Keir Starmer

Looks like a poor night for Starmer, a few decent results but not a real breakthrough up against the worst government in my lifetime
Terrible for labour really. The govt is openly corrupt, failing, and the economy is on the rocks yet starmer/labour seem to have little appeal outside of the London 'metropolitan elite'.
 
i think that would be a bad move for both the Lib Dems and Labour. I like that the Lib Dems have separate policies to Labour, particularly at local level. If they basically combine with Labour I wouldn’t vote for them - I don’t like Labour.

for me it would be Labour admitting they can’t win on their own. Terrible government, but still can’t win. That’s not a great look
Given the current Conservative majority and the collapse of Labour in Scotland, that is the new reality. Until people in England accept that, then they will probably continue to have a Conservative government for the foreseeable.
 
Terrible for labour really. The govt is openly corrupt, failing, and the economy is on the rocks yet starmer/labour seem to have little appeal outside of the London 'metropolitan elite'.
Yes, Labour share of the vote outside London is actually down.

Looks a reasonable night for the Fib Dems and the Greens.
 
Terrible for labour really. The govt is openly corrupt, failing, and the economy is on the rocks yet starmer/labour seem to have little appeal outside of the London 'metropolitan elite'.
Surely not everyone in London is part of this ‘metropolitan elite’? The more interesting question for me is why does Labour appeal more to working people in London but less so to working people in other parts of the country?
 
Given the current Conservative majority and the collapse of Labour in Scotland, that is the new reality. Until people in England accept that, then they will probably continue to have a Conservative government for the foreseeable.

people aren’t going to accept voting for some kind or merged party though. As I said at local level the policies of Labour and Lib Dems are very different in lots of cases.

two separate parties. I’m not going to vote for a party I don’t like, just to stop the tories winning - especially not on local issues.

Labour should be winning anyway. They shouldn’t need tactical voting to have a chance
 
people aren’t going to accept voting for some kind or merged party though. As I said at local level the policies of Labour and Lib Dems are very different in lots of cases.

two separate parties. I’m not going to vote for a party I don’t like, just to stop the tories winning - especially not on local issues.

Labour should be winning anyway. They shouldn’t need tactical voting to have a chance
Some people will accept it, just that none of us can tell whether enough people would do so in a General Election. Labour as it is just cannot win on its own.
 
Is it common at local election level for parties not to contest seats?
There were no LibDems on the ballot here (east London).

Some of Dowden's claims are a bit harder to judge as "wins in Hartlepool" appear to be taking them from Independents. Surely that would then come down to what they were before they were independents.

More rural places aren't often going to jump from blue to red, but may go blue to orange or green; there'll be more chance of making a difference that way - going to NOC or from NOC to a party is more likely than a complete change.
 
Surely not everyone in London is part of this ‘metropolitan elite’? The more interesting question for me is why does Labour appeal more to working people in London but less so to working people in other parts of the country?

I think it's muddied by local independents in a lot of places, and the continuing fading of the UKIP voters.
 
Is it common at local election level for parties not to contest seats?
There were no LibDems on the ballot here (east London).

Some of Dowden's claims are a bit harder to judge as "wins in Hartlepool" appear to be taking them from Independents. Surely that would then come down to what they were before they were independents.

More rural places aren't often going to jump from blue to red, but may go blue to orange or green; there'll be more chance of making a difference that way - going to NOC or from NOC to a party is more likely than a complete change.
All parties are increasingly selective about where they will stand and how much money and effort they will expend.

You can see for yourself below by clicking on the details of the respective seat In 2018. I can see the Liberal Democrats did not field candidates in certain seats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_London_local_elections
 
Last edited:
Is it common at local election level for parties not to contest seats?
There were no LibDems on the ballot here (east London).

Some of Dowden's claims are a bit harder to judge as "wins in Hartlepool" appear to be taking them from Independents. Surely that would then come down to what they were before they were independents.

More rural places aren't often going to jump from blue to red, but may go blue to orange or green; there'll be more chance of making a difference that way - going to NOC or from NOC to a party is more likely than a complete change.

I heard on sky news a couple of days ago that Labour only contests about 65% or so of the available seats. If that’s true then I’d not read too much into Lib Dem and Green’s gains nor into Labours supposedly poor showing. In other words, if that’s the case, we’ve learnt very little from last night - the councils Labour took from the Tories in London might be a significant indicator and they’ll rightly make much of this but it’s hard to extrapolate this out in any meaningful sense.
 
All parties are increasingly selective about where they will stand and how much money and effort they will expend. Which particular seat in East London?

Waltham Forest council ward which elected 3 labour.
The council is about 3:1 Labour over Conservative, with the latter mostly Chingford area (Tebbit, IDS constituency).

The Wandsworth/Westminster votes are maybe significant because the entire council was elected, not just 1/3. In Westminster 1 in 3 Conservative seats changed hands.

Simple numbers aren't the whole story.
 
Surely not everyone in London is part of this ‘metropolitan elite’? The more interesting question for me is why does Labour appeal more to working people in London but less so to working people in other parts of the country?
In a word

BREXIT.
 
people aren’t going to accept voting for some kind or merged party though. As I said at local level the policies of Labour and Lib Dems are very different in lots of cases.

two separate parties. I’m not going to vote for a party I don’t like, just to stop the tories winning - especially not on local issues.

Labour should be winning anyway. They shouldn’t need tactical voting to have a chance
They are very different parties.

The Lib Dems especially the Orange Bookists are rabid free marketeers and socially liberal

Labour is or should be Socialist and culturally small c conservative.
 
Waltham Forest council ward which elected 3 labour.
The council is about 3:1 Labour over Conservative, with the latter mostly Chingford area (Tebbit, IDS constituency).

The Wandsworth/Westminster votes are maybe significant because the entire council was elected, not just 1/3. In Westminster 1 in 3 Conservative seats changed hands.

Simple numbers aren't the whole story.
Then they did stand in 2018. Came a distant third but didn’t win any seats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Waltham_Forest_London_Borough_Council_election
 
In a word

NUANCE. ;-)

Can it really all be distilled to that?
Yes I believe it does, Brexit voting areas appear to have stayed away from Labour as they fear Starmer wants to rejoin, remain voting areas like London voted Labour because they want Starmer to endorse rejoin.
 
Then they did stand in 2018. Came a distant third but didn’t win any seats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Waltham_Forest_London_Borough_Council_election

I may have missed your point. I know they did in the past, and they stood in other wards this time too - just not mine.

It's a slightly ridiculous system that a ward ballot can have 3 people from each party and you get three votes. It's odds-on to be 3-0 for one party or other.
The Green candidate got more than all 3 Conservatives put together.
 
Think last night sums up the disconnect between the Labour party and the voters it used to represent.

Has that been because the population has shifted perspective over the past few decades? Sure, but I think to support left leaning values politically you have to have local buy-in, and in previous generations that was jobs for local people, a big employer the community lived around and was theirs, traditional family units with traditional values and social structures, public services that worked or the community worked on and a sense of community.

Now, a lot of places have lost several of the above at a minimum so the checks and balances on a more primitive instinct are removed, the social structures and norms have been eradicated over the past 50 years. Some would call that profress, but then bemoan why the country has gone down the toilet. People determine what it means to be "British" as their identity, rather than what it means to be part of their community which is their manifestation of being British. It becomes ideological, rather than value driven.

Those results really are a condemnation of Labour because they should be sweeping the board across the country if they were in tune with their former core supporter base. Instead, they are in tune with ideologues and, to be fair to them, certain minority groups who have a sense of community.

I think it's just an unfortunate summation of where we're at. At this rate, Lib Dem will split the Labour/Tory vote next time around and we will end up with another Tory government. And even the most ardent Tory can't argue that serious damage has been done to the country in the past decade.

Unfortunately, the general population is right of where Labour are willing to go, and it's gone there because the checks and balances in society have been done away with, so there's no buy-in. People are more unwilling to buy into something new that's less good than they what was taken away from them.
 
Yes I believe it does, Brexit voting areas appear to have stayed away from Labour as they fear Starmer wants to rejoin, remain voting areas like London voted Labour because they want Starmer to endorse rejoin.
Yet Hull, a solid Leave city, went to the Liberal Democrats, and they’ve adopted a more ‘pro-European Union‘ aligned position than Labour. Not saying you’re wrong, just that my crystal ball is cloudy.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top