Galloway

TeaCider said:
Is it really being swayed away from Labour when they didn't run a candidate and their party name was only on the ballot because of a technicality?

If you want to vote Labour, and Labour are publicly condemning and disavowing a candidate, and you know that he wouldn't be a Labour MP if he did win, you're not going to vote for the candidate on that basis.

It's not like it was a last minute change, they stopped supporting Ali over 2 weeks ago.
Anyone voting in a by-election is going to be at least slightly politically engaged and will have known that he wasn't really a Labour candidate anymore.
Click to expand...
My point was that a lot of people don't keep up with politics and vote based purely on what they see on the slip or on their national preference. They will have no idea that the Labour candidate wasn't being supported. They see Labour, they tick a box. This shows that number isn't a high one.

This also shows that a candidate can beat Labour on a single issue.
 
Nano said:
It's a unique constituency situation so it's very difficult to read any meaning from it. I think the one thing that Starmer should take away from it is that it does show that his only strategy of not being the Tories isn't enough to win an election on its own. Everyone knows that the majority of the country don't want the Tories to win so they will vote for another party. Starmer has so far refused to give anyone a reason to vote for Labour so there is a risk that there are situations like this Galloway one where individual constituencies can be swayed away from Labour to vote for someone that is offering something. If the Tories can hold enough of their votes and the "not Tory" votes are split then the Tories win.
Click to expand...
He wont release the manifesto until there's a GE Date announcement. That's what's making the Tories and the Anti Labour friends of Tories pull out their hair. Still think he has a good chance of getting Labour into power than ever before.
We will have to wait and see.
 
Nano said:
My point was that a lot of people don't keep up with politics and vote based purely on what they see on the slip or on their national preference. They will have no idea that the Labour candidate wasn't being supported. They see Labour, they tick a box. This shows that number isn't a high one.

This also shows that a candidate can beat Labour on a single issue.
Click to expand...

Almost nobody who doesn't keep up with politics is going to vote in a by-election.

They'll have been well aware of the situation surrounding candidates, especially when there's no national campaign "distracting" things.
 
1finny said:
This gets trotted out so much it has become the new truth.
There are policy differences but people just ignore them to repeat what they are told in the media

That's why we are where we are.
Click to expand...
It’s actually trotted out by the Tory vote, those who want and probably will vote Tory anyway because they want a blue rosette, they are the ones continually saying they are all as bad as each other, politics is broken and there is no difference if you vote Labour.

They just can’t face up to a possible defeat five years after getting a big majority.

There will be a massive difference to the way the country is run if Labour get in.
 
HolgateCorner said:
It’s actually trotted out by the Tory vote, those who want and probably will vote Tory anyway because they want a blue rosette, they are the ones continually saying they are all as bad as each other, politics is broken and there is no difference if you vote Labour.

They just can’t face up to a possible defeat five years after getting a big majority.

There will be a massive difference to the way the country is run if Labour get in.
Click to expand...
Exactly
If someone who will definitely vote Tory - while stating they don't care about politics - can get a couple to not vote Labour (or not vote at all) by making them believe the 'they're all the same' line, then their Tory vote has more chance of returning a Tory MP
 
HolgateCorner said:
It’s actually trotted out by the Tory vote, those who want and probably will vote Tory anyway because they want a blue rosette, they are the ones continually saying they are all as bad as each other, politics is broken and there is no difference if you vote Labour.

They just can’t face up to a possible defeat five years after getting a big majority.

There will be a massive difference to the way the country is run if Labour get in.
Click to expand...
it's trotted out on here by non Tory's too
It's become the truth - that's how it works
 
1finny said:
There are policy differences but people just ignore them to repeat what they are told in the media
Click to expand...
LessoftheLip said:
I expect that sort of rubbish from other posters on this forum but not from you 😔
Click to expand...
HolgateCorner said:
There will be a massive difference to the way the country is run if Labour get in.
Click to expand...

My problem with Starmer isn't that he won't be different than the current crop of Tories. I know he definitely will but it is because the Tories are so dreadful that they have boxed themselves into a very right-wing corner. Starmer is not offering change. He is offering a better version of what the Tories would offer. Everything he has so far said could have been said by a Tory (someone centre-right like Cameron, not Truss/Mogg/Sunak etc).

This is why I say he is not offering a reason to vote for him. He'll probably get my vote because he's not a Tory but I have no confidence there will be meaningful change. Applying the brakes to the direction the Tories are taking us is not the same as turning around and heading in the opposite direction. He has already ruled out so many things that are good ideas and would make things better in the long run. Personally I want a Labour leader to have left-wing ideas and Starmer doesn't.
 
TeessideCleveland said:
Labour certainly made a right mess of this , but I'm not sure it's quite as bad as this Sky News article is making out

news.sky.com

Sir Keir Starmer should be very, very worried after Galloway win

When Labour holds its inquest into the debacle of this by-election, it will reflect on how what should have been a routine by-election win in a relatively safe seat turned into Sir Keir's worst nightmare - a win for George Galloway.
news.sky.com news.sky.com
Click to expand...
That’s just a load of guff from Sky, the right wing media are desperate for Starmer to back the Palestinians so that they can label him anti Semitic and no different to Corbyn, Labour hasn’t changed …..so you may as well vote Tory after all…..

I’ve said before on here the right wing in this country care nothing for Palestinians or Jews they just care about manipulating the political situation for themselves to keep in power. It’s as simple as that.
 
HolgateCorner said:
They are non Tories but not necessarily Labour voters.
Click to expand...
The major Starmer critics that I have seen on here are all people like me that should be smack bang in the middle of what Labour stand for. It is Labour moving right and chasing the Tory vote which means they no longer represent the people that they should be representing and that is why I am critical. I don't agree with political parties "moving". They should have an ideology and work towards that. If they want more votes they should convince people that what they are offering is the best option. It's utterly pointless winning if you are just going to do the same as the opposition anyway.

I haven't changed my ideology. People like me just want Labour to be in a position where my beliefs and theirs align. You are semi-correct in that I am not a Labour voter. I am a person at a specific point on the political spectrum and I will vote for whichever party best represents my beliefs. Under Corbyn that was Labour 100%, under Starmer it isn't. If it was a 50/50 decision between Labour or Tories then Labour would be closer to me and get my vote every time because they are always going to be closer to me than the Tories. It isn't that way though and me voting for Labour in the current system can be taken as an endorsement of them and I can't currently endorse them and that is because they are not doing what is needed to be done to represent the majority of people in the country that need the most help.
 
Nano said:
Everything he has so far said could have been said by a Tory (someone centre-right like Cameron, not Truss/Mogg/Sunak etc).
Click to expand...
Starmer pssisses me off no end - but that is simply untrue
None of them, ever, would put VAT on private schools

And, as has been said - there is no manifesto yet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top