Jump to content
Which Tyler

UK Politics: Awaiting MV3

Recommended Posts

While I get that the news organisations and political parties are desperately searching for a narrative coming out of these results, I'll repeat: it would be foolish not to treat any such narrative with a high degree of scepticism. 

These are low-turnout local elections. While they are undoubtedly influenced by Brexit, they're also influenced by lots of other things, many of them local or regional, not national, and nobody can say which mattered more. They're also distorted by low turnout.

The meaning of these elections for the parties at UK level is likely to be almost impossible to read accurately without a good deal of research, and is certainly impossible to read accurately now, the day after. 

Won't stop people trying, I know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Which Tyler said:

Yup, agree with that. I'm just not getting any BBC spin (so far), just reporting of party / MP spin, albeit with implied eye-rolls or basically all variations of the spin. 

Yes, however if you apply the voters want us to get on with Brexit to both parties, that is indeed spin IMHO. Like I said, I think you can apply that logic to the Tories with their leave voting core, I don't think you can apply it equally to Labour. I mean the implication would be that (would be) Labour voters want their party support Brexit, thus Labour should help May get some deal through parliament, no second referendum, no questions asked (in other words to bail out May, as Barry Gardiner put it). Somehow I don't see that approach going well for Labour, but it would rather instantly split Labour.

If Labour bails out May, this entire Brexit mess instantly becomes Labour's. There's nothing May would like better than pass that shit crusted poisoned chalice on to Corbyn. The really sad/worrying thing is, I really would not put past the current Labour frontbench (namely Corbyn and McDonnell) to do just that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Talking about spin:

UKIP’s Lawrence Webb says the party’s local election performance shows that the party’s fortunes are “on the up.”

 

 

Edited by Which Tyler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad night for Labour (that swing in North-East Derbyshire was brutal), but terrible night for the Tories. Currently their worst local election losses in 24 years, and the worst losses by anyone since Labour in 1999.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

No that I've found.

Equally, of course, UKIP and conservative were both on the ballot at (I think) every council. Both are very much Brexit parties.

 

The only absent Brexit party is Nigel's new one. But he, CHUK is also absent, so...

Well UKIP are poison, we can discount them. Tories have basically have a total meltdown and Brexit has ruined them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

Over a thousand Tory losses now.

And less than 100 labour. But still being reported as if it is comparable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

For historical comparison, the biggest seat losses in local elections since 1973:

  1. 1995 Conservatives: -2018
  2. 1976 Labour: -1309
  3. 2019 Conservatives: -1281*
  4. 1981 Conservatives: -1193
  5. 1999 Labour: -1161

The Tories are closing in on Jim Callaghan... 

Edit: They've now hit 1312 losses. Congratulations, Theresa May. You've gone where only John Major has gone before.

Edited by The Marquis de Leech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

And less than 100 labour. But still being reported as if it is comparable. 

I think the point is, the Tories lose well over 1000 seats in local elections, and somehow Labour not only manages to win nill seats, they even manage to also drop a hundred. Which is remarkable. I mean the worst goverment since WWII was supposed to lose heavily, and the main opposition party somewhat still manages to not benefit from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Was there any word on turnout? I can't find anything about how high it was. I've heard some say that a protest vote against non delivery of Brexit might just end up with abstaining, as there was no real Brexit alternative vote available.

On the BBC's coverage earlier they were saying it was roughly comparable to past local elections, maybe slightly down. However, I'm not sure if those were the final figures.

5 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

Talking about spin:

UKIP’s Lawrence Webb says the party’s local election performance shows that the party’s fortunes are “on the up.”

If I remember correctly, in the previous local elections they manage to lose all but one of their seats, so only losing about 90% of their seats is technically an improvement, although even that may only be because the Get Nigel Farage Back On TV Party wasn't contesting the elections.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

I think the point is, the Tories lose well over 1000 seats in local elections, and somehow Labour not only manages to win nill seats, they even manage to also drop a hundred. Which is remarkable. I mean the worst goverment since WWII was supposed to lose heavily, and the main opposition party somewhat still manages to not benefit from it.

*cough* Brexit polarisation *cough*

A shitty night for Labour (in the North anyway) is not comparable to an apocalyptic night for the Tories. Seriously - the only time in the last half century a party has lost more council seats was Major's 1995 meltdown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Marquis de Leech said:

*cough* Brexit polarisation *cough*

A shitty night for Labour (in the North anyway) is not comparable to an apocalyptic night for the Tories. Seriously - the only time in the last half century a party has lost more council seats was Major's 1995 meltdown.

Yep. And Labour policy is trying to please everyone.

No, Labour's luck is they are the opposition party (even if in name only) and thus are held accountable to a lesser extent than the Tories. The Tories lost more seats, however if I am not mistaken, the vote share for Labour and Tories was on the same level (28% or so I think).

So of course you can pretend Labour did okayish, or rather good compared to the mare of an election night the Tories suffered. But that's only half the story. Apart from the rather bleak vote share, there were also a couple of seats and councils Labour held just by the skin of their teeth. I don't think just looking at the Tories and say: sucks to be you, is going to help Labour.

And judging by Corbyn's and McDonnel's takeaways from the election, well, let's just say, I don't think Labour is looking like a goverment in waiting, and neither do I think that the leadership is able or willing to change their strategy. Thus they are in for a few more beatings, next stop EU elections (if they don't cut a deal to avoid another beating).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Yes, however if you apply the voters want us to get on with Brexit to both parties, that is indeed spin IMHO. Like I said, I think you can apply that logic to the Tories with their leave voting core, I don't think you can apply it equally to Labour. I mean the implication would be that (would be) Labour voters want their party support Brexit, thus Labour should help May get some deal through parliament, no second referendum, no questions asked (in other words to bail out May, as Barry Gardiner put it). Somehow I don't see that approach going well for Labour, but it would rather instantly split Labour.

If Labour bails out May, this entire Brexit mess instantly becomes Labour's. There's nothing May would like better than pass that shit crusted poisoned chalice on to Corbyn. The really sad/worrying thing is, I really would not put past the current Labour frontbench (namely Corbyn and McDonnell) to do just that.

I don’t think its the media spin though, when you have figures within Labour saying stuff like

“Sunderland voted as a city to leave and having had a message from MPs saying we have to have a people's vote and a second referendum, people are saying we are not just accepting that in the Labour party.

"I have lost councillors tonight because of this - the Brexit message has stepped into local politics and that is the outcome.

"Hopefully the party will learn from it and will not make that mistake again."

Most of the reporting i read has been quoting stuff like that rather than actually expressing the get on with brexit sentiment themselves. But then i havent read too widely so i could easily have missed something

 

eta: just to clarify, i don’t agree with Miller, i just think the “spin” in the media is understandable when people in labour are saying stuff like this

Edited by HelenaExMachina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Labour can justifiably be said to have done badly because they are the main opposition party to a government that is, by any standards, a complete mess. In that context they should have been picking up numerous seats, instead of actually losing some. I think that they have been makng a big mistake - I note that even in Brexit supporting Sunderland what hurt them was voters switching to Remain parties.

Still I am glad that the electorate seems to have generally seen through Labour's fig leak of pretense that they are not a Brexit party. Our local Labour councillor came knocking on our door a few days ago claiming that she personally was Remainer and that Brexit wasn't that important anyway - I am pleased to say that she has lost her seat to a Green.

Theresa May would of course now interpret absolutely any event whatsoever as a message that she needs to go on pushing to get her personal hard Brexit through unchanged. However I am unimpressed by the widespread media spin. "Got the message? Deliver Brexit!" seems to be the typical tabloid response. Given that the swing was to the fiercely Remain parties the Lib Dems and Greens, that is blatant propaganda.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

I don’t think its the media spin though, when you have figures within Labour saying stuff like

“Sunderland voted as a city to leave and having had a message from MPs saying we have to have a people's vote and a second referendum, people are saying we are not just accepting that in the Labour party.

"I have lost councillors tonight because of this - the Brexit message has stepped into local politics and that is the outcome.

"Hopefully the party will learn from it and will not make that mistake again."

Most of the reporting i read has been quoting stuff like that rather than actually expressing the get on with brexit sentiment themselves. But then i havent read too widely so i could easily have missed something

 

eta: just to clarify, i don’t agree with Miller, i just think the “spin” in the media is understandable when people in labour are saying stuff like this

But then again, look where those seats went. At least one of them went Green, didn't it?

That's a really weird way of expressing your support for Brexit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

But then again, look where those seats went. At least one of them went Green, didn't it?

That's a really weird way of expressing your support for Brexit.

Who would a Brexit voter vote for in these elections? ( excluding the permanently damaged UKIP)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how the Kippers are more damaged than Frogface's new party, save for the fact he is better at labelling racist shit. But then again, you are probably one of those who are pretending that Frogface is not a racist, and that his breaking point poster during the referendum was a mere good humored capaign gimmick. :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Not sure how the Kippers are more damaged than Frogface's new party, save for the fact he is better at labelling racist shit. But then again, you are probably one of those who are pretending that Frogface is not a racist, and that his breaking point poster during the referendum was a mere good humored capaign gimmick. :dunno:

Ugh. Sigh.

Anyway, if you were a Brexiteer and favoured simply leaving or felt that the government had not kept its promises, who is your voting option here seeing as there is no Brexit party.

And yes UKIP have moved on and are mostly a confused party of Tommy Robinson’s and Internet trolls, so hard to even call them anything now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, Kippers have always been that way. They have always been a bunch of racists.

Just a small reminder.

 

You can skip the first 7 mins or so. Then he addresses a few of the Kippers of Old.

Yes, Frogface was better at hiding it, by not letting illiterate skinheads like Tommy Robinson in, however a racist with a dictionary, is still a racist.

And his new Party is no different from the old UKIP. Of course Unity Rees-Mogg has better manners, and a better education than Tommy Robinson. But on political substance, there's still very little between UKIP and NewKIP.

So if you are cool with NewKIP you could've just voted UKIP, if you want to send a leave message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UKIP was previously almost a single issue party, it wanted independence from Europe. Of course it was loaded with undesirables and bigots, but because it was a protest vote on a single issue that seemed to stop people being that bothered.

Now I don’t know what UKIP is. Is it the party of anti Islam or something? Not sure anybody knows and they’ve done a very bad job of explaining it themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×