Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Professor Sir John Curtice's analysis of the local election results.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43976539

Interesting that Brexit has such a large apparent effect on vote shares in local elections.
UKIP seem done and dusted!

I watched an interview with a lesser spotted Lib Dem on BBC Breakfast this morning, he was so happy and enthusiastic to begin with but Charlie and Naga ground that out of him by comparing this performance with vote numbers under Charles Kennedy! Must have thoroughly spoilt the poor blokes morning.

Ken Livingstone is putting both feet in his mouth again.

 Da Boss wrote:
I agree with you, I just think this is a manufactured outrage and there are far bigger problems in third level education in the UK.

The existence of other, bigger problems does not justify ignoring an issue. I disagree with this is a manufactured outrage, its a very serious issue. Though I will agree that the Tories have and will happily use it to distract from other issues. (as all Politicians do).

This isn't a Zero Sum Game. ALL these problems in Academia should be dealt with, including the attacks on Free Speech.

[Edited because I missed that you were responding directly to and agreeing with me]

Is the UKIP slump surprising to anyone? They were a one issue party. I'm amazed they've hung around as long as they have since they got the Brexit vote.

I'm not sure why people are hailing this as a defeat for "Brexiteers". As Creed says, UKIP was a one issue party that achieved its one issue and brought the Eurosceptic wing of the Conservative party to dominance. The Tory party is now for all intents and pruposes the Brexit party (not that they're in anyway 100% united on Brexit, but they're the closest thing we've got to a Brexit Party).

UKIP won, even if it killed them as a party.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:


UKIP won, even if it killed them as a party.

What that victory brings to Britain is a totally different matter.

True. Thats up to the conservative party now.

But you cannot deny that UKIP achieved its primary objective (albeit provisionally...we haven't left yet and I think it could still be overturned).

I was watching the BBC's election coverage. As always kudos to John Curtice

Anyway, Curtice aside, it was the usual collection of has beens and Oxbridge mafia types banging on Corbyn and May etc etc

And I though to myself that nothing has changed. Here they are sailing on blissfully as though Brexit never happened, as though the establishment never got the boot up the rear in 2016.

How anybody can claim defeat or victory on a 33% turnout is beyond me, and if I were a party leader getting 20% of that, I'd be ashamed. deeply ashamed, that nobody bothers with these things.

But here they were, as they do every election, trying to talk it up.

And as for engaging with the working classes, these people wouldn't know the working classes if a keg of bitter was dropped on them.


And the Tories? After 8 years of incompetence and ineptitude that would shame a banana republic, millions of people go out and vote for them?

I will never understand this nation...

I thought UKIP were making a big deal of hanging around to make sure that the government didn't cheat them on Brexit. With all of Mays defeats you'd think the brexiteers would want that more than ever. That said I doubt they made particularly good councils leaders.

However, you'd expect the UKIP votes to go back to Tory, but UKIP lost 96 councils and Tory gained 0. Those UKIP losses seem to have been scooped up by pretty much everyone BUT Tories.

That said; local elections have poor turnouts and are usually about local issues so I don't think you can read anything into it.

I'm glad UKIP are pretty much finished though; we shouldn't be validating that level of bigotry.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I'm not sure why people are hailing this as a defeat for "Brexiteers". As Creed says, UKIP was a one issue party that achieved its one issue and brought the Eurosceptic wing of the Conservative party to dominance. The Tory party is now for all intents and pruposes the Brexit party (not that they're in anyway 100% united on Brexit, but they're the closest thing we've got to a Brexit Party).

UKIP won, even if it killed them as a party.

Pretty much this. UKIP is redundant now that the country has newUKIP in place. I would suggest again that in some areas the Windrush fiasco probably benefited the Tory party unfortunately.

The results seem to indicate that, as predicted, the Country is still extremely divided. Anti-Wrexit votes went to Labour and LDs. Pro-Wrexit votes went (especially from UKIP) to Tories.

However the unfortunate thing that will happen is that this result will likely embolden the nut cases in newUKIP because their vote is becoming more reliant on the very pro-Wrexit side of the votes. They do have the advantage in the FPTP system in that there is no effective right wing party to strip them of votes now. In comparison the left and centre-left are split between multiple parties which gives the opportunity for newUKIP to take seats as these parties split the vote.

There are a couple of things that I am interested in. Firstly the actual voting numbers by party. FPTP can hide changes in voting intention and I'd like to see proportions (though noting it is not a full sample, so will have biases). I'd also like to see whether the areas with the ill concieved Voter ID application saw any shift one way or another (actual turnout isn't particualrly useful as we don't have a baseline figure for that area without the method in place). Apparently almost 4000 people were tunred away as part of the trial which is probably more than have prosecuted for voter fraud in the last 20 years.

On the other hand it really shows what the newUKIP party is like when if you get voted in then all previous transgressions are immediately forgiven..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-44004241

There's not much they can do to "hang around" when they're losing seats and political influence. Its not up to them, its up to the voters.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

And the Tories? After 8 years of incompetence and ineptitude that would shame a banana republic, millions of people go out and vote for them?

I will never understand this nation...

What I'd love to know is how many people voted Tory because they want a Tory Vs how many don't want Labour?

There's a benefit to a Tory council though; they've been getting lighter budget cuts from the Tory government through some huge coincidence.

Herzlos wrote:
I thought UKIP were making a big deal of hanging around to make sure that the government didn't cheat them on Brexit. With all of Mays defeats you'd think the brexiteers would want that more than ever. That said I doubt they made particularly good councils leaders.

However, you'd expect the UKIP votes to go back to Tory, but UKIP lost 96 councils and Tory gained 0. Those UKIP losses seem to have been scooped up by pretty much everyone BUT Tories.

That said; local elections have poor turnouts and are usually about local issues so I don't think you can read anything into it.

I'm glad UKIP are pretty much finished though; we shouldn't be validating that level of bigotry.

I'm glad UKIP are pretty much finished though; we shouldn't be validating that level of bigotry.

It predates UKIP. In the West Midlands back in the 1960/70s, one local anti-Labour, Tory campaign slogan was do you want X for a neighbour? Vote Labour, with X being a racist slur that rhymes with digger, which I won't mention here. But you can guess at it.

Then as I often mention, young Conservatives back in the 1980s, including John Bercow, had support for Apartheid South Africa, which the Tories have successfully managed to sweep under the carpet.

Another infamous example is Peter Tatchell and the disgusting bigotry he had to contend with back in the 1980s from a man who later revealed he was gay himself!

Herzlos wrote:
I thought UKIP were making a big deal of hanging around to make sure that the government didn't cheat them on Brexit. With all of Mays defeats you'd think the brexiteers would want that more than ever. That said I doubt they made particularly good councils leaders.

However, you'd expect the UKIP votes to go back to Tory, but UKIP lost 96 councils and Tory gained 0. Those UKIP losses seem to have been scooped up by pretty much everyone BUT Tories.

There is more to it than this because the UKIP losses have resulted in gains in the main for the Tories. They are down because of the loss of other seats that have swung to Labour/LDs especially in London. It's not like the UKIP supporters have suddenly decided to vote LD.

In some ways this is just a realignment of the local politics landscape to last years election results (i.e. the collapse of UKIP, a bit of growth for LDs and an increase for Labour).

Herzlos wrote:
I thought UKIP were making a big deal of hanging around to make sure that the government didn't cheat them on Brexit. With all of Mays defeats you'd think the brexiteers would want that more than ever. That said I doubt they made particularly good councils leaders.

However, you'd expect the UKIP votes to go back to Tory, but UKIP lost 96 councils and Tory gained 0. Those UKIP losses seem to have been scooped up by pretty much everyone BUT Tories.

That said; local elections have poor turnouts and are usually about local issues so I don't think you can read anything into it.

I'm glad UKIP are pretty much finished though; we shouldn't be validating that level of bigotry.

I don't think it is as straightforward as that.

The broad social profile of Leave voters matches the areas where UKIP and Leave were strong, for obvious reasons. Those areas are where UKIP has lost a lot of seats and the Tories have gained them. E.g. Basildon.

It's not difficult to infer from the above that most UKIP voters went back to the Tories.

If the Tory vote was level despite the returning Kippers, it reflects pro-EU Tories (of which there are many) deserting their party in favour of Remain and soft-Brexit alternatives.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
There's not much they can do to "hang around" when they're losing seats and political influence. Its not up to them, its up to the voters.

That is a very good point.

Both the general election last year, and these council elections, indicate that we are in a polarised situation and people are deserting fringe parties for traditional loyalty to the three main parties.

Hence UKIP dies as its former supporters return to the Tory fold.

Herzlos wrote:
I thought UKIP were making a big deal of hanging around to make sure that the government didn't cheat them on Brexit. With all of Mays defeats you'd think the brexiteers would want that more than ever. That said I doubt they made particularly good councils leaders.

However, you'd expect the UKIP votes to go back to Tory, but UKIP lost 96 councils and Tory gained 0. Those UKIP losses seem to have been scooped up by pretty much everyone BUT Tories.

That said; local elections have poor turnouts and are usually about local issues so I don't think you can read anything into it.

I'm glad UKIP are pretty much finished though; we shouldn't be validating that level of bigotry.

Not true, if you the read the BBC article from that crazy prof it states that most areas where leave and UKIP was strong swung to Conservative this time.

That balanced out loosing seats in Remainer heavy London councils.

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
I was watching the BBC's election coverage. As always kudos to John Curtice

Anyway, Curtice aside, it was the usual collection of has beens and Oxbridge mafia types banging on Corbyn and May etc etc

And I though to myself that nothing has changed. Here they are sailing on blissfully as though Brexit never happened, as though the establishment never got the boot up the rear in 2016.

How anybody can claim defeat or victory on a 33% turnout is beyond me, and if I were a party leader getting 20% of that, I'd be ashamed. deeply ashamed, that nobody bothers with these things.

But here they were, as they do every election, trying to talk it up.

And as for engaging with the working classes, these people wouldn't know the working classes if a keg of bitter was dropped on them.


And the Tories? After 8 years of incompetence and ineptitude that would shame a banana republic, millions of people go out and vote for them?

I will never understand this nation...

You do know that Brexit is 100% the "Establishment" controlled and wanted right ?
You are aware that Garage, Smug, Piffle and the rest would not piss on the brexit faithfull if you were on fire for fun maybe?
You are aware that they almost all stand to benefit financially or professionaly out of screwing the country and it's people?

I have to laugh any time a Brexiteer dribbles on about the establishment taking a hit, then I remember it's me and my family that are going to be screwed along with the "Will o th a piple" drones and I get pretty pissed off.

You do know that Brexit is 100% the "Establishment" controlled and wanted right ?

Apart from the millions of working-class people that voted for it, I agree.

You are aware that Garage, Smug, Piffle and the rest would not piss on the brexit faithfull if you were on fire for fun maybe?

I'll take your Farage and raise you a Cameron/Clegg/Osborne

You are aware that they almost all stand to benefit financially or professionaly out of screwing the country and it's people?

They were raking in the cash even when we were in the EU.

The Hilarity knows no bounds. Oakley just compared his party to the Black Death. Makes sense. Causes massive disaster, goes dormant, flares up again to cause another massive disaster and so on....

In other news, 50 Crocs seized at Heathrow! I guess we know what they were planning to do with any surviving UKIP politicians...

UKIP lost 123 seats, and have only 3 councillors left. They are finished.

Both Labour and Conservative are claiming a sort of victory.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
OK, so there's the title, which isn't that much opinion, the government has taken the side of free speech, and reading through the article again, all I see is statements of events, not judgments.
And had I seen the BBC article first, as it does provide more information, I would have shared it. It just so happens I saw the daily mail one first.
Additionally, just because it is a small number of incidents, not pervasive, does not mean it is not a problem. Nor does it mean it should be allowed to continue. Mr Gyimah is entirely right to clear up the university rules regarding this in order to protect free speech.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html

Another factual non-opinion piece from your favoured news source for you to mull over.

Tory new policy apparently - we're that desperate if you win a seat, we ignore your previous racist comments...

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/conservatives-pendle-councillor_uk_5aec782be4b0c4f193220367?utm_hp_ref=uk-homepage

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:

Herzlos wrote:
I thought UKIP were making a big deal of hanging around to make sure that the government didn't cheat them on Brexit. With all of Mays defeats you'd think the brexiteers would want that more than ever. That said I doubt they made particularly good councils leaders.

However, you'd expect the UKIP votes to go back to Tory, but UKIP lost 96 councils and Tory gained 0. Those UKIP losses seem to have been scooped up by pretty much everyone BUT Tories.

That said; local elections have poor turnouts and are usually about local issues so I don't think you can read anything into it.

I'm glad UKIP are pretty much finished though; we shouldn't be validating that level of bigotry.

I'm glad UKIP are pretty much finished though; we shouldn't be validating that level of bigotry.

It predates UKIP. In the West Midlands back in the 1960/70s, one local anti-Labour, Tory campaign slogan was do you want X for a neighbour? Vote Labour, with X being a racist slur that rhymes with digger, which I won't mention here. But you can guess at it.

Then as I often mention, young Conservatives back in the 1980s, including John Bercow, had support for Apartheid South Africa, which the Tories have successfully managed to sweep under the carpet.

Another infamous example is Peter Tatchell and the disgusting bigotry he had to contend with back in the 1980s from a man who later revealed he was gay himself!

I used to vote Tory, but Section 28 brought in by the Thatcher government (which, among other things, made it basically illegal for teachers to tell their pupils that it okay to be gay), ensured that I will never vote Tory again as long as I live. It’s not that long ago that May was sending van round telling illegal immigrants to log home”. My partner, who is herself the daughter of immigrants (her parents came over from Jamaica in the early 60’s) said it immediately brought back memories of all the times, growing up as a black kid in Yorkshire, that she was told to go home.

Whatever they do, I refuse to believe that the Tories are not still full of the same racist, homophobic bigots they always were.

 r_squared wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
OK, so there's the title, which isn't that much opinion, the government has taken the side of free speech, and reading through the article again, all I see is statements of events, not judgments.
And had I seen the BBC article first, as it does provide more information, I would have shared it. It just so happens I saw the daily mail one first.
Additionally, just because it is a small number of incidents, not pervasive, does not mean it is not a problem. Nor does it mean it should be allowed to continue. Mr Gyimah is entirely right to clear up the university rules regarding this in order to protect free speech.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html

Another factual non-opinion piece from your favoured news source for you to mull over.

Wow, nice assumption there. The only 'paper' I regularly read is the spectator, I read pretty much all the other papers only when I see them scrolling through the MSN page on bing or on Facebook. Show me where I said the daily mail as a paper was good, bad or really anything? I was talking about one article which to me seemed to be just a report. Of course they churn out a lot of drivel, but not everything they produce is intrinsically somehow trash.

In other British News...


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44005360

 BaronIveagh wrote:
In other British News...


http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44005360

That's how you go about getting a second referendum then.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 r_squared wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
OK, so there's the title, which isn't that much opinion, the government has taken the side of free speech, and reading through the article again, all I see is statements of events, not judgments.
And had I seen the BBC article first, as it does provide more information, I would have shared it. It just so happens I saw the daily mail one first.
Additionally, just because it is a small number of incidents, not pervasive, does not mean it is not a problem. Nor does it mean it should be allowed to continue. Mr Gyimah is entirely right to clear up the university rules regarding this in order to protect free speech.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html

Another factual non-opinion piece from your favoured news source for you to mull over.

Wow, nice assumption there. The only 'paper' I regularly read is the spectator, I read pretty much all the other papers only when I see them scrolling through the MSN page on bing or on Facebook. Show me where I said the daily mail as a paper was good, bad or really anything? I was talking about one article which to me seemed to be just a report. Of course they churn out a lot of drivel, but not everything they produce is intrinsically somehow trash.

Like this article? .

If you could tone down the smugness, that'd be appreciated. And screw it, you know what, yes, that article is unbiased on the mail's part, they're just reporting on the findings of a particular study. The only judgment in the entire thing is referring to it as 'controversial' which is fair when something claims almost half of people are less intelligent than the other half.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
If you could tone down the smugness, that'd be appreciated.

Don’t count on it mate. I made the mistake of sharing here how the political events of the last two years have effected my family, and he just used it to make a cheap (and incorrect) shot at me. Won’t be making that mistake again, I’d show you the post but Kilkrazy deleted that whole thread. I also reported the post in question but nothing was done about it. So if any mods are ever wondering why I’m always on your case about impartiality, that’s why.

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
If you could tone down the smugness, that'd be appreciated.

Don’t count on it mate. I made the mistake of sharing here how the political events of the last two years have effected my family, and he just used it to make a cheap (and incorrect) shot at me. Won’t be making that mistake again, I’d show you the post but Kilkrazy deleted that whole thread. I also reported the post in question but nothing was done about it. So if any mods are ever wondering why I’m always on your case about impartiality, that’s why.

...you just said yourself that the thread was deleted.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:
If you could tone down the smugness, that'd be appreciated.

Don’t count on it mate. I made the mistake of sharing here how the political events of the last two years have effected my family, and he just used it to make a cheap (and incorrect) shot at me. Won’t be making that mistake again, I’d show you the post but Kilkrazy deleted that whole thread. I also reported the post in question but nothing was done about it. So if any mods are ever wondering why I’m always on your case about impartiality, that’s why.

...you just said yourself that the thread was deleted.

The thread was deleted weeks after the fact. Use your head.