ForumGarden

I am asking before the results,but can anything be read into the results of these local elections.

Every anti-Corbynist is going to have a damn good try.

I am very Pro-Corbyn, but putting that aside the ones that are doing most harm to the party are the die-hard Blairites who continue to deride him, trying to force splits in the Party, despite his record mandate. In my opinion, if they cannot support a democratically elected leader, then they should resign their membership from the Party. Not only are they dividing the Party, but they are promoting lack of confidence in Labour support in general & losing votes as a consequence.

As to being able to tell anything from it. That's not as straightforward as it seems. These are Council elections, as opposed to Parliamentary ones, and Councils have always tended to lean more towards Labour. Even at the last election when Southampton Itchen got Royston Smith (Con), in what was previously considered a safe seat, the Local Elections, which were held at the same time returned an overwhelming support for a Labour Council.

If there is anything to be seen, I think it should be more a case of the swing of number of votes, rather than seats held / gained / lost. Even then, as the Election Results have been saying, the question lies in where you compare the changes from.

I notice the words "Principled Leadership" at Cheadle Hulme South Councillor Joins Labour - Vote Labour 5th May

A shameful and dishonest chap just switched parties on the day of the vote, and a shameful and dishonest Stockport Labour Party was so prepped for it that their press release webpage was ready to go online.

My decision to change party says more about the Stockport Labour Group than it does about the Stockport Lib Dem Group.

Indeed it does, Mr Bodsworth. It says the Stockport Labour Group is prepared to lie to the electorate. As are you.

Apologize and resign, you're not fit for public office.

So far it appears to me that it is no change.

I get the over riding impression that all politicians are, to coin a phrase, self serving, devious, double dealing gobbledegook talking tossers............could be wrong.

Bruv;1495481 wrote: I get the over riding impression that all politicians are, to coin a phrase, self serving, devious, double dealing gobbledegook talking tossers............could be wrong.I do hope that's not me you're insinuating against.

spot;1495482 wrote: I do hope that's not me you're insinuating against.


When did you become a politician ?

When I became leader of a political party?

spot;1495485 wrote: When I became leader of a political party?


Was your election to leader unanimous ?

I led the field of contenders, let's put it that way.

Bruv;1495481 wrote: So far it appears to me that it is no change.

I get the over riding impression that all politicians are, to coin a phrase, self serving, devious, double dealing gobbledegook talking tossers............could be wrong.


Umm, could be, but I kinda doubt it.

spot;1495491 wrote: I led the field of contenders, let's put it that way.


Can I ask, how big was your mandate?... in numbers.

Bruv;1495500 wrote: Can I ask, how big was your mandate?... in numbers.


Goodlord no. You'd need to be on the National Executive Council to ask that and even then you'd be unlikely to get an answer.

spot;1495502 wrote: Goodlord no. You'd need to be on the National Executive Council to ask that and even then you'd be unlikely to get an answer.


Not very transparent your party is it?

I'm not sure what you mean by transparent.

We'll not go into any election without a complete manifesto promise for all the legislative changes we intend to make during the term.

Can you think of any party which discusses its internal administrative processes in public? What would be transparent, against which you're judging this as non-transparent? Who's set the bar you'd like me to jump over?

The Cornwall and Devon PCC result is in. How some people get from one day to the next puzzles me sometimes.

The difference on the first preference votes between the highest and second-highest placed candidate was under 3,000, and under 4,000 on the final tally.

The number of Spoiled ballot papers was 9,530. Few of these were people writing "cobblers" over the paper in disgust, these really are 9,530 people turning out to vote and then messing up the boxes. How do they do it?

Voting for more than one candidate as to the first preference vote 3,375

Writing or mark by which the voter could be identified 10

Unmarked as to the first preference vote 2,961

Void for uncertainty as to the first preference vote 3,183

Beyond comprehension.

You do know there were more important elections going on today as well don't you?

Someone said there were some foreigners squabbling about having an absolute majority in a far-flung regional assembly on the outskirts of civilization, I forget which.

spot;1495520 wrote: Someone said there were some foreigners squabbling about having an absolute majority in a far-flung regional assembly on the outskirts of civilization, I forget which.


:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl The media coverage is incredibly biased, the point about PR is it prevents a small party getting control of a parliament with a minority support but a majority of the seats - like we have just now with the tories or hitler had in 1933. The fact the snp did it once is significant that they can do it a third time falling short by two seats is a comment on how they have actually governed yet the media try and play it as a drubbing. Labour are destroyed and the tories are now the third largest party which is due to the leader they have who wouldn't have a chance of getting anywhere in the partyestablishment had she been in one of the english seats.

It's the unionist parties that keep banging on about a second referendum because they have nothing else to say all they're doing os making it more certain.

spot;1495508 wrote: I'm not sure what you mean by transparent.

We'll not go into any election without a complete manifesto promise for all the legislative changes we intend to make during the term.

Can you think of any party which discusses its internal administrative processes in public? What would be transparent, against which you're judging this as non-transparent? Who's set the bar you'd like me to jump over?


You sound like a previous Right Wing Political Candidate we used to have here

FourPart;1495539 wrote: You sound like a previous Right Wing Political Candidate we used to have here


I presume that means no, you can't think of a party which discusses its internal administrative processes in public.

Neither can I.