| Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| By-Election. | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Nov 20 2015, 11:23 PM (356 Views) | |
| Tytoalba | Nov 20 2015, 11:23 PM Post #1 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There was a bye election in Ashford on Thursday, a Labour held seat, where the previous Labour candidate had won the seat with 53% of the vote. The evening Star newspaper, a strong supporter of Corbyn, said it was a seat they had to win, and the Labour Party canvassed hard to win it again. The very left wing Labour candidate came third third with just 18% of the vote, UKIP were second. and the seat was won by a Conservative party candidate, after four recounts at the demand of the Labour candidate {poor loser}, each recount showing the same result. It was won by just one vote, which just goes to show that every vote counts. Corbyn may have been elected by a big majority, mostly by left wing Londoners, and Unions,, but this result must be disturbing for the party in general. There is another election due in Michael Meacher's old constituency, but it looks as if UKIP may win that one. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 20 2015, 11:35 PM Post #2 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I just looked at the amount of votes cast, 110, 109, 106 Con, UKIP, Lab. Looks like democracy is alive and kicking. And the Lib Dems did well in a constituency very near to me, in fact your post was the first news of any of this that I have seen, which is again a bit of a worry. |
![]() |
|
| Affa | Nov 21 2015, 01:09 AM Post #3 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Turn out 19% ......... and Trog determines it was an anti-Corbyn reaction. More a lack of interest in politics more like. It was won with 725 votes in May. It is a Conservative led Council ......... not a popular one it would seem. |
![]() |
|
| Opinionater | Nov 21 2015, 10:01 AM Post #4 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Lin Dems got 42 not yet the come back kids The conservative winner was just 19 UKIP candidate defected from Labour http://www.kentonline.co.uk/ashford/news/youngest-conservative-councillor-wins-by-election-46672/ Edited by Opinionater, Nov 21 2015, 10:02 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Tytoalba | Nov 21 2015, 01:05 PM Post #5 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Its a democratic decision. with each party having the same chances. and Labour lost big time. I wonder what the excuses will be in Oldham West and Royton when that parliamentary bye election is held, Michael Meacher's Old seat. What will be Labours chances when the boundary commission makes the recommended changes to Parliamentary boundaries.? |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 21 2015, 01:52 PM Post #6 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Nice to see you tacitly approving of gerrymandering. Still that just shows your alleged democratic principles up for what they really are, non existent! |
![]() |
|
| Tytoalba | Nov 21 2015, 02:43 PM Post #7 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The boundary commission is independent of Government of the day. They have made recommendations to equalise each constituency, and to reduce the number of MPs overall, in light of devolution and devolved powers. If you can identify any gerrymandering there go ahead and identify it please. For your further education http://https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_Commissions_(United_Kingdom Please not it was set up by a Labour Government. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 21 2015, 04:55 PM Post #8 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If the independent Commission changes boundaries according to what they think is fair and proper and Labour lose seats then according to their Tribalists that is proof positive of gerrymandering. Only elections of their tribe are acceptable. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 21 2015, 10:35 PM Post #9 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You really should read your own links because I tend to also read them! Here is the crucial stuff you were probably unaware of, each commission may make recommendations, one way to get the right sort of recommendations is to stuff each commission with your mates, that said ultimately the Secretary of State has the power to say either yes or no, now call me a cynic here but do you really think a Labour/Conservative SOS is going to let past anything that might disadvantage his own party? NO! |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 22 2015, 12:12 AM Post #10 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Are you saying you wish to retain a system where in 2010 Manchester Central had 85,522 registered voters while Glasgow North had just 50,588? Wouldn't actually that be gerrymandering? |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 22 2015, 12:41 AM Post #11 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Tribalists? Irony overload. Who's posts contain analogies to righties being big strong cave-dwelling warriors? What a joke. Stop self-projecting this "I am man I am beast" drivel on others. The boundaries commission's report has been heavily criticised by the electoral reform society. I won't waste your time with links as you don't read them so best educate yourself before spouting more unsubstantiated Old Blue Nag drivel. |
![]() |
|
| Tigger | Nov 22 2015, 01:00 AM Post #12 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Possibly, but the point is this is not a democratic process and is entirely at the whim of the secretary of state. It's clear the process open to partisan shenanigans, the temptation to split a large and solid seat into two safe and solid seats and of course vice versa, is just too tempting. |
![]() |
|
| The Buccaneer | Nov 22 2015, 01:22 AM Post #13 |
|
Regular Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
When it only took around 43k votes to elect a Labour MP against 74k to get a conservative one, I'd say that situation needed sorting, and it would have been last time around had the LibDims not reneged on an agreement to hold an AV referendum, which they comprehensively lost, hence their snotty abandonment of that agreement. I hope it happens this time around, along with a wholesale reform of the HOL. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 22 2015, 01:25 AM Post #14 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
This by-election result is a total non story anyway. Despite Corbyn's effing banal statement to the contrary, this 'by-election' proves nada. It is a tiny fraction in Tory dominated Kent which is usually solid blue. |
![]() |
|
| Lewis | Nov 22 2015, 08:21 AM Post #15 |
|
Senior Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I know, the biggest tribalist of all whinges about tribalism. If it wasn't so hypocritical it would be laughable. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 22 2015, 09:06 AM Post #16 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You are very inventive in providing good reasons not to engage your brain. Concentrate on the matter in hand and that is why would anyone consider the work of the BC to be gerrymandering. Then look at the types that make such foolish claims. Slowly but surely, however I expect the Penny might drop in a decade or so, you will begin to understand. What this has to do with men or beasts is beyond my comprehension. You are free to substantiate your claims, but I will not follow your links unless you first point out that which you believe to be proof positive as thus far I have found these are often a complete waste of my valuable time. You have to understand one does not judge so-called evidence by the number of links one can post on this forum. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 22 2015, 12:21 PM Post #17 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No and they don't judge so called evidence based on your tribal opinions either. Go and read the electoral reform society's critique or don't, but if you don't then best zip your blabbermouth if able. |
![]() |
|
| Steve K | Nov 22 2015, 12:41 PM Post #18 |
|
Once and future cynic
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You sure you wrote that right? |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 22 2015, 04:07 PM Post #19 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see no substance here. Do you understand the meaning of that word. Do I have to explain to you how grown up debate is carried out? It would seem so! Put up evidence not just waste other peoples time with a bunch of un-researched links. Then expect someone to try and knock those claims down for the sport of it. |
![]() |
|
| skwirked | Nov 22 2015, 04:13 PM Post #20 |
|
On Enforced Vacation
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
More waste of time replies, you call this sport? You must be very interesting to know IRL. |
![]() |
|
| RJD | Nov 22 2015, 04:17 PM Post #21 |
|
Prudence and Thrift
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
You are the one being goaded into providing some substance for your claims. Unless you put such up they you are only here to chat. I am not interested in chat only destroying the claims of others, particularly those emanating from the lhs, in the same way I expect adversaries to attempt to destroy mine. That is what debate is for. Unfortunately there a few on here who actually ever bother with substance and you certainly are not one of them. Up your game. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic » |




![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)



8:29 AM Jul 11