That really is what the numbers from these byelections suggest however it is surely a lot more complicated than that, particularly for Labour.
Labour have problems if they persist in going out and treating this like a fair fight.
I donât know what you are seeing in the result, but to me its screamingly obvious what happened. Nothing about Labourâs polling suggests they were about to lose 7000 votes. Everything about the result suggests everyone who doesnât want the Toryâs to get in rallying behind the Lib Demâs.
In my constituency Labour would have a good chance of winning if the 10,000 people who vote Lib Dem would get the idea that they havenât a cat in hellâs chance of winning!
1 Like
Itâs not like the tories to loose 56% of their vote either thatâs what Iâm getting at. You need to explain both Labours and Tory loss. Itâs for those studying the exit polls and on the ground to fathom it out, then put the numbers together.
Labour voters are much more likely to not vote in a by election than tory voters so Iâd guess a large number of the tory decline went to Libs and a lage portion of Labour voters didnât get out of bed.
Itâs wierd though some non traditional labour seats like constituencies in Exeter remain strong (Plymouth as well).
I agree with @Kopstar that it looks like a lot of Tories didnât turn out.
1 Like
Yet you donât think thatâs what happened to Labour voters even after Hartlepool? 
If Labour had lost a few thousand voters, it would be a concern - they lost all of them, which suggests something else is going on. The greens lost over 50% of their votes too.
Hartlepool (a supposed safe Labour seat) is not Buckinghamshire (where Labour have no chance of winning).
Exactly! 
The thing about Labour voters is they really havenât got anyone else to vote for. In fact they are as likely to vote for the tories as anyone else if they desert Labour.
I suggested some sort of middle ground to Kopstar didnât you notice? Donât you even see that as a possibility?
Of course iâm out of touch with UK politics on the ground and would like to know what the canvassers and exit pollers were picking up but you rarely get that.
Because they face an overwhelmingly right wing media which constantly strives to portray them in a bad light.
1 Like
i can almost buy into that (in Oz) and i used to, but im less inclined to give them any slack anymore, they can play just as dirty and screaming about the press influencing people insinuates a lack of trust in the people you want to persuade to vote for you.
were not all as dumb as dogshit, and the âright wing mediaâ if you scratch the surface dont just attack the non conservatives, they basically complain about everything and anything.
the biggest issue facing labour (ânon conservativesââŚsomehow) and the greens in Australia is that everytime a reslut doesnt go thier way, the narative is that they were robbed by a misinformed public.
people dont like that âblame shiftingâ additude in public servants, its toxicâŚ
just maybe the reason your not being elected is yourselvesâŚi mean, your backing the right horse to win popular votesâŚ(action on climate, action on wage equality and so many other progressive issues that most people are onboard with)âŚ
so perhaps its youâŚperhaps your just shit.
3 Likes
Donât they have problems created by themselves? Itâs a question, not an opinion.
1 Like
That is not entirely true.
Blaire got Labour voted in by using the media to his advantage. The torries are simply playing smarter by using the media and offering them a reason to back them.
If Labour were smart, they would get Murdoch on their side which has been done in the past and use that media influence.
That is the way of life.
Everyone has to/will at some point sell their soul - it merely comes down to how much of your soul you are willing to sell and for what gain
That would involve becoming the Tory Lite party, which is what New Labour was under Tony B Liar.
2 Likes
Speak for yourself! (oh! that didnât come out right did it?) 
To an extent this is true. Though I feel the underlying problem is policy messaging. The âleftâ just can not keep it simple for multiple reasons (they have greater diversity in their ranks so argue more amongst themselves than take on the opposition, the issues that concern them are a lot more complicated than those championed by the ârightâ (or at least the right has simplified their issues to neanderthal levels) âŚ)
Itâs so much easier to start from Immigration thereâs too much, Austerity because running a country is like running a household (and it works just look at those poor people writhing in agony) âŚ
To questions of equality, schooling âŚ
The ârealâ issue boils down to messaging joe public doesnât want to think about these issues they want a clear idea (they do have other things that are much more important to think about like where can they afford to go on holiday this summer?).
Then there is what should be the leveling issue of quality of politicians. They are all as poor as a whole as one another (and we know it) the problem is putting over that message once again. Labour in the UK and for that matter the Socialistes in France do put out excellent manefestos and the canvassers stick to the line given, the problem is the âleftâ havenât been peddling this line for 4 years they agreed to it 4 months ago. The ârightâ stick in their manifesto what they have been peddling for 8 years. The problem comes down to philosophy I think, The âleftâ is built around parlement the ârightâ around doctrine.
Hope you enjoyed that read, pick it to pieces.
Really? David Icke videos next?
Is the source dodgy?