Tories win Copeland b-election.

[Helmet Cole]

Just a made up Myth I'm afraid mate, Labour would have breezed into power in 1945,1997 and 2005 if every seat in Nationalistic Scotland had voted Tory.

That's just three times, and not even in the same century. Its like saying conceding ten goals is fine if we score eleven.
The three GE's you quote were effectively protest votes. The Tories were so loathed in 97 that labour were a shoe in. I admit Blair was the right man at the right time, but even Kinnock or foot would probably have won in 97.

 

[Len Rum]

You need to check yours. Of course throwing vast amounts of cash at bailing out a banking catastrophe (that Labour presided over), made matters much worse.

However after a short period of budget surplus (due to spending restraint) in the late 1990s, the UK went into budget deficit under Labour of 2-3% of GDP between 2002-2007. A bloody disgrace considering the economy was growing by between 2% and 3% for much of the period.

Basically they spent more than we could afford, as usual.

Tory borrowing record since 2010 mate?
( please no lectures on difference between national debt vs deficit).

 

[Chippy_boy]

Just a made up Myth I'm afraid mate, Labour would have breezed into power in 1945,1997 and 2005 if every seat in Nationalistic Scotland had voted Tory.

They were not a million miles off in 2010 nor in 2015, so I agree it's a total myth.

The loss of Labour seats in Scotland merely balances to some extent the damage to the Tories' chances due to the re-drawing of electoral boundaries in 4th boundary commission review in the 1990's. The effect of which meant that (for example) - in 2005 Labour had a lead of 3 points over the Conservatives, and got a majority of over 60 seats whereas in 2010 the Conservatives had a lead of 7 points over Labour, but did not have an overall majority at all.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Tory borrowing record since 2010 mate?
( please no lectures on difference between national debt vs deficit).

It's fucking outrageous that some Labour supporters have the outright temerity to criticise the Tories for increasing the national debt, whilst (a) not respecting the fact that THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS when you run a deficit, and even more galling, (b) at the same time criticising the Tories for austerity and spending cuts!!!?! Without austerity and spending cuts, the debt would be even worse, WOULDN'T IT LEN.

You would understand this, since you understand the difference between debt and deficit.

 

[bluemoonmatt]

That's just three times, and not even in the same century. Its like saying conceding ten goals is fine if we score eleven.
The three GE's you quote were effectively protest votes. The Tories were so loathed in 97 that labour were a shoe in. I admit Blair was the right man at the right time, but even Kinnock or foot would probably have won in 97.

It's three out of eight occasions since the 1945 result that labour would have been elected to govern in spite of the Scottish vote, so yes we are helped by the vote up north but not entirely reliant on it and as stated earlier with no reply that Scottish vote could conceivably swing back when we are considered electable (i.e. Once the fool and his cohorts fuck off)

 

[Magicpole]

Dont know if it's been mentioned earlier in the thread but the real reason for the defeat, according to a labour spokesman was....you couldn't make this up....





Storm Doris.

Yes, apparantly most of the labour voters in the area can't afford cars and were therfore unable to vote. Classic.

That's nearly as bad as my excuse for returning from the pub after 8 hours when I texted I was nipping in fir a quick pint.

Apparently there has never been an incident in the uk involving an escaped tiger.

 

[i kne albert davy]

That's just three times, and not even in the same century. Its like saying conceding ten goals is fine if we score eleven.
The three GE's you quote were effectively protest votes. The Tories were so loathed in 97 that labour were a shoe in. I admit Blair was the right man at the right time, but even Kinnock or foot would probably have won in 97.

Labour would have won also in 1966 if every seat in Scotland voted other than Tory or when Scotland jumps ship and they've only won 8 elections . You state as fact with the collapse of Labour s vote in Scotland the Labour party couldn't win a General election which is plainly a made up myth. The Labour party can't win with Corbyn but it can certainty win without Scotland.

 

[bluemoonmatt]

Labour would have won also in 1966 if every seat in Scotland voted other than Tory or when Scotland jumps ship and they've only won 8 elections . You state as fact with the collapse of Labour s vote in Scotland the Labour party couldn't win a General election which is plainly a made up myth. The Labour party can't win with Corbyn but it can certainty win without Scotland.

Thanks for the info ikad, I'm glad I'm not fighting this fight alone. It's worth adding anyone who thinks Micheal Foot would ever have won a general election must be as deluded as those who think Corbyn can. He can only win leadership elections and even then he's reliant on his £3 commie cult socialist worker momentum dickhead members

 

[Helmet Cole]

Labour would have won also in 1966 if every seat in Scotland voted other than Tory or when Scotland jumps ship and they've only won 8 elections . You state as fact with the collapse of Labour s vote in Scotland the Labour party couldn't win a General election which is plainly a made up myth. The Labour party can't win with Corbyn but it can certainty win without Scotland.

Name the labour leader that could achieve such a swing in england in the foreseeable future? The only way labour will get in again is when the Scots have had a belly full of the SNP, and we've had a couple of decades of Tory rule as per 97. A different leader will make no difference to labour.

 

[urban genie]

Was a shite result for labour and Corbyn is partly to blame, the local CLP wanted someone else to stand, and it was rejected for a more pro corbyn candidate, also the tories played on his own stanve on nuclear, which I somewhat agree with, but in areas which have been seriously hit by things like de-industrialisation you don't say I would lile.to get rid of nuclear without having something to replace it.
Labour in it's current ideological thinking of returning to a socialist agenda is the best option for the country, but the message is lost by a media suspicious, stubborn old goat in charge.

I do find it laughable though that copeland was a footnote on the news before the results and it was all about stoke and labour losing, which as it hasn't happened is now pushed to tge sidelines, letting ukip's failiure off the hook.