Major shock in Copeland by election..

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:59 am

The Tories have taken this safe Labour seat off Labour..[2147 majority]..a 2 -horse race...a massive result for the Tories.

- earlier, Labour held Stoke Central.

A pretty poor night for UKIP.

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:33 am

That's no shock. The shock is that Corbyn hung on to Stoke. When will he go? I don't think he'll ever go.

Saxoman · Post by **Saxoman** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:44 am

Another kick in the teeth for the poor.

Right_winger · Post by **Right_winger** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 6:07 am

When will people realise that there is no party representing the working man. They are all in it for themselves.

BennyD · Post by **BennyD** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 6:08 am

That's politics.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 6:34 am

Says a lot about the "dignified " Mr Nuttall that he was beaten by the current Labour Party.

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 7:35 am

Says a lot about the state of Corbyns Labour Party that he can hang on to this seat by only two thousand votes against an absolute scumbag like Nuttall.

TheOriginalLongsider · Post by **TheOriginalLongsider** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 8:19 am

Saxoman wrote:Another kick in the teeth for the poor.

Were the poor not allowed to vote?

It was won on local issues, mainly that 20,000 people work in the nuclear industry in the area and Corbin is anti-nuclear

Also what is this "working man" stuff. Are the conservatives only supported by landowning gentry ?

NottsClaret · Post by **NottsClaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 8:37 am

All good fun this Corbyn thing. Until Labour is completely wiped out and the Tories are in charge for decades.

But remember that rally in Liverpool... at least 10,000 there. Momentum. A new politics..

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 8:51 am

TheOriginalLongsider wrote:Were the poor not allowed to vote?

It was won on local issues, mainly that 20,000 people work in the nuclear industry in the area and Corbin is anti-nuclear

Also what is this "working man" stuff. Are the conservatives only supported by landowning gentry ?

Spot on post.

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:26 am

post 2 dermotdermot..you say - 'That's no shock'..

Really? A Labour MP just described the result on BBC 5 live as 'catastrophic'..

I would say that to lose a parliamentary seat that you have held for 80 years, was a shock.

'The Conservatives have won the Copeland by-election, beating Labour in an area it represented for more than 80 years.
Trudy Harrison won with 13,748 votes to Labour's Gillian Troughton's 11,601.
Mrs Harrison hailed the victory - the first by-election gain by a governing party since 1982 - as "a truly historic event".' BBC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39064149" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lucs86 · Post by **lucs86** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:34 am

The first by-election gain by a governing party since 1982. Wow, the local nuclear issue isn't going to repeat elsewhere, but that's got to be a big worry

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:45 am

hampsteadclaret wrote:post 2 dermotdermot..you say - 'That's no shock'..

Really? A Labour MP just described the result on BBC 5 live as 'catastrophic'..

I would say that to lose a parliamentary seat that you have held for 80 years, was a shock.

Maybe dermotdermot should have qualified his comment by saying: "That's no shock to anyone living in the real world with their finger on the pulse".
Labour is in crisis under Corbyn nationally, and were defending a fairly slim majority in Copeland.
To try to hold onto a seat whose constituents are virtually entirely dependent on the nuclear industry with a leader who has a history of being vociferously anti-nuclear, and who, throughout the campaign was at best "lukewarm", it was always likely to be difficult.
It is true that the nhs situation in that constituency should have played into Labour's hands, but it would appear that at the end of the day the voters have chosen protection of their jobs over the nhs.

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:52 am

Watched the Labour bloke take Stoke last night.... I was hoping for a sign of a "new" Labour (not a New Labour) to take the party forward... so we could start to have a democracy again in the future... instead the impression given was another its another Champagne socialist, offering nothing but sound bites, self congratulation and mis-placed smugness. I've taken little interest in the build up and couldn't have picked him out of a line up before last night, but sorry different face same old.

I think a much more relevant result was the Cumbrian one. Labour seat for living memory, mainly working class area rejecting Labour's sudden switch to pro Nuclear power (I'm sure it is genuine not opportunist). The kind of result not seen since the 40's never mind the 80's. The Labour party need to sort it and quickly this current regime is REALLY bad for democracy and the country. WE NEED AN OPPOSITION, WE NEED A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE to chose.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:01 am

elwaclaret wrote:Watched the Labour bloke take Stoke last night.... I was hoping for a sign of a "new" Labour (not a New Labour) to take the party forward... so we could start to have a democracy again in the future... instead the impression given was another its another Champagne socialist, offering nothing but sound bites, self congratulation and mis-placed smugness. I've taken little interest in the build up and couldn't have picked him out of a line up before last night, but sorry different face same old.

I think a much more relevant result was the Cumbrian one. Labour seat for living memory, mainly working class area rejecting Labour's sudden switch to pro Nuclear power (I'm sure it is genuine not opportunist). The kind of result not seen since the 40's never mind the 80's. The Labour party need to sort it and quickly this current regime is REALLY bad for democracy and the country. WE NEED AN OPPOSITION, WE NEED A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE to chose.

No different than when Michael Foot was in opposition unfortunately.

Mind you, the Tories had the same issues when William Hague was their leader.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:03 am

You should read the tweets from Corybnistas this morning.

Its all "Hitler bunker syndrome" and a mixture of hilarious and horrifying.

Only high point of the night was UKIP proving that there is nowhere for them to go.

Mind you, they can all go back to being Tories, what with them now effectively UKIP lite

Frenchclaret · Post by **Frenchclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:05 am

[quote="nil_desperandum"
It is true that the nhs situation in that constituency should have played into Labour's hands, but it would appear that at the end of the day the voters have chosen protection of their jobs over the nhs.[/quote]

Frankly, if you were a doctor in the NHS would you choose to go and live with your family and work next to a nuclear plant ?

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:12 am

elwaclaret wrote:Watched the Labour bloke take Stoke last night.... I was hoping for a sign of a "new" Labour (not a New Labour) to take the party forward... so we could start to have a democracy again in the future... instead the impression given was another its another Champagne socialist, .....

In what sense is Snell a "Champagne Socialist"? How do you define "Champagne Socialist"?
He is a local man, who has come through the local Labour Party, and been elected as a local councillor, and then elected as Leader of one of the local borough councils. He was then democratically elected / adopted as the Labour candidate for the by-election by his local constituency party, and democratically elected yesterday.
Apart form his clearly misguided and inappropriate comments about women, he seemed to be a fairly good fit for this seat, and certainly had far more in in common with his electorate than his predecessor - Tristram Hunt.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:14 am

One thing that Lab have improved a lot recently is selecting local people to be MP candidates.

Thats one thing in a sea of stupid, utterly crass decisions mind.

RocketLawnChair · Post by **RocketLawnChair** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:18 am

I just think the whole political spectrum is dull in this country these days and needs livening up a bit, like the good old U S of A.

I think we should change the entire constitution and go all left field when electing PMs. Perhaps we could go for a Louie Spence or Liam Gallagher next, or maybe even Frank Bruno.

It would be great !!

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:24 am

And its worth pointing out that in Copeland, whose only hospital is about to become a "Minor incident unit", that people probably voted for someone who stood for local issues and selected national ones.

Corybn is toxic. He lives in a bubble and believes in stuff that won't win elections in this country.

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:27 am

Spijed wrote:No different than when Michael Foot was in opposition unfortunately.

Mind you, the Tories had the same issues when William Hague was their leader.

Totally agree with your comments re: Michael Foot (I make the comparison on the thread for the Stoke bi-election). For the record I'm political but not party political. I loved Foot, he was genuine in his belief's, extremely intelligent and a very brave man (during the war he was a covert assassin). But he was completely out of touch with the populace over Nuclear and most importantly to the press looked scruffy and was thus unelectable - Bang on the money its history repeating itself.

For the record I think had he come 20 years earlier or 20 years later Foot would have made a brilliant PM (at least for a term), but now that ship has long sailed again.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:35 am

Labour can't keep blaming the press though.

Corbyn is an unelectable disaster because he's an unelectable disaster.

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:36 am

nil_desperandum wrote:In what sense is Snell a "Champagne Socialist"? How do you define "Champagne Socialist"?
He is a local man, who has come through the local Labour Party, and been elected as a local councillor, and then elected as Leader of one of the local borough councils. He was then democratically elected / adopted as the Labour candidate for the by-election by his local constituency party, and democratically elected yesterday.
Apart form his clearly misguided and inappropriate comments about women, he seemed to be a fairly good fit for this seat, and certainly had far more in in common with his electorate than his predecessor - Tristram Hunt.

As I say I was going off the impression I got from last night (I hadn't followed the campaign) but although I realise he lives in Stoke, is married to a local girl and is based in the City (I am willing to accept for the long haul) he was brought up in the South (Sussex I think they said) and his all demeanour last night screamed SAME OLD SAME OLD to me as a passive observer. Right or wrong that is the impression he gave me. I was hoping for inspiration and turned off thinking smug bastaard TBH.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:49 am

Fair enough, elwa, but it's not Sussex it's Suffolk - which is somewhat different in character, and he studied at Keele, which is fairly local to the Potteries. Then he became a Trade unionist, and settled in the Potteries.
He was leader of Newcastle Borough Council, which is about 3 miles from his new seat, not as some of his ignorant detractors claimed, up on the River Tyne!
(I haven't as yet heard his victory speech so can't comment on his demeanour).

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:53 am

The problem with Mr C is the lack of overt leadership to carry a nation.

Chobulous · Post by **Chobulous** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 10:55 am

The quinoa and sun dried tomato munchers will be out in force at Saturday night dinner parties in Islington this weekend smugly celebrating the fact that they didn't lose both by-elections. Corbyn will continue head down in the sand bearing his arse to the world while the rest of the PLP will stay muttering in their foxholes and nothing will change until the next general election when Labour will finally be put to the sword. Tragic.

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:08 am

As I think I've said Nil I've not followed it closely but watched last night hoping for a breath of fresh air from the new MP.... it didn't happen.
But thanks for the background far more detailed than I could have hoped to offer. (and there is NO sarcasm intended in this post).

Stockbrokerbelt · Post by **Stockbrokerbelt** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:21 am

Jimmy Saville has more chance being named a saint than Corbyn has of being PM, the 70's university politics that untrustworthy scruffy git spouts does not fit with the world of today. A long with the last 7 years the Tories have encouraged anyone to have a go at the poor, unemployed & unfit class them as scounger has worked its magic, those with are keeping it & not sharing it.
I've voted & been a member of the labour party & union delegate since i started work but i've never seen such a poor out of touch shower that have grabbed power in the labour party.

NottsClaret · Post by **NottsClaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:28 am

Aye. There were plenty of Corbyinstas on here too at one time. Rather like the modern day Rovers fan, they've all evaporated away now, as though it never happened.

Has the daft old sod gone yet?

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:00 pm

I said many years ago, Ive never left Labour, Labour left me. I still hold the same views, same opinions and same beliefs that I've always held politically.
I doubt Corbyn even knows what a working class man is.

The biggest disappointment is the weak as water dross left in the Labour party. There is no natural leader to take over from Corbyn, just a sad bunch of yes men. I doubt that momentum would care if he never won a general election, they would quite happily live in obscurity, so long as their man was at the helm.
Then there's the danger of the Tories believing that they are winning general elections because they are popular, when in fact it is a choice of the lesser of two evils. The damage could be horrendous.

The answer though, lies in our own hands, we all have a voice and we need to use it.

biggles · Post by **biggles** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:19 pm

it's a shock alright; i'm agreeing with Lancaster! i think Corbyn has some reasonable, laudable ideals [and his 'gang' would strongly support him whatever happens] but, as Lancaster says, he and his ideas are not what the voting public really want. maybe he's outdated and doesn't realise that the UK has changed a great deal since the 1940's. people have greater aspirations these days than merely to be happy just to have a job. a divided labour party is going nowhere. it really needs to adopt a strategy that espouses unity if it actually puts winning a general election above some anachronistic, socialist ideals.

minnieclaret · Post by **minnieclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:32 pm

Britain is and always will be middle of the road.
Blair got in because the Tories had been in for to long.
He stayed in because the tories put up right wing non-entities like Duncan-Smith, Hague and Howard against him.
The tories will stay in because the tory press will never stand for a left wing PM.
It does appear that the public want more diverse parties but as long as we have first past the post the tories will clean up.

Woodleyclaret · Post by **Woodleyclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:35 pm

Corbyn out.He is making Labour unelectable with his failure to address the major concerns to working class voters of mass immigration and housing
Gets far too hung up on the issues in Syria and Brexit and fails to talk about issues he can hammer the Tories about.
Why have we paid compo to terrorists and why are we allowing these Daesh fighters back in ? let them rot in a third world hell hole of their choosing.a

Bacchus · Post by **Bacchus** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:37 pm

This wasn't a shock, at least not in the sense that anyone who has taken a passing interest in politics over the past couple of years should find it shocking. Corbyn has to go, it's really that simple. The problem is that he has to actually step down rather than be challenged, because he will win any leadership contest he stands in due to his entire cult forming most of the Labour membership.

I don't necessarily disagree with a lot of what he says and I'm not sure it's his views or policies that are necessarily the problem. He simply shows no aptitude for leadership and there is no evidence that he has the ability to get Labour's message out to the public in anything resembling a positive manner. The current government leave him open goal after open goal and he 'Ronny Rosenthals' the lot. He probably hasn't been given a fair crack by the media (then again, what Labour leader is?) but he's had his chance now and has proven conclusively that he is unable to effectively lead the party. He doesn't command the respect of his MPs (largely due to his record of voting against the whip himself) and he doesn't poll well among the public. There are absolutely no signs that he could win an election, and even if he did by some miracle manage that there is almost no chance of him heading up a functioning government and uniting the country behind him.

conyoviejo · Post by **conyoviejo** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:49 pm

hampsteadclaret wrote:The Tories have taken this safe Labour seat off Labour..[2147 majority]..a 2 -horse race...a massive result for the Tories.

- earlier, Labour held Stoke Central.

A pretty poor night for UKIP.

On the whole,a pretty poor night for the nation with another Tory getting in.. The country is phooked..

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 1:03 pm

He should go but he won't. I don't think that he'll ever go. He has this chance to re-shape the Labour Party into a party of his own ideals and nothing will stop him. He will plough through to the next election and, by that time, will be so unpopular that Labour won't be just decimated but annihilated. He won't care. He will have laid the foundations for his Labour Party to rise from the dead under younger members of his own ilk. A thoroughly selfish, unreasonable, undemocratic, totally hypocritical and extremely unstable individual.

timshorts · Post by **timshorts** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 1:39 pm

dermotdermot wrote: A thoroughly selfish, unreasonable, undemocratic, totally hypocritical and extremely unstable individual.

So is Trump, but he got elected. Admittedly in a 2-donkey race..............

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:01 pm

post 30..NottsClaret....'There were plenty of Corbyinstas on here too at one time. Rather like the modern day Rovers fan, they've all evaporated away now''

Ha!..

- the problem being here of course Notts, that you are unable to differentiate between posters on here who would vote Labour in normal circumstances [with a decent electable leader]....there are plenty of them... and 'Corbynistas'..you cannot differentiate between the two very different groups so you end up chucking out some vague lame insult, at nobody in particular..that is slack thinking, and a bit pathetic.

If you want to have a go at Corbyn supporters, for backing the wrong horse, then name names..I will then be able to see what sort of credibility you have...how many 'Corbynistas' are you aware of on 'Up the Clarets'?

FWIW...to my mind..there have been very few JC supporters on this forum, since he first got elected.

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:05 pm

IT will be tearing his hair out..................thats if he had any left after the Brexit and Trump wins ! Eventually the left wing will get the message

hampsteadclaret · Post by **hampsteadclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:06 pm

post 37..dermotdermot..you describe JC as 'undemocratic' in that post..

I am no fan of JC but could you please explain clearly how he is 'undemocratic'?..perhaps with some examples..?

NottsClaret · Post by **NottsClaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:26 pm

hampsteadclaret wrote:If you want to have a go at Corbyn supporters, for backing the wrong horse, then name names..I will then be able to see what sort of credibility you have...

Your music threads are pretty good.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:43 pm

Some of these posts really are something else, if you consider yourself a reasonable balanced individual and want the same from your government then I suggest you stop bleating and give JC a go as most/all of the alternatives have proved little more then useless since 79.

mkmel · Post by **mkmel** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:46 pm

I'm sure there are a lot of lifelong Labour supporters like me who will not vote Labour while Corbyn is Leader and who would also rather stick needles in their eyes than vote Tory

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:54 pm

Whoa, Momentum member alert

Everything in team Corbyn is right, its the voters who are wrong.

South West Claret. · Post by **South West Claret.** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 2:58 pm

mkmel wrote:I'm sure there are a lot of lifelong Labour supporters like me who will not vote Labour while Corbyn is Leader and who would also rather stick needles in their eyes than vote Tory

Well if you feel that way go and join the dim-libs.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:46 pm

mkmel wrote:I'm sure there are a lot of lifelong Labour supporters like me who will not vote Labour while Corbyn is Leader and who would also rather stick needles in their eyes than vote Tory

It's this kind of unthinking ignorance that allowed the Labour party to stagnate into the mess it is today.

You've got the Labour Party your dictum deserves mkmel.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:52 pm

Rowls wrote:It's this kind of unthinking ignorance that allowed the Labour party to stagnate into the mess it is today.

You've got the Labour Party your dictum deserves mkmel.

Isn't it a political cycle though.

Could the Tories get much lower than when they appointed William Hague (bit of a laughing stock as leader) and then IDS? Yet over time, once New Labour had finished their cycle, it was the turn of David Cameron to at least get his foot partially in the door (via a coalition).

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:59 pm

Yes it is partly a cycle spijed but I don't think you've got the point I was making.

mkmel always trots out his silly "NEVER vote Conservative" line. But people should vote for the party who best represents their interests or reflects their opinions.

The idea that you should NEVER vote for a party simply just "because" and without reasoning is anathema to proper political debate. I'd happily vote for a Labour candidate if they abandoned the failed doctrine of socialism, accepted the idea of the nation state, were willing to back nuclear energy, trident, lower taxes, work to help businesses etc etc.

We should save partisanship for football. When it comes to politics we shouldn't care what colour the rosette is, only what the candidates stand for.

That, as he has made apparent on many occasion, is beyond the wit of mkmel.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Fri Feb 24, 2017 4:03 pm

minnieclaret wrote:Britain is and always will be middle of the road.
Blair got in because the Tories had been in for to long.
He stayed in because the tories put up right wing non-entities like Duncan-Smith, Hague and Howard against him.
The tories will stay in because the tory press will never stand for a left wing PM.
It does appear that the public want more diverse parties but as long as we have first past the post the tories will clean up.

That has always been the issue. Two parties fighting their own extremists. The middle of the road is right, and the party that wins the fight for those middle Englanders inevitably wins the election.
Jeremy has no hope. He's trying to sell something even a majority of Labour supporters don't want.