|
Post by stuttgartershrew on May 12, 2015 15:35:53 GMT 1
I just can't see UKIP gaining support from previous LibDem voters. I suspect Labour lost support to UKIP which might well have been supplanted by people coming over from the LibDems. Could be wrong of course, it would be interesting to see how it all worked...but I just couldn't see many moving from LibDem to UKIP.
I reckon if Labour are going to be blind to people moving from Labour to UKIP (and there is good reason to believe they will be) the I think we can expect more of the same in years to come.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on May 12, 2015 15:48:31 GMT 1
I knew there would be a UKIP effect but did not anticipate it would have so much effect on Labour. So it's not just right wingers - it is disaffected working class too. The bitter truth for Labour is that if you appoint an unelectable leader you are toast. They picked the wrong brother. You knew that the morning after.
I agree completely with this - over the last 6 years or so on here and other media sites the derogatory phrase "little Englanders" has been aimed at myself and others with UKIP/Tory stances.
I've seen a lot worse than that said. And since last Thursday to boot. I thought many might have seen the damage it can do to their cause but it appears not... I honestly believe that Labour's desire to 'rub the right's nose in diversity' has well and truly backfired and come back and bit them on the arse. I'm not saying it was the main reason why they failed last Thursday but I have no doubt that it played its part.
|
|
|
Post by QuorndonShrew on May 12, 2015 16:48:12 GMT 1
I agree completely with this - over the last 6 years or so on here and other media sites the derogatory phrase "little Englanders" has been aimed at myself and others with UKIP/Tory stances.
I've seen a lot worse than that said. And since last Thursday to boot. I thought many might have seen the damage it can do to their cause but it appears not... I honestly believe that Labour's desire to 'rub the right's nose in diversity' has well and truly backfired and come back and bit them on the arse. I'm not saying it was the main reason why they failed last Thursday but I have no doubt that it played its part. Labour's campaign over the last year or two has been arrogant quite frankly, and they've been duly punished by the electorate. And you're right, trying to pander to minorities, and particularly the Scots during the referendum, left a very bitter taste in the mouths of a lot of people particularly south of the border. Miliband somehow managed to alienate the traditional working class Labour voter as well as appear anti-business and p*ss off some of Labour's biggest donors. I'll never forget the utter disregard Miliband seemed to show to the English electorate, not once engaging himself in the English votes on English issues debate for fear of being seen to offend the Scots by doing so. Ironic really that in the end the Scots wanted nothing to do with his party and neither did the English. I think the real moment which encapsulated just when and where Labour lost the working class vote was when that snobby mare Emily Thornberry made those snide comments about the amount of St George cross flags in Rochester. A true facepalm moment that I don't think they ever recovered from. The amount of votes UKIP got in the election, despite not transpiring into seats, proves that there is room in the right-wing vote for both UKIP and Tories to co-exist. The scaremongering about UKIP putting Miliband in power by taking away Tory votes never happened and I think most people treated Sturgeon's attempts to self-appoint herself as 'kingmaker' and 'lock Cameron out of number 10' with the contempt it deserved. I think the outcome of the election came down to which of the main parties insulted the electorate's intelligence the least.
|
|
|
Post by camdenshrew on May 12, 2015 16:51:27 GMT 1
Lib Dems switching to UKIP definitely happened. Check out the swing in Redcar and Hull, for example.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 17:08:16 GMT 1
Jew hating, hand licking and general all round scumbag George Galloway rumoured to have lost his seat to Labour. That's what you get when you try and stir racial divisions. Good riddance. It's not over for Gorgeous George yet lad . He has begun legal proceedings to overturn the election result in Bradford West after losing by more than 11,000 votes to the Laboucandidate Naz Shah. Apparently he has uncovered widespread malpractice including postal voting fraud. You just can't keep a good man down Oh , by the way I have noticed in your favourite paper that you can get lovely tshirts for under £20 . I' m thinking of ordering one for you for your birthday . Would you like the Nye Bevan tshirt with " no amount of cajoling can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party . So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin " printed slap bang in the front. Thought it would look good on you , you can wear it when joining Jamo for a pint or two in The Nags . What do you think.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on May 12, 2015 17:09:09 GMT 1
I agree it looks bizarre but I think it can be explained to the extent that it reveals how much the Liberal Democrat vote used to be made up of protest voters rather than people who believed in liberal democracy. Once they went into government, those protest voters found a new home in UKIP. Think that's a good interpretation actually now I come to think of it. Two main parties (Scotland excepted) do seem to have retained much of their core vote from 2010. Labour still strong in the cities and large towns where there vote remained steady or even increased; Conservative in the rural counties and commuter belt Maybe the protest vote is where the floating voters go now with Lib Dems getting that vote last time and UKIP and SNP getting it last time. That doesn't devalue the very valid points that people have made about Labour in particular, and partly the Conservatives, having made errors in being aloof and distant from their core voters, and makes them vulnerable to people switching to a protest vote. If we do now have a four party system it will be quite possible for either Conservative or Labour to win a majority with 35% of the vote, which does mean they don't need to be a countrywide party to get elected anymore. As others have said they just have to make sure to not annoy the remaining 65% of the population as much as their opposition do! Not totally sure that makes for good government though!
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on May 12, 2015 17:30:15 GMT 1
I know I'll get shot down for posting something from the Telegraph... Stop your whinging: why the Left are such bad losersI think there is something in what this lass says though. I've seen plenty of the comments that she describes on newspaper forums and on social media. People will see the reaction and I have no doubt it will influence how they will vote in the future. And I know that is it such a tiny number of people but right or wrong, I do believe that this is how the left (and so Labour) are seen by many people in the UK today and I think many people just don't want to be a apart of that. I think this is why people question who Labour now represent and why others would be willing to turn their back on them.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on May 12, 2015 17:51:43 GMT 1
There's no doubt Labour has lost some of its traditional voting base but I think the ides that Labour has "lost the working class vote" is a wild exaggeration.
Look at Labour's performance in our cities and you wouldn't say that. Maybe you'd refine that to say it's the white working class vote that's been lost. But then there's an interesting map comparison I saw today. One shows the old mining areas in England & Wales, the other the distribution of Labour seats after the election. The correlation is remarkable. No evidence of a loss of the working class vote there.
Labour let the coalition claim success on their handling of the economy when their record is really not very impressive at all. They were never going to win on immigration but then neither could the Tories because, for all the bluster, EU immigration can't be stopped and Cameron was always going to fail to meet his ridiculous, random 100,000 target.
But Labour has undoubtedly lost some voters to Ukip, especially in the Midlands it seems. Once the EU referendum is over and if people do feel the benefits of an improved economy, I would expect immigration to be much less of an issue in 2020 (and it wasn't as big an issue this time as some expected).
But you can't appeal to everyone and I think it's more important for Labour to win the centre ground than to try to out-tough others on immigration. Attempting to chase a traditional working class vote that Labour already has in some places and that barely exists these days in others would be a big mistake. Labour has to increase its appeal amongst the middle classes as well.
I never believed that Ukip was inherently racist but there's no doubt there are some very unpleasant racists amongst them - you've only got to read some of the Twitter feeds since the election to see that. If they used to be Labour voters (and I have my doubts about that), I'd rather not attempt to win them back.
Regardless of political persuasion, this was a very unsatisfactory election for a modern democracy. Too many people have been left isolated by our antiquated electoral system. We need compulsory voting, some form of proportional representation and no more safe seats. Unless we change, the process of public disengagement with politics can only increase.
|
|
|
Post by atcham jack on May 12, 2015 18:29:17 GMT 1
are labour finished? they a hit after right to buy came in with Maggie. they will take another hit when right to buy housing association houses comes in.
with Liberals already gaining 10K new members since Friday, I suspect their fight back has begun. it will not happen in my life time, but I see Libs replacing lab within 20 years as opposition. lab will be in wilderness for ages, IMO
|
|
|
Post by sussexshrew on May 12, 2015 19:43:59 GMT 1
In an earlier post, Martin B accused "Labour Supporters" on this board of accepting the spin that got Tony Blair Elected and kept him in power, but condemning Cameron's "tactics" as dirty tricks. Sorry Martin, I think you are completely wrong. I believe that the majority of the "Labour supporters" on this board do not accept the spin of Tony Blair that got him elected and kept him in power. So spin had nothing to do with the election victories it was all down to Labour policies then? Martin, You obviously did not get my point. I said quite clearly that I, to my shame, voted for Blair first time around because I believed his spin. So of course the spin got him elected and kept him elected, although not thanks to my vote after the first time. What I said was that most labour supporters on this board do NOT accept his spin.. they see it now as spin, and don't like it... as neither do they like Tory spin referred to as tactics. If you read my post again you will see that I am saying that Labour supporters here don't accept his spin... NOT that they don't accept that he spun. Of course we know he did... and we dislike him and his close coterie because of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 20:58:48 GMT 1
The rise in the Conservative and Labour vote certainly doesn’t suggest a swing to UKIP from these parties, though of course some disaffected Con/Lab voters will have.
I think that a lot of people who had not voted before, or lapsed, may have swelled the numbers of UKIP voters. Disaffected Lib Dem voters may have gone Green as might left leaning Labourites who believe in Social Democracy.
I think something that a lot of people on here are missing is how Labour tried (in some areas of their policy) to out Tory the Tories. Producing mugs about cutting immigration for example. It was like the Labour campaign was actually lead by the press as opposed to Labour party policy makers. There appeared to be no real coherent policy, just a load of reactionary stuff.
To somebody like me who is sympathetic to the Labour cause and their values, from a historical point of view, it is mildly frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 12, 2015 21:04:20 GMT 1
I know I'll get shot down for posting something from the Telegraph... Stop your whinging: why the Left are such bad losersI think there is something in what this lass says though. I've seen plenty of the comments that she describes on newspaper forums and on social media. People will see the reaction and I have no doubt it will influence how they will vote in the future. And I know that is it such a tiny number of people but right or wrong, I do believe that this is how the left (and so Labour) are seen by many people in the UK today and I think many people just don't want to be a apart of that. I think this is why people question who Labour now represent and why others would be willing to turn their back on them. Genuine question. How is The austerity programme of The British Government affecting your and your families lives in mainland Europe ?
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on May 12, 2015 21:42:37 GMT 1
I know I'll get shot down for posting something from the Telegraph... Stop your whinging: why the Left are such bad losersI think there is something in what this lass says though. I've seen plenty of the comments that she describes on newspaper forums and on social media. People will see the reaction and I have no doubt it will influence how they will vote in the future. And I know that is it such a tiny number of people but right or wrong, I do believe that this is how the left (and so Labour) are seen by many people in the UK today and I think many people just don't want to be a apart of that. I think this is why people question who Labour now represent and why others would be willing to turn their back on them. Is that not trivialising the issue to a certain extent, not to mention once again conveniently shifting focus from the real source of people's anger? The \tory election strategy was essentially spearheaded by an aggressive press campaign to ridicule Ed Milliband (sample headline from the print edition of the Daily Mail a couple of days before the election: " do you really want this clown ruling us?" www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3059492/A-meeting-minds-Labour-leader-Ed-Miliband-chats-tax-non-voting-comic-Russell-Brand-candles-burn-smart-East-London-kitchen.html). We had bacon sandwich-gate, two kitchens-gate and Paxman's assertion that Milliband was nothing but a 'North London geek' who Vladimir Putin would wipe the floor with in a fight, amongst others. The pro-Tory press' argument basically ran along the lines that Milliband was a bit creepy, and hung around with other reprobates like that uncouth Russell Brand. Analysis of the real issues at hand was in short supply (as it is now). So how are we now supposed to believe that the Tories, who ran such a bitter, vindictive campaign are now such sensitive souls? The reality is that the chatter on Facebook and Twitter is no different to the reams of nonsense that fills up social media every day; the thousands and thousands of words from people on the right moaning about the EU or immigrants, people of all persuasions complaining about 'benefit scroungers', religious nutters decrying gay people and assorted links to made up or wildly exaggerated news stories expressly designed to generate outrage amongst a particular demographic (and pictures of cats of course). By and large, that's what a lot of social media appears to be; one great big hate fest, with a slice of triviality on the side. Needs to be taken with a shovel or two of salt. It certainly would have been no different if Labour had won. Lumping all legitimate criticism and expressions of discontent with the otucome of the election and concerns for the future in with social media ramblings is plainly disingenuous. It strikes me that this curious reaction from the Tory press and their acolytes (I'm aware the article was written by a Labour voter, talking here about the number of instances of this line of argument that have come up in recent days) is borne largely of embarrassment at how plainly unpopular their minority view is and how starkly it shines a light on the absurdity of the FPTP system. It would be nice to hear somebody actually offer some hope for the future, actually reach out and try to reassure the vast number of people out there who are afraid for their futures (or those of others) that things won't be so bad. Instead we're told simply to put up and shut up. The thing which still baffles me about this election is how the Tories managed to pull of the sleight of hand that convinced 'ordinary' voters that they were in their corner (if that's really what happened at all). I've yet to hear anyone offer a convincing argument for how things will improve under a Tory government for those of us in the 'squeezed middle'. Of course, a Labour government would have made little difference. But what would likely have been different under a Labour (or probably just not Tory) government would have been the lot of society's most vulnerable. I, like many others it seems, have absolutely no faith in the intentions of persons such as IDS and Gove and the fact that they will be entrusted with crucial decisions on wellfare reform and re-writnig of our human rights legislation fills me with dread. It seems to me that, by and large, the election wasn't really won on the promise of improvement. Most parties seemed to offer a fairly bleak (or lukewarn at best) view of the future. Optimism was at a premium. What the Tories did appear to offer though, was the opportunity to punish a few bogey men; single mums with big houses on benefits, unemployed layabouts claiming benefits, foreign people coming here to claim benefits (basically anyone on benefits) and, inexplicably, people such as nurses, teachers and fire fighters, working very long hours, often on low pay, to educate our children, look after our sick and save us from burning buildings. That's the real tragedy of this election and the real source of many people's anger. That it was decided on a spiteful wish to punish those less fortunate who were perceived to be getting better treatment or supposedly cossetted public sector workers who don't know they're born, as opposed to the desire to build a better future. Would love to be proved wrong, but nothing I've seen or heard before or since the election has convinced me otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on May 12, 2015 21:46:57 GMT 1
That's just too long Frankwell our kid, I can't be reading all that...
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on May 12, 2015 21:52:36 GMT 1
That's just too long Frankwell our kid, I can't be reading all that... To be honest, Stutty, it's that sort of attitude that landed us here in the first place. Far too many people easily swayed by soundbites and context-free headline figures, not enough thought.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on May 12, 2015 22:05:00 GMT 1
I know I'll get shot down for posting something from the Telegraph... Stop your whinging: why the Left are such bad losersI think there is something in what this lass says though. I've seen plenty of the comments that she describes on newspaper forums and on social media. People will see the reaction and I have no doubt it will influence how they will vote in the future. And I know that is it such a tiny number of people but right or wrong, I do believe that this is how the left (and so Labour) are seen by many people in the UK today and I think many people just don't want to be a apart of that. I think this is why people question who Labour now represent and why others would be willing to turn their back on them. Genuine question. How is The austerity programme of The British Government affecting your and your families lives in mainland Europe ? The vast majority of my family lives in England. So how is it effecting your life and your families lives? And why would you think it effects my family any differently? Or are you suggesting that because I'm over here I'm in no position to comment on such things? If you are then it's OK just to come out and say it...
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on May 12, 2015 22:11:17 GMT 1
That's just too long Frankwell our kid, I can't be reading all that... To be honest, Stutty, it's that sort of attitude that landed us here in the first place. Far too many people easily swayed by soundbites and context-free headline figures, not enough thought. Either that or they've had a 12 hour shift at work and have half an eye on Bayern v Barca on the box...
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on May 12, 2015 22:13:37 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on May 12, 2015 22:26:55 GMT 1
No demotion is too big for Grant Shapps but this is a good attempt. Still find it hard to square the fact that this buffoon is cousin to Mick Jones, once of the Clash, but then you don't get to choose your family. Ha! I know, I was surprised when I heard that, too.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on May 12, 2015 22:35:21 GMT 1
I've read through about the first ten pages of comments and I'm not really getting that at all. One or two calling her silly, one or two telling her she should accept the result but other than that I'm not seeing a great deal of abuse being thrown her way.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on May 12, 2015 22:44:40 GMT 1
I've read through about the first ten pages of comments and I'm not really getting that at all. One or two calling her silly, one or two telling her she should accept the result but other than that I'm not seeing a great deal of abuse being thrown her way. Think she got the abuse via her twitter account. Katie Hopkins got involved and it all got a bit personal from there I've always been a big fan of political satire on tv and in print - its a great British tradition going back centuries. But I'm starting to wonder if we are a bit to keen to mock politicians now rather than listen to what they are actually saying Listening to Dead Ringers on Radio 4 - Cameron was a rich posh boy who wanted to get voted out so he could earn money in the city; Milliband was constantly teased by his more successful brother; Clegg was trying to hang out with the cool kids and Farage and Natallie Bennett were racists and immigrants. Quite a funny show actually, but if we constantly mock every politician or someone expressing a political opinion it's maybe not the best way to build up our knowledge and advance debate on subjects
|
|
|
Post by QuorndonShrew on May 12, 2015 22:48:04 GMT 1
I'm starting to think frankwellshrews is a parody account. No one could possibly be that self-righteous.
Come on own up, who is it?
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on May 12, 2015 23:17:22 GMT 1
"...on the side of people who want to get on and do well"
Chuka Umunna proving Simon Hoggart's dictum that any political utterance is nonsense if no one could disagree with the opposite.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on May 12, 2015 23:31:23 GMT 1
I've read through about the first ten pages of comments and I'm not really getting that at all. One or two calling her silly, one or two telling her she should accept the result but other than that I'm not seeing a great deal of abuse being thrown her way. Think she got the abuse via her twitter account. Katie Hopkins got involved and it all got a bit personal from there I've always been a big fan of political satire on tv and in print - its a great British tradition going back centuries. But I'm starting to wonder if we are a bit to keen to mock politicians now rather than listen to what they are actually saying Listening to Dead Ringers on Radio 4 - Cameron was a rich posh boy who wanted to get voted out so he could earn money in the city; Milliband was constantly teased by his more successful brother; Clegg was trying to hang out with the cool kids and Farage and Natallie Bennett were racists and immigrants. Quite a funny show actually, but if we constantly mock every politician or someone expressing a political opinion it's maybe not the best way to build up our knowledge and advance debate on subjects Not sure if it was Mark Radcliffe or Stuart Maconie who observed that the only satire that ever changed anything was Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse as Dave Nice and Mike Smash - Radio 1 cleared out its time-warped DJs almost overnight. Don't know if that's the only occasion but it's a good point. Satire generally tickles and flatters the powerful rather than genuinely subverting the established order. Good on Charlotte Church anyway. It's not easy to raise your head above the parapet when you know the trolls will be at you for daring to express your opinions.
|
|
|
Post by QuorndonShrew on May 13, 2015 0:17:40 GMT 1
Think she got the abuse via her twitter account. Katie Hopkins got involved and it all got a bit personal from there I've always been a big fan of political satire on tv and in print - its a great British tradition going back centuries. But I'm starting to wonder if we are a bit to keen to mock politicians now rather than listen to what they are actually saying Listening to Dead Ringers on Radio 4 - Cameron was a rich posh boy who wanted to get voted out so he could earn money in the city; Milliband was constantly teased by his more successful brother; Clegg was trying to hang out with the cool kids and Farage and Natallie Bennett were racists and immigrants. Quite a funny show actually, but if we constantly mock every politician or someone expressing a political opinion it's maybe not the best way to build up our knowledge and advance debate on subjects Not sure if it was Mark Radcliffe or Stuart Maconie who observed that the only satire that ever changed anything was Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse as Dave Nice and Mike Smash - Radio 1 cleared out its time-warped DJs almost overnight. Don't know if that's the only occasion but it's a good point. Satire generally tickles and flatters the powerful rather than genuinely subverting the established order. I don't think too much to most of Harry and Paul's new stuff but the Question Time and panel show sketches are brilliant. A fantastic depiction of the endless churning out of mundane panel shows rife with rich left-wing petty bourgeois 'comedians' that are for the most part not remotely funny.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2015 6:02:51 GMT 1
That's just too long Frankwell our kid, I can't be reading all that... To be honest, Stutty, it's that sort of attitude that landed us here in the first place. Far too many people easily swayed by soundbites and context-free headline figures, not enough thought. Spot on.
|
|
|
Post by Matster on May 13, 2015 7:14:52 GMT 1
David Schneider tweeted this today:
Today's inconsistency play-off:
Government voted for by 37% of voters says only votes of above 40% count to allow a strike.
Also: Equality minister opposed equal marriage.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 13, 2015 7:28:07 GMT 1
Genuine question. How is The austerity programme of The British Government affecting your and your families lives in mainland Europe ? The vast majority of my family lives in England. So how is it effecting your life and your families lives? And why would you think it effects my family any differently? Or are you suggesting that because I'm over here I'm in no position to comment on such things? If you are then it's OK just to come out and say it... Certainly not suggesting in any way that you are not in a position to comment - hence the preface ' genuine question' . The point I was trying to make - obviously clumsily - was that you seem particularly anti any form of opposition to the austerity programme of this country and that it could be viewed that this is a comfortable position to take if you are not directly affected by its effects. I take the point of course about your wider family living here.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 13, 2015 7:35:51 GMT 1
The idea that within Shropshire that any local authority is corrupt is clearly written with the intent to offend and not report any accurate assessment of the truth. Equally so is the reference to council employee's salaries.
|
|
|
Post by ssshrew on May 13, 2015 8:36:40 GMT 1
It seems bizarre to me that some posters on this thread can't be bothered to read replies from other posters particularly when they are replying to their post!! Why bother to come on it then?
|
|