially if Tories vote tactically). Meanwhile UKIP victory will push Cameron further into their policy corner. So tactical voting for UKIP has its dangers as well.

Labour tactical voters won't vote Tory, whatever happens, but I'm not sure they'll see actively promoting UKIP as in their best interests. Their party will argue that a close result with the Labour vote holding up sends better signals and they may be right.

 

[brogdale]

Up at the top of the thread I asked where the Labour tactical vote would go, because I don't think it's simple.

A UKIP scrape-through by-election win will have some impact but nothing like as much as a resounding win, like in Clacton where there was a major collapse of the Labour vote, down from 11,000 to 4,000.

There won't be a vote of no confidence in Cameron this side of the GE, and afterwards he's toast unless he gets a decent or outright majority. Which is most unlikely, based on the polls. So it doesn't look like voting UKIP will achieve that much except extra nails in coffin.

However, no Labour tactical voter will want to promote UKIP so much they can cause real damage to Labour in the GE. Currently there is UKIP momentum which is encouraging belief that they can defeat sitting MPs in heartlands, including Labour. That may not be fully realistic right now, but in a few months time with additional boosts from another big by-election win, including another collapsed Labour vote, and possible defections encouraged by the win, that belief might really come to pass (especially if Tories vote tactically). Meanwhile UKIP victory will push Cameron further into their policy corner. So tactical voting for UKIP has its dangers as well.

Labour tactical voters won't vote Tory, whatever happens, but I'm not sure they'll see actively promoting UKIP as in their best interests. Their party will argue that a close result with the Labour vote holding up sends better signals and they may be right.

Tactical voting has always carried an element of risk, (I'd imagine there'd be a fair few folk who voted LD tactically in 2010 who might concur), but NuLab's concerns should not be primarily focussed on those of their supporters who choose to vote tactically, but rather on those that they've lost outright to UKIP/apathy.

 

[butchersapron]

Up at the top of the thread I asked where the Labour tactical vote would go, because I don't think it's simple.

A UKIP scrape-through by-election win will have some impact but nothing like as much as a resounding win, like in Clacton where there was a major collapse of the Labour vote, down from 11,000 to 4,000.

There won't be a vote of no confidence in Cameron this side of the GE, and afterwards he's toast unless he gets a decent or outright majority. Which is most unlikely, based on the polls. So it doesn't look like voting UKIP will achieve that much except extra nails in coffin.

However, no Labour tactical voter will want to promote UKIP so much they can cause real damage to Labour in the GE. Currently there is UKIP momentum which is encouraging belief that they can defeat sitting MPs in heartlands, including Labour. That may not be fully realistic right now, but in a few months time with additional boosts from another big by-election win, including another collapsed Labour vote, and possible defections encouraged by the win, that belief might really come to pass (especially if Tories vote tactically). Meanwhile UKIP victory will push Cameron further into their policy corner. So tactical voting for UKIP has its dangers as well.

Labour tactical voters won't vote Tory, whatever happens, but I'm not sure they'll see actively promoting UKIP as in their best interests. Their party will argue that a close result with the Labour vote holding up sends better signals and they may be right.

I was waiting to see what on the ground research turned up before answering that question. Last week Mathhew Goodwin reported on what labour voters in the seat were thinking (can't find the series of tweets now, will look more shortly) and it pretty much mirrored what my first instincts were - and that's vote UKIP to harm cameron and the tories. It doesn't matter if it's highly unlikely another UKIP win will bring about a vote of confidence in Cameron or not - it matters if these voters think it will damage him and open him/them up to further damage - which it unquestionably would do. Also, if some labour voters are switching UKIP in the mistaken belief a UKIP win would force a tory vote of conference it doesn't matter - their vote still counts.

I think you're well off on labour tactical voters being concerned about inflating UKIP nationally - that just doesn't enter into local contests, esp by-elections. That's the sort of concern a tactically voting labour member might have - not a voter. And i think you may be dismissive of/ignoring the fact that UKIP have a number of issues they focus on which trad labour voters agree with them on and would be happy to use their vote at a tactically appropriate time to highlight.

Where else is the tactical labour vote to stop the the tories going to go? Is it just not going to happen? I see no reason why there will not be the same loss of 50% of the labour vote (as a %) and that largely going to UKIP as we saw in Clacton.

 

[treelover]

What about a substantial UKIP win pushing the Tories even further to the right as they respond to the threat, is that a possibility?

 

[chilango]

What about a substantial UKIP win pushing the Tories even further to the right as they respond to the threat, is that a possibility?

...if so, so what?

 

[butchersapron]

What about a substantial UKIP win pushing the Tories even further to the right as they respond to the threat, is that a possibility?

What of it? Do you have an opinion on your suggested possible outcome? That labour voters shouldn't vote UKIP in this by-election? That they should? That a rightward moving tory party will isolate itself and cut off those it needs to have even a sniff of chance? What?

 

[andysays]

What about a substantial UKIP win pushing the Tories even further to the right as they respond to the threat, is that a possibility?

If that did happen, what do you think would be the specific consequences (electorally and otherwise) of that?

 

[treelover]

I'm asking the experts the question, that why I asked it.

I'm limited in how/how much I can post, that's why I ask questions, etc.

 

[nino_savatte]

Up at the top of the thread I asked where the Labour tactical vote would go, because I don't think it's simple.

A UKIP scrape-through by-election win will have some impact but nothing like as much as a resounding win, like in Clacton where there was a major collapse of the Labour vote, down from 11,000 to 4,000.

There won't be a vote of no confidence in Cameron this side of the GE, and afterwards he's toast unless he gets a decent or outright majority. Which is most unlikely, based on the polls. So it doesn't look like voting UKIP will achieve that much except extra nails in coffin.

However, no Labour tactical voter will want to promote UKIP so much they can cause real damage to Labour in the GE. Currently there is UKIP momentum which is encouraging belief that they can defeat sitting MPs in heartlands, including Labour. That may not be fully realistic right now, but in a few months time with additional boosts from another big by-election win, including another collapsed Labour vote, and possible defections encouraged by the win, that belief might really come to pass (especially if Tories vote tactically). Meanwhile UKIP victory will push Cameron further into their policy corner. So tactical voting for UKIP has its dangers as well.

Labour tactical voters won't vote Tory, whatever happens, but I'm not sure they'll see actively promoting UKIP as in their best interests. Their party will argue that a close result with the Labour vote holding up sends better signals and they may be right.

The Tories want to repeal their Fixed Term Act if they win an outright majority. They don't know shit from shinola but they also despise democracy.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...parliamentary-terms-law-repealed-9814508.html

Two days ago, my favourite parliamentarians (sarcasm) Frank Field and Edward Leigh tabled a motion to have the act repealed. It failed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29736934

 

[newbie]

I think you're well off on labour tactical voters being concerned about inflating UKIP nationally - that just doesn't enter into local contests, esp by-elections. That's the sort of concern a tactically voting labour member might have - not a voter. And i think you may be dismissive of/ignoring the fact that UKIP have a number of issues they focus on which trad labour voters agree with them on and would be happy to use their vote at a tactically appropriate time to highlight.

fair points, although anyone thinking about tactical voting will run through everything posted here and more before making up their mind, and some of that will be strategic. One of the biggest questions in domestic politics is the proportion of core Labour voters who have real sympathies with UKIP positions. 'some' perhaps, but an awful lot find them repellant.

 

[newbie]

The Tories want to repeal their Fixed Term Act if they win an outright majority. They don't know shit from shinola but they also despise democracy.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...parliamentary-terms-law-repealed-9814508.html

Two days ago, my favourite parliamentarians (sarcasm) Frank Field and Edward Leigh tabled a motion to have the act repealed. It failed.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29736934

an expedient insisted on by Clegg to shore up his personal position will be gone after the next couple of elections, whoever wins.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

I'm limited in how/how much I can post, that's why I ask questions, etc.

If you asked half as many questions you would have some time to provide answers when people ask questions of you

 

[juice_terry]

Out in force today in Rochester Britain First out in numbers as well me and my oh were approached by BF campaigners and the poor sod trying to give as a leaflet was left nursing a very sore jaw [emoji13]