# England local election results thread



## Random (May 2, 2013)

"Labour are defending the South Shields seat in a contest caused by the resignation of David Miliband in March.

Mayoral contests are also being held in Doncaster and North Tyneside....

More than 2,300 seats are up for grabs in county council and unitary authority elections across the length and breadth of England,"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22376584

Are UKIP expected to do well? Any places where a left-of-Labour candidate has a chance?


----------



## brogdale (May 2, 2013)

Its sunny; used to be known as 'Labour weather' on election days, and won't the 'kippers be playing golf?


----------



## belboid (May 2, 2013)

Doncaster mayor will be interesting, NF as well as English Democrats and the looney ex-ED who is currently mayor.

UKIP will be the nights winners, could get 100+ seats.

The left will do even worse than usual, but it is the tory shires voting, in the main, so no big deal.


----------



## Quartz (May 2, 2013)

I'm less concerned about for whom people vote than they actually go and make an informed vote. The democratic process is one of our better responsibilities and it is a shame to see people shirk it.


----------



## belboid (May 2, 2013)

What's wrong with an informed abstention?  And how do you tell the difference between informed and uninformed votes?


----------



## JimW (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> I'm less concerned about for whom people vote than they actually go and make an informed vote. The democratic process is one of our better responsibilities and it is a shame to see people shirk it.


I can quite see the better informed finding the process not very democratic at all and so choosing not to legitimise it by participating.


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

can't decide whether not to bother or spoil the ballot paper.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> can't decide whether not to bother or spoil the ballot paper.


Spoil it. Do it for me, I've yet to have the opportunity


----------



## Teaboy (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> I'm less concerned about for whom people vote than they actually go and make an informed vote. The democratic process is one of our better responsibilities and it is a shame to see people shirk it.


 
You pompous oaf.  I'll do what I fucking well like.

My vote is far to important (to me anyway) to be thrown away on a party / person I don't support.


----------



## JimW (May 2, 2013)

Teaboy said:


> You pompous oaf.


 Steady on there! This is a family board.


----------



## J Ed (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> I'm less concerned about for whom people vote than they actually go and make an informed vote. The democratic process is one of our better responsibilities and it is a shame to see people shirk it.


 
lol


----------



## J Ed (May 2, 2013)

People are actually regularly using shirk as a verb now

jesus


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

acutally i've always spoilt my ballot paper because i've thought of it as a chance to say my bit and there hasnt been a party i've supported where i've lived, but i've read arguments recently suggesting that you shouldn't even do that because it's still an engagement with the bourgeois state and so somehow legitimising it.

dunno what to think tbh.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> acutally i've always spoilt my ballot paper because i've thought of it as a chance to say my bit and there hasnt been a party i've supported where i've lived, but i've read arguments recently suggesting that you shouldn't even do that because it's still an engagement with the bourgeois state and so somehow legitimising it.
> 
> dunno what to think tbh.


If you don't go at all they can count it as you being fine with how things are, or apathetic to the extent that you deserve what you get. Maybe not you personally, but the portion of people who don't vote.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

belboid said:


> *What's wrong with an informed abstention?* And how do you tell the difference between informed and uninformed votes?


 
Nothing -- but personally I'd prefer a spoilt ballot paper ("None of the above!" etc or *pithier * ) than simply not bothering. I accept neither make any difference either way, cos returning officers don't distinguish between political spoilt and confusion spoilt, but you get my drift.

(No voting happening here in Wales, so I'm a stay at home!)


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

But if you spoil it they can count it as you being too stupid to know how to vote. 

Dunno tbh.


----------



## JimW (May 2, 2013)

I can confidently predict that spoilt ballots, abstentions and a general informed contempt for the electoral process will emerge as one of the biggest winners tonight.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> If you don't go at all they can count it as you being fine with how things are, or apathetic to the extent that you deserve what you get. Maybe not you personally, but the portion of people who don't vote.


 
And I agree with that too. Go out and spoil, people!


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> acutally i've always spoilt my ballot paper because i've thought of it as a chance to say my bit and there hasnt been a party i've supported where i've lived, but i've read arguments recently suggesting that you shouldn't even do that because it's still an engagement with the bourgeois state and so somehow legitimising it.
> 
> dunno what to think tbh.


 
How do you avoid on a day to day basis engaging with the bourgeois state and somehow legitimising it.I think we should be told


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> But if you spoil it they can count it as you being too stupid to know how to vote.
> 
> Dunno tbh.


 
I did acknowledge that political spoils and confusions spoils aren't distinguished. But neither are political stay at homes distinguished from 'can't be arsed'/'didn't even know there was an election' stay at homes ...


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

Bah, many results not due till Friday and no proper election results program on TV.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

JimW said:


> I can confidently predict that spoilt ballots, abstentions *and a general informed contempt for the electoral process* will emerge as one of the biggest winners tonight.


 
Or underinformed = high UKIP vote ....


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> But if you spoil it they can count it as you being too stupid to know how to vote.
> 
> Dunno tbh.


They can but it's a wee bit harder, because you've actually turned up and filled in the ballot paper.
Although in the grand scheme of things it doesn't actually matter. I just like the rebellion of it. It's basically legal graffiti.


----------



## belboid (May 2, 2013)

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/05/how-well-does-labour-need-do-local-elections

To do 'well', Labour need to win back four councils & win around 300 seats, according to that.  Not impossible.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

They count the spoilt papers? If so, then yes, definitely go and spoilt it.
Sorry I know that seems like something really basic but I've not voted before


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> They can but it's a wee bit harder, because you've actually turned up and filled in the ballot paper.
> Although in the grand scheme of things it doesn't actually matter.* I just like the rebellion of it. It's basically legal graffiti*.


 
 

And there's scope to be quite creative/artistic if you want 

(for the tiniest of audiences admittedly, but if you have a mate working on the counting teams with a phone camera, then better publicity could be there there for you ... )


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> They count the spoilt papers? If so, then yes, definitely go and spoilt it.
> Sorry I know that seems like something really basic but I've not voted before


 
Yeah, just a general total of spoils is given as part of the formal result/returning officers' readout.


----------



## Streathamite (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> acutally i've always spoilt my ballot paper because i've thought of it as a chance to say my bit and there hasnt been a party i've supported where i've lived, but i've read arguments recently suggesting that you shouldn't even do that because it's still an engagement with the bourgeois state and so somehow legitimising it.
> 
> dunno what to think tbh.


surprised you haven't voted for an SP candidate, or hasn't there been one?


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

J Ed said:


> People are actually regularly using shirk as a verb now


  Shirk is a verb

I shirk, you shirk, she shirks...


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

William of Walworth said:


> And there's scope to be quite creative/artistic if you want
> 
> (for the tiniest of audiences admittedly, but if you have a mate working on the counting teams with a phone camera, then better publicity could be there there for you ... )


There's something really romantic about only a tiny audience seeing your artwork before it's destroyed though. Makes it more personal and amplifies the message. Obviously, this only works if they haven't already seen the same thing 50 times over.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Shirk is a verb
> 
> I shirk, you shirk, she shirks...


She shirks shirk shells by the sea shirk


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

Streathamite said:


> surprised yopu haven't voted for an SP candidate, or hasn't there been one?


 
not round where I live no, the SP candidates are standing in aylesbury, not here!


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

Well here we are in sunny Donny and it's pick another layer of bureaucratic drivel in the guise of an elected mayor.
We have nine right wing candidates standing and the TUSC candidate. 
The English Democrats candidate biggest vote catcher is making St George's day a national holiday, perfect for saving the lives of children at risk mate! Sadly he looks like Dr Mengele!
The current incumbent Davies, former chairman of the local Conservative party and then English Dems is now an independent! As well as still being the father of Shipley Tory MP Phillip Davies.
Then there is the national front (Lower case on purpose cos they are are tiny minded). Asking for support against chemtrails would you believe!
A Tory.
A Lib Dem.
Labour.
3 more Independents.(Closet Tories)
A TUSC candidate supported by Bob Crow and Dave Nellist!
Who would you pick?
I might stand at the next one, abolish the post and give the money to Shelter and other Homeless charities!


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

Who your best guess for winning the Mayorality there, Sprocket? Realistically like?


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

I'd vote for tusc to be honest if they were standing @sprocket


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

So would I as it goes, but I was looking for a best guess on actual result thing. I'm guessing not TUSC


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> Well here we are in sunny Donny and it's pick another layer of bureaucratic drivel in the guise of an elected mayor.
> We have nine right wing candidates standing and the TUSC candidate.
> The English Democrats candidate biggest vote catcher is making St George's day a national holiday, perfect for saving the lives of children at risk mate! Sadly he looks like Dr Mengele!
> The current incumbent Davies, former chairman of the local Conservative party and then English Dems is now an independent! As well as still being the father of Shipley Tory MP Phillip Davies.
> ...


 
The Tory's not Nick Allen is it?


----------



## JimW (May 2, 2013)

Socialist Shirker! Demand the TUC calls a general chuck-a-sickie day!
ETA: TUC, off your knees and back to bed.


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> Then there is the national front (Lower case on purpose cos they are are tiny minded). Asking for support against chemtrails would you believe!


We need to know more about this


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

My demand is that all workers have the same level of leave as I currently do 

(ahead of 10th June, I've got at least one additional  day off every week ... and I'm 4 days a week part time, no Fridays, anyway  ) )


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

Hoping to beat 1998 28.8% turnout, come on we can break the 25% barrier!


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

are spoiled votes counted towards turnout? hmm.


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

killer b said:


> are spoiled votes counted towards turnout? hmm.


yes


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

JTG said:


> yes


In that case the real way to show your contempt is not to vote. _Spoiling votes only encourages them._


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In that case the real way to show your contempt is not to vote. _Spoiling votes only encourages them._


that's what i was just thinking.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In that case the real way to show your contempt is not to vote. _Spoiling votes only encourages them._


How? Not turning up encourages them because they'll think we're all apathetic.


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

Agh! Indecision... I am now going to be wracked by uncertainty all day.


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In that case the real way to show your contempt is not to vote. _Spoiling votes only encourages them._


 
yeah i'm undecided between this and writing "communism" or "fuck off" on the ballot papers like i usually do.


----------



## JimW (May 2, 2013)

Yes, smacks of a residual faith in the system and that one day articul8 will find that Labour left riding their unicorns in Dingley Dell to make it all worthwhile again.


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> How? Not turning up encourages them because they'll think we're all apathetic.


because higher turnout can be spun as more people engaged with the process, thus legitimising the results.


----------



## gentlegreen (May 2, 2013)

I was sure it was next week - luckily I passed the polling station on the way in.
I can't say I'm highly motivated.
We have a long-serving Libdem who seems to know what he's doing.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> How? Not turning up encourages them because they'll think we're all apathetic.


They can think what they want about that - not bothered if they think i'm apathetic or not. However, any increased turnout says that _things are OK, look i've got a mandate, not as large as i'd like but it still exists. _Spoiled votes mask the real level of turnout and so the real level of people who hold them in utter contempt.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 2, 2013)

don't think I'm registered to vote at theis new adress.


looks like we've got a BNP candidate standing in everything but the Rural Division. hmm.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

William of Walworth said:


> Who your best guess for winning the Mayorality there, Sprocket? Realistically like?


 
As it is voters get two votes the count being made up from all candidates and then second choice votes going to the leading candidates following the first choice count.
Davies, the current mayor got in on the second choice votes last time.
I Davies could get back in purely if voter apathy plays into the hands of the minorities.
Hopefully he will be out on his ear.
Labour only missed out last time because of the disenchantment regarding the previous Labour Mayor Martin Winter and some dodgy stuff going on.
If voters only picked one candidate I am sure Labour would get back in.
The only relevant second choice for dyed in the wool Labour voters is Mary Jackson the TUSC candidate. She has done some sterling support work in the local ex mining villages and is strongly fancied as preferable in these areas.
Labour victory by a hairs breadth I think!



frogwoman said:


> I'd vote for tusc to be honest if they were standing @sprocket


 
TUSC definitely my first choice frogwoman. Just hope we are not just wind in sails again!


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> How? Not turning up encourages them because they'll think we're all apathetic.


The purpose of elections is to legitimise authority, there's a limit to the amount of apathy they can stand before that legitimacy is put into question.

(and I'm not arguing that on its own it's worthwhile, FWIW)


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> The Tory's not Nick Allen is it?


 
Martin Drake be the villain! He sent kids posting leaflets through doors around here, the coward!!!


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

gentlegreen said:


> I was sure it was next week - luckily I passed the polling station on the way in.
> I can't say I'm highly motivated.
> We have a long-serving Libdem who seems to know what he's doing.


 
Being a watered down Tory?


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

You're all coming up with quite good points if I'm honest. I still prefer spoiling the ballot paper though. I think it's the act of having physically done something to show anger. I dunno.


----------



## gentlegreen (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> Being a watered down Tory?


 
The other (Labour) ward councillor is a bit annoying (young, petrolhead).
Mind you I don't know if John Kiely (LD) rides a bike to work - he certainly could as he works at the hospital I cycle past every day.


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> As it is voters get two votes the count being made up from all candidates and then second choice votes going to the leading candidates following the first choice count.
> Davies, the current mayor got in on the second choice votes last time.
> I Davies could get back in purely if voter apathy plays into the hands of the minorities.
> Hopefully he will be out on his ear.
> ...


 
The elephant graveyard that is TUSC


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

gentlegreen said:


> The other (Labour) ward councillor is a bit annoying (young, petrolhead).
> Mind you I don't know if John Kiely (LD) rides a bike to work - he certainly could as he works at the hospital I cycle past every day.


Easton Lib Dems put out a last minute leaflet last night saying that it's too close to call there and that the Greens have conceded they can't win. Obviously this is a complete lie


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> Martin Drake be the villain! He sent kids posting leaflets through doors around here, the coward!!!


i used to go leafleting for the labour party when i was a kid (dad was a LP campaigner). it's fairly common. mainly cause they struggle to get enough adults to go trudging in the rain rather than out of cowardice though.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Assume Nellist isn't up this time for TUSC?  Anyone in Cov standing?


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

JTG said:


> Easton Lib Dems put out a last minute leaflet last night saying that it's too close to call there and that the Greens have conceded they can't win. Obviously this is a complete lie


i think that's the standard leaflet they send out to all wards they stand in.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Assume Nellist isn't up this time for TUSC? Anyone in Cov standing?


oh oh oh you thinking of voting for TUSC then?


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

No, principally because I'm in London and we have no elections.


----------



## emanymton (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> You're all coming up with quite good points if I'm honest. I still prefer spoiling the ballot paper though. I think it's the act of having physically done something to show anger. I dunno.


I tend to agree, I remember Blair trying to claim that low turnout was because people were happy. Much harder to spin 'your all scum' scrawled on a ballot paper in the same way.
On the mandate issue, spoilt ballots reduce the majority of the winning party and therefore reduces heir legitimacy as hey have secured less of the votes cast. What we need hough is a campaign to get people to write the same message on their ballot paper. May I suggest the following: 'down with parliament, down withe bourgeois democracy, forward to international working class revolution.'

Usually though I am too lazy to go to the polling station to bother.


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

killer b said:


> i think that's the standard leaflet they send out to all wards they stand in.


Yeah it's a variation on recurring themes. Greens in Easton reckon they can win, Lib Dems obviously worried they can't hold onto the seat if the Greens keep picking up votes from former Lib Dems


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

killer b said:


> i used to go leafleting for the labour party when i was a kid (dad was a LP campaigner). it's fairly common. mainly cause they struggle to get enough adults to go trudging in the rain rather than out of cowardice though.


 
Twas but a cheap shot/joke fella! But the last tory that was door knocking round here did get threatend at a few houses.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> You're all coming up with quite good points if I'm honest. I still prefer spoiling the ballot paper though. I think it's the act of having physically done something to show anger. I dunno.


Burn the polling station down?


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

On the spoilt ballot papers thing, I'm really torn now between muscovyduck's and emanymton's points, and butchers' and others' points. Lucky there's no elections here today eh ...


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Burn the polling station down?


mine's the local community centre.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

killer b said:


> i used to go leafleting for the labour party when i was a kid (dad was a LP campaigner). it's fairly common. mainly cause they struggle to get enough adults to go trudging in the rain rather than out of cowardice though.


I bet the lib-dem had to pay them though - knowingly putting them in immediate psychical danger at the same time. The rats.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

killer b said:


> mine's the local community centre.


_Hey it worked for the muslims  _


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> The elephant graveyard that is TUSC


 
Sadly I am just an awkward old bastard that will try to ensure the continual annoyance of vote counters.


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

William of Walworth said:


> On the spoilt ballot papers thing, I'm really torn now between muscovyduck's and emanymton's points, and butchers' and others' points. Lucky there's no elections here today eh ...


 
http://www.wikihow.com/Make-a-Quick-Decision


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

emanymton said:


> I tend to agree, I remember Blair trying to claim that low turnout was because people were happy. Much harder to spin 'your all scum' scrawled on a ballot paper in the same way.
> On the mandate issue, spoilt ballots reduce the majority of the winning party and therefore reduces heir legitimacy as hey have secured less of the votes cast. What we need hough is a campaign to get people to write the same message on their ballot paper. May I suggest the following: 'down with parliament, down withe bourgeois democracy, forward to international working class revolution.'
> 
> Usually though I am too lazy to go to the polling station to bother.


Spoilt papers with abusive messages are just ignored, they're not talked about - they literally mean nothing beyond inflating turnout figures. No one cares. Canididates don't really see them never mind wring their hands thinking _oh no i've got to change the entire system now_. The agent has a look, nods says _yes i agree these are all spoiled_ - and that's it.


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> Sadly I am just an awkward old bastard that will try to ensure the continual annoyance of* vote counters*.


 
fellow members of the working class


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> fellow members of the working class


the people working at election counts will be members of council staff who have volunteered for the role. so they may be managers just as easily as members of library staff or social workers.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

emanymton said:


> spoilt ballots reduce the majority of the winning party and therefore reduces heir legitimacy


heir legitimacy nothing to do with elections.


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Spoilt papers with abusive messages are just ignored, they're not talked about - they literally mean nothing beyond inflating turnout figures. No one cares. Canididates don't really see them never mind wring their hands thinking _oh no i've got to change the entire system now_. The agent has a look, nods says _yes i agree these are all spoiled_ - and that's it.


 
When i was supervising a ward count at the last local elections I took great pleasure in going through with the candidates the spoilt papers and my decision about rejecting them. Especially the BNP member who I read out to the remarks on the ballot papers that referred to the BNP in as loud as voice as possible.He agreed that they were indeed spoilt.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

Is it Australia were it is a legal duty to vote but at the bottom of the paper there is a None of the Above choice or have I dreamt this?


----------



## belboid (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Spoilt papers with abusive messages are just ignored, they're not talked about - they literally mean nothing beyond inflating turnout figures. No one cares. Canididates don't really see them never mind wring their hands thinking _oh no i've got to change the entire system now_. The agent has a look, nods says _yes i agree these are all spoiled_ - and that's it.


not even the agent normally. One of the merry hoard of bored party supporters making sure they get every vote possible.

The only way to get a response out of any of them is to put your cross over two candidates' box. That way they'll both waste some time arguing that its a vote for them (and it'll eventually be dumped as spoilt)


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> Is it Australia were it is a legal duty to vote but at the bottom of the paper there is a None of the Above choice or have I dreamt this?


yes


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> the people working at election counts will be members of council staff who have volunteered for the role. so they may be managers just as easily as members of library staff or social workers.


 
They are paid though for that role.Managers usually get the supervisors jobs the counters where I am  re mixture of low paid staff and local people. Our trade union argued very strongly that low paid staff rather than managers were recruited as counters


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> fellow members of the working class


 
It is nice for them to have more than two piles to build it passes the time quicker. My dear wife will be one of them. She will be getting a nice wage for it too.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> They are paid though for that role.Managers usually get the supervisors jobs the counters where I am re mixture of low paid staff and local people. Our trade union argued very strongly that low paid staff rather than managers were recruited as counters


they are paid, yes: but i never said they weren't.


----------



## chilango (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> can't decide whether not to bother or spoil the ballot paper.



You should be writing "Proletarian Democracy" on it.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> yes


 
Thank you brother, I was concerned I was having one of those senior moments!


----------



## redsquirrel (May 2, 2013)

belboid said:


> UKIP will be the nights winners, could get 100+ seats.


They won't get anything like 100. I know they're riding a wave ATM but they didn't make any (net) gains in either the 2011 or 2012 local elections.

I reckon 20 seats would be a good result. Their share of the vote will be pretty good tho.


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

belboid said:


> not even the agent normally. One of the merry hoard of bored party supporters making sure they get every vote possible.
> 
> The only way to get a response out of any of them is to put your cross over two candidates' box. That way they'll both waste some time arguing that its a vote for them (and it'll eventually be dumped as spoilt)


 
I have a Guide to Judging Spoilt Ballot Papers booklet


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> they are paid, yes: but i never said they weren't.


 
Its not an interview Pickman


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Its not an interview Pickman


in future, before contributing, ask yourself: "is this post really necessary?"


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

belboid said:


> UKIP will be the nights winners, could get 100+ seats.


 
UKIP should be forced to go and live on an independent island somewhere! Doh!


----------



## DotCommunist (May 2, 2013)

Corby Rural Divisions UKIP Candidate is called Margot Leadbetter Parker


lol


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> They won't get anything like 100. I know they're riding a wave ATM but they didn't make any (net) gains in either the 2011 or 2012 local elections.
> 
> I reckon 20 seats would be a good result. Their share of the vote will be pretty good tho.


 
UKIP odds :under 50 = 5/2; 50-100 =7/4; over 100= evens.

They were 5/2 to be over 100 a couple of days ago.


----------



## chilango (May 2, 2013)

Who remembers the Anti Election Allance and the bright pink stickers?


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

My dad has just gone off to vote Tory. Now torn over whether I should vote in order to neutralise his idiocy


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> in future, before contributing, ask yourself: "is this post really necessary?"


 
lead by example?


----------



## Streathamite (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> not round where I live no, the SP candidates are standing in aylesbury, not here!


oh sorry yes, forgot it's not a bastion of red revolution round there!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> lead by example?


anarchists don't have leaders.


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 2, 2013)

emanymton said:


> I tend to agree, I remember Blair trying to claim that low turnout was because people were happy. Much harder to spin 'your all scum' scrawled on a ballot paper in the same way.


 
But Blair had to try and spin low turnout, he never had to spin spoilt ballots.



> On the mandate issue, spoilt ballots reduce the majority of the winning party and therefore reduces heir legitimacy as hey have secured less of the votes cast. What we need hough is a campaign to get people to write the same message on their ballot paper. May I suggest the following: 'down with parliament, down withe bourgeois democracy, forward to international working class revolution.'


 
Not about the legitimacy of individual candidates, but the legitimacy of the whole exercise.



> Usually though I am too lazy to go to the polling station to bother.


That's the spirit!


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

JTG said:


> My dad has just gone off to vote Tory. Now torn over whether I should vote in order to neutralise his idiocy


 
Or just let his tyres down, urban guerilla tactics!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> can't decide whether not to bother or spoil the ballot paper.


 
no proletarian democracy candidate there?



Since we don't have a county council, no voting here.


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Hoping to beat 1998 28.8% turnout, come on we can break the 25% barrier!


 
Any idea what the weather was like then?

For several reasons I doubt there is an opportunity for record low turnout at this election, but perhaps I'm wrong and I will certainly be doing my bit.


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> Or just let his tyres down, urban guerilla tactics!


He's walking


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> Not about the legitimacy of individual candidates, but the legitimacy of the whole exercise.


Challenging the legitimacy of individual candidates is more likely to help us get to the stage where we can change the legitimacy of the exercise.


----------



## emanymton (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Spoilt papers with abusive messages are just ignored, they're not talked about - they literally mean nothing beyond inflating turnout figures. No one cares. Canididates don't really see them never mind wring their hands thinking _oh no i've got to change the entire system now_. The agent has a look, nods says _yes i agree these are all spoiled_ - and that's it.


I know, my post was a little tongue in check, a spoilt ballot is really for the person spoiling it rather that for 'them'.

There was a semi-serious point in it though. The reason it doesn't matter is that not enough people do it and not in any unified way. It could have more of an impact as part of a wider campaign. lets imagine we actually had a decent nationwide anti-cuts campaign a call could be made for people not planning to vote to spoil their ballot with 'no more cuts an end to austerity' or something similar. It's the sort of thing you could generate a bit of media publicity around if you could expect serious numbers of people to do it. Although better to be standing anti-cuts candidates in the first place.


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

If anyone wants to overdose on election turnout stats, this article has plenty:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/nov/16/uk-election-turnouts-historic


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 2, 2013)

emanymton said:


> I know, my post was a little tongue in check, a spoilt ballot is really for the person spoiling it rather that for 'them'.
> 
> There was a semi-serious point in it though. The reason it doesn't matter is that not enough people do it and not in any unified way. It could have more of an impact as part of a wider campaign. lets imagine we actually had a decent nationwide anti-cuts campaign a call could be made for people not planning to vote to spoil their ballot with 'no more cuts an end to austerity' or something similar. It's the sort of thing you could generate a bit of media publicity around if you could expect serious numbers of people to do it. Although better to be standing anti-cuts candidates in the first place.


You answered your own question. If you could get enough people interested in coordinated active abstention to do that, the obvious retort would be - "why didn't you just stand a candidate on that platform".

The reason I abstain is because I don't think there's anything positive to be gained out of taking part in that sort of democratic exercise. It's an acknowledgement that they don't care about my opinions, that I don't care who's elected and that even if someone I thought represented me was elected, it wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference.


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Challenging the legitimacy of individual candidates is more likely to help us get to the stage where we can change the legitimacy of the exercise.


You think? The Mayor of London was elected of 17.5% of the eligible voters, yet he still feels perfectly comfortable telling the trade unions that their votes to strike aren't valid unless they get 50% of the eligible voters.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> You think? The Mayor of London was elected of 17.5% of the eligible voters, yet he still feels perfectly comfortable telling the trade unions that their votes to strike aren't valid unless it's they get 50% of the eligible voters.


 
Sadly people ignore the fact about his 17.5% result yet get pitchforks and form mobs in attacking Trade Unions democratic procedures!


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> You think? The Mayor of London was elected of 17.5% of the *eligible voters*, yet he still feels perfectly comfortable telling the trade unions that their votes to strike aren't valid unless it's they get 50% of the *eligible voters.*


Neither solution is perfect but at least turning up and spoiling a ballet paper stops them calling you apathetic.


----------



## J Ed (May 2, 2013)

The Graunid was talking up the prospects of UKIP winning South Shields, I can't imagine it for a second but then again Bradford West happened..


----------



## emanymton (May 2, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> You answered your own question. If you could get enough people interested in coordinated active abstention to do that, the obvious retort would be - "why didn't you just stand a candidate on that platform".


Mostly true, it requires much more resources to stand a candidate, so maybe you could not cover every ward. But as said i is a semi-serious idea.


Lo Siento. said:


> The reason I abstain is because I don't think there's anything positive to be gained out of taking part in that sort of democratic exercise. It's an acknowledgement that they don't care about my opinions, that I don't care who's elected and that even if someone I thought represented was elected, it wouldn't make the blindest bit of difference.


I tend to agree, spoiling by ballot is something I do for me and a handful of spoilt ballets don't make much difference either way.

I think we can agree on hating the dicks who insist you must vote regardless, the right not to vote is more important than the right to vote, imagine the Australian system without none of the above


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Neither solution is perfect but at least turning up and spoiling a ballet paper stops them calling you apathetic.


 
I AM "apathetic" about electoral politics. I have no objection to being labelled that. It adequately describes my feelings about voting, and implicitly introduces my _antipathy_ to all our elected representatives.


----------



## treelover (May 2, 2013)

They seem to be hyping up these elections more than most local ones, but are they significant? and if not why is the media doing this?

The turnout will be low as usual, though I do expect some people who don't usually vote to turn out for UKIP


----------



## DotCommunist (May 2, 2013)

treelover said:


> *They seem to be hyping up these elections more than most local ones, but are they significant? and if not why is the media doing this?*
> 
> The turnout will be low as usual, though I do expect some people who don't usually vote to turn out for UKIP


 

I think because its looking like the tories and libs are going to take a pasting and the assumption is that labour and UKIP will make the gains.


----------



## frogwoman (May 2, 2013)

Is it worth voting for Labour or ukip then? Don't think I could really bring myself to vote for either of them two! It would be Ukip in my area who had the best chance tbh.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 2, 2013)

I wouldn't bother tbh, anyway isn't your ward like Tory heartland


I'm expecting Labour and Co-operative party lash up to do well round here.


----------



## belboid (May 2, 2013)

J Ed said:


> The Graunid was talking up the prospects of UKIP winning South Shields, I can't imagine it for a second but then again Bradford West happened..


not a chance.  Labour are talking about the possibility as a way of getting their vote out.  They want a decent swing to them, to take as much shine of UKIP as possible


----------



## emanymton (May 2, 2013)

Regarding UKIP, if they do well is there a possibility it could damage them in the long term as the have to deal with having lots of elected councilors?


----------



## belboid (May 2, 2013)

emanymton said:


> Regarding UKIP, if they do well is there a possibility it could damage them in the long term as the have to deal with having lots of elected councilors?


even more exposed as truly barking?  You'd have to think so.  A few, no doubt, will prove to be relatively sane and sensible, but as councillors have so little power, we'll only get to hear about the nutters


----------



## Streathamite (May 2, 2013)

treelover said:


> They seem to be hyping up these elections more than most local ones, but are they significant? and if not why is the media doing this?


UKIP factor, innit


----------



## redsquirrel (May 2, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I think because its looking like the tories and libs are going to take a pasting and the assumption is that labour and UKIP will make the gains.


LibDems probably won't do as badly as they have in the last two years. Most of their marginals this time are Con/LD, where they still do ok, rather than Lab/LD. Plus UKIP could help them significantly as they did in Eastleaigh.


----------



## emanymton (May 2, 2013)

belboid said:


> even more exposed as truly barking? You'd have to think so. A few, no doubt, will prove to be relatively sane and sensible, but as councillors have so little power, we'll only get to hear about the nutters


Yeah that's what I was thinking, it's quite easy to sit around snipping (something those of us on the left know all too well) but they will come under much closer scrutiny once elected.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

any predictions for TUSC?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> any predictions for TUSC?


any predictions for STFU? you're getting to be a bore on this topick as you are on so many others.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

you are so boring they made you a librarian - at least that posh school of yours gave you some sage career advice


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> you are so boring they made you a librarian - at least that posh school of yours gave you some sage career advice


if you are going to insult people please make sure they know about it by either quoting them or tagging them. otherwise you come across as a loser, when i thought you wanted people to stop thinking of you as a loser and begin to show you the respect you think you deserve. given you know as much about my schooling as you do about the construction of a faceted classification scheme, perhaps you should stop showing your ignorance.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model you seem touchy on the subject - anyway, this is a tedious exchange, as are most exchanges involving your good self


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Pickman's model you seem touchy on the subject - anyway, this is a tedious exchange, as are most exchanges involving your good self


you're only saying that because you get the worst of them


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> you're only saying that because you get the worst of them


 boring, even by the standards of your own profession


----------



## fractionMan (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> boring, even by the standards of your own profession


 
You can fuck off with the 'boring librarian' insults tbh.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

ah, another one. Sssshhhh - quiet please


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> boring, even by the standards of your own profession


i don't know why you find librarians, and by extension libraries, boring. what i spend my days doing is helping people get their hands on information they need, and in the process finding out quite a bit about subjects i would otherwise never have encountered. while some aspects of librarianship are quite dry, the location, organization and retrieval of information are not: and of the two ways of getting information - remembering it or remembering where you can find it - the latter is simpler, and that is what librarians do. you may have noticed the outcry when it is proposed libraries are closed. i wonder whether anyone would care a jot whether where you work were closed. by the way, some librarians of whom you may have heard are casanova, leibniz, mao tse-tung and philip larkin.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

I actually know and quite like some librarians.  The ones who don't act like pricks on internet bulletin boards.   I do like and value libararies - and have been a vocal critic of my local Labour group's decision to close half of them in the borough   I'm not sure the world would have been worse off without the 4 famous examples you cite though


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I actually know and quite like some librarians. The ones who don't act like pricks on internet bulletin boards. I do like and value libararies - and have been a vocal critic of my local Labour group's decision to close half of them in the borough  I'm not sure the world would have been worse off without the 4 famous examples you cite though


perhaps then you could show your librarian friends the posts where you describe their profession as boring and see how pleased they are with what you really feel.


----------



## Random (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Neither solution is perfect but at least turning up and spoiling a ballet paper stops them calling you apathetic.


That's another reason spoiling as politics is a terrible idea. It's a built-in split in the working class and involves those "conscious" ballot spoilers feeling superior and more "political" than the poor lumpen apathetic non turning up masses, who's choice is seen as being somehow outside politics.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Neither solution is perfect but at least turning up and spoiling a ballet paper stops them calling you apathetic.


stop dancing round the issue.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps then you could show your librarian friends the posts where you describe their profession as boring and see how pleased they are with what you really feel.


Lots of useful professions can also be boring


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Lots of useful professions can also be boring


which useful profession do you work in?


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

what's a ballet paper?


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> which useful profession do you work in?


 research and consultancy; magazine editing


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> what's a ballet paper?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> research and consultancy; magazine editing


'research and consultancy'? what's that then?


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Researching stuff and consulting with folk


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Researching stuff and consulting with folk


clearly. but researching WHAT and consulting over WHAT? are you a management consultant and you don't want to admit it?


----------



## Random (May 2, 2013)

Please, not only is this off-topic, it's boring as well


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

no I'm not!  Researching policy related issues for trade unions, and helping them influence the policy makers.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

Random said:


> Please, not only is this off-topic, it's boring as well


the previous few pages are an indication of why results threads should be posted when there are results expected and not when there's hours and hours to kill beforehand.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Random said:


> Please, not only is this off-topic, it's boring as well


 he started it


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> no I'm not! Researching policy related issues for trade unions, and helping them influence the policy makers.


see, that wasn't so very difficult, was it? but it's not like trade unions have a very good record in recent years of influencing policy makers is it.


----------



## Random (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> the previous few pages are an indication of why results threads should be posted when there are results expected and not when there's hours and hours to kill beforehand.


Just stop


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

Random said:


> That's another reason spoiling as politics is a terrible idea. It's a built-in split in the working class and involves those "conscious" ballot spoilers feeling superior and more "political" than the poor lumpen apathetic non turning up masses, who's choice is seen as being somehow outside politics.


this is a bit off-topic, having nothing really to do with the op.


----------



## Random (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> this is a bit off-topic, having nothing really to do with the op.


Oh ffs grow up


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> see, that wasn't so very difficult, was it? but it's not like trade unions have a very good record in recent years of influencing policy makers is it.


 
No, but they may have ameliorated policies from being even worse than they otherwise have been.  

Now then, any predictions for TUSC?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

Random said:


> Oh ffs grow up


you're happy enough with your own little digressions which have nothing to do with the op


----------



## Favelado (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> you're happy enough with your own little digressions which have nothing to do with the op


 
You're a twat. Shut up.


----------



## Random (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Now then, any predictions for TUSC?


 What are people saying in the lobbies of power?


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

a) parliament has been prorogued and won't sit again til Her Maj's speech next week so they've all fucked off
b) TUSC isn't making a splash even in the small world of lefty unions.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> a) parliament has been prorogued and won't sit again til Her Maj's speech next week so they've all fucked off
> b) TUSC isn't making a splash even in the small world of lefty unions.


you're coming across here as a traditional little labourite sneering at a competitor. if the tusc are so utterly insignificant why do you continue mentioning them at every drop of the hat?

while it's true that the tusc is unlikely to make much progress tonight, i thought their policies might be those that you, as a _soi-disant _member of the labour left, could agree with.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

Favelado said:


> You're a twat. Shut up.


nothing to contribute on topic? what a surprise.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 2, 2013)




----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> you're coming across here as a traditional little labourite sneering at a competitor. if the tusc are so utterly insignificant why do you continue mentioning them at every drop of the hat?  while it's true that the tusc is unlikely to make much progress tonight, i thought their policies might be those that you, as a _soi-disant _member of the labour left, could agree with.


 
That's entirely an inference drawn by yourself.  Whilst I'm sceptical of its chances of succeeding, I bear no personal anomosity whatsoever towards them, nor would its failure give me any pleasure.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> That's entirely an inference drawn by yourself. Whilst I'm sceptical of its chances of succeeding, I bear no personal anomosity whatsoever towards them, nor would its failure give me any pleasure.


what other minor parties do you believe will make few, if any, gains tonight?


----------



## Streathamite (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> you are so boring they made you a librarian


what a charming, progressive and enlightened attitude you have towards the essential beacons of education, culture and empowerment that libraries are! 
I presume this is the Official Labour-Without-Illusions line...


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

Streathamite said:


> what a charming, progressive and enlightened attitude you have towards the essential beacons of education, culture and empowerment that libraries are!
> I presume this is the Official Labour-Without-Illusions line...


 
Carry on down the thread - I've made perfectly clear that I support and value libraries.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Carry on down the thread - I've made perfectly clear that I support and value libraries.


weasel words, not to be trusted.


----------



## articul8 (May 2, 2013)

I've publicly attacked the council exec member who lead the closure of half the boroughs libraries ("the next exciting phase in the transformation of Brent's library services!)


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I've publicly attacked the council exec member who lead the closure of half the boroughs libraries ("the next exciting phase in the transformation of Brent's library services!)


did you deck him/her or were you held back by your comrades?


----------



## mk12 (May 2, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> can't decide whether not to bother or spoil the ballot paper.


 
The political impact of the former would be equal to the political impact of the latter.


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I've publicly attacked the council exec member who lead the closure of half the boroughs libraries ("the next exciting phase in the transformation of Brent's library services!)


With a pickaxe I hope


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I've publicly attacked the council exec member who lead the closure of half the boroughs libraries ("the next exciting phase in the transformation of Brent's library services!)


 
There is something in the term 'transformation' that doesn't quite feel right.


----------



## The39thStep (May 2, 2013)

Streathamite said:


> what a charming, progressive and enlightened attitude you have towards the essential beacons of education, culture and empowerment that libraries are!
> I presume this is the Official Labour-Without-Illusions line...


 
You are over stretching the capabilities of most libraries mate. Thats why we are all on t'internet


----------



## gentlegreen (May 2, 2013)

Good grief.
If local government and voting is tedious, what can it be like for those party helpers who take names outside ?
Since I forgot my card, the old chap asked me to find out what my number was, remember it and let him know when I came out... (at least I think he did, I'd lost the will to live by then)

Did I heck.
He was wearing a Libdem badge anyway.


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

if you've told them you'll vote for them, and don't want them to come and knock on your door later in the evening to get you to vote, give them your number. otherwise there's nothing they use it for, so don't bother.


----------



## gentlegreen (May 2, 2013)

killer b said:


> if you've told them you'll vote for them, and don't want them to come and knock on your door later in the evening to get you to vote, give them your number. otherwise there's nothing they use it for, so don't bother.


I've no idea. I haven't spoken to any kind of politician in decades.


----------



## Streathamite (May 2, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> You are over stretching the capabilities of most libraries mate. Thats why we are all on t'internet


yes, you're probably right Mr Steps. I've always just loved libraries, since I was v young


----------



## JimW (May 2, 2013)

Streathamite said:


> yes, you're probably right Mr Steps. I've always just loved libraries, since I was v young


Plus I'll need somewhere out the wet when I'm very old.


----------



## JTG (May 2, 2013)

JimW said:


> Plus I'll need somewhere out the wet when I'm very old.


Wetherspoons


----------



## jakethesnake (May 2, 2013)

Well, i've just been to vote... TUSC - although i didn't even know they were standing here untill i saw the ballot paper. i was going to spoil my ballot because i couldn't bring myself to vote labour any more. Ya gotta love democracy.


----------



## JimW (May 2, 2013)

JTG said:


> Wetherspoons


On my currently projected pension of zero pounds, free places like the library will have to feature in the rotation at some point.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 2, 2013)

Random said:


> That's another reason spoiling as politics is a terrible idea. It's a built-in split in the working class and involves those "conscious" ballot spoilers feeling superior and more "political" than the poor lumpen apathetic non turning up masses, who's choice is seen as being somehow outside politics.


 
Both sets of my grandparents (railways one side, building trade the other, and neither of them were  managers!) had that view. They were all self educated socialists who didn't have much time for ignorance. Do something, don't just idly not bother, was their attitude and not just to elections. They were very TU active too and got right fucked off by fellow workers who .... erm ... didn't think stuff through too well 

But in those days (1930s), voting Labour and being active in a mainstream TU was OK. Unlike nowamedays


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 2, 2013)

JimW said:


> On my currently projected pension of zero pounds, free places like the library will have to feature in the rotation at some point.


 
You'll be lucky. Amazon will have bought up all the library buildings and converted them into fully automated book warehouses.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 2, 2013)

There is a rumour that one polling station in the Doncaster Borough has only had eleven voters in up to 9 o'clock!!!


----------



## DotCommunist (May 2, 2013)

its sad that there will be no cgi landscapes and all night coverage of the count as it rolls in.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> its sad that there will be no cgi landscapes and all night coverage of the count as it rolls in.


victims of the cuts


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

JimW said:


> Plus I'll need somewhere out the wet when I'm very old.


bus shelter


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

Random said:


> That's another reason spoiling as politics is a terrible idea. It's a built-in split in the working class and involves those "conscious" ballot spoilers feeling superior and more "political" than the poor lumpen apathetic non turning up masses, who's choice is seen as being somehow outside politics.


To be fair I don't actually give a shit, it's just an interesting, challenging debate I've never had before. It also works the other way around - you get those people who decide everyone who votes is a 'sheeple' and we all know anyone who uses the word sheeple is a dick.



articul8 said:


> what's a ballet paper?


Fuck off.


----------



## andysays (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Lots of useful professions can also be boring


 
Boredom is always counter-revolutionary


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (May 2, 2013)

First hints coming through from political hacks on Twitter.

From @patrickwintour of the Guardian:

"Labour in South Shields says its vote share in mid-40s, UKIP reach 30 %, Tories fall from 21 % in 2010 to single figs. Libs obliterated."


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> First hints coming through from political hacks on Twitter.
> 
> From @patrickwintour of the Guardian:
> 
> "Labour in South Shields says its vote share in mid-40s, UKIP reach 30 %, Tories fall from 21 % in 2010 to single figs. Libs obliterated."


good news about the lib dem vote


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

andysays said:


> Boredom is always counter-revolutionary


if that's the case why are so many marxist writings so fucking dull?


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> victims of the cuts


 
And a large number of results arent even being counted till Friday. I hate this trend, pseudo-democracy should not be restricted to normal working hours.


----------



## Quartz (May 2, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> You think? The Mayor of London was elected of 17.5% of the eligible voters, yet he still feels perfectly comfortable telling the trade unions that their votes to strike aren't valid unless they get 50% of the eligible voters.


 
That's a big problem with FPTP. I wish we had Approval Voting instead.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> That's a big problem with FPTP. I wish we had Approval Voting instead.


That wouldn't change turnout. It would just reconfigure so that a low-turnout is described as having 50% plus approval.


----------



## Quartz (May 2, 2013)

elbows said:


> And a large number of results arent even being counted till Friday. I hate this trend, pseudo-democracy should not be restricted to normal working hours.


 
I don't like the opening hours being so limited. It can make it difficult for those on the night shift to vote, because they're asleep or commuting during the day. Have them open for a full 24 hours say 07:00 Thurs to 07:00 Friday, then the count proceeds on Friday during the day. Actually, I'd like to see polling day and the Friday be public holidays. (Poll workers would obviously be compensated by having Mon & Tues off instead.) Vote on the Thursday, get plastered on Friday celebrating or commiserating, then recover on Sat / Sun.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> I don't like the opening hours being so limited. It can make it difficult for those on the night shift to vote, because they're asleep or commuting during the day. Have them open for a full 24 hours say 07:00 Thurs to 07:00 Friday, then the count proceeds on Friday during the day. Actually, I'd like to see polling day and the Friday be public holidays. (Poll workers would obviously be compensated by having Mon & Tues off instead.) Vote on the Thursday, get plastered on Friday celebrating or commiserating, then recover on Sat / Sun.


He's on about result returns not voting hours.


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> I don't like the opening hours being so limited. It can make it difficult for those on the night shift to vote, because they're asleep or commuting during the day. Have them open for a full 24 hours say 07:00 Thurs to 07:00 Friday, then the count proceeds on Friday during the day. Actually, I'd like to see polling day and the Friday be public holidays. (Poll workers would obviously be compensated by having Mon & Tues off instead.) Vote on the Thursday, get plastered on Friday celebrating or commiserating, then recover on Sat / Sun.


fuck no. i hate a daytime count. overnight the day of the election, starting when polls close at 10 please.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> I don't like the opening hours being so limited. It can make it difficult for those on the night shift to vote, because they're asleep or commuting during the day. Have them open for a full 24 hours say 07:00 Thurs to 07:00 Friday, then the count proceeds on Friday during the day. Actually, I'd like to see polling day and the Friday be public holidays. (Poll workers would obviously be compensated by having Mon & Tues off instead.) Vote on the Thursday, get plastered on Friday celebrating or commiserating, then recover on Sat / Sun.


so 15 hours not iyo long enough for the polls to be open.


----------



## Quartz (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> so 15 hours not iyo long enough for the polls to be open.


 
No: a 12 hour shift, plus a 90 minute commute (max mandated by DWP) each way is 15 hours. No time to vote there.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:
			
		

> No: a 12 hour shift, plus a 90 minute commute (max mandated by DWP) each way is 15 hours. No time to vote there.



One of them non postal areas is it?


----------



## Quartz (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> One of them non postal areas is it?


 
You have to apply for a postal vote well in advance.


----------



## shagnasty (May 2, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> its sad that there will be no cgi landscapes and all night coverage of the count as it rolls in.


Only six Councils and one safe labour bye election to be called overnight


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> You have to apply for a postal vote well in advance.


So do so then?


----------



## belboid (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> You have to apply for a postal vote well in advance.


There aren't that many jobs with 12 hour shifts any more. And unless they are 8.30-20.30 then it wouldn't impinge upon such a worker anyway. If you are that 1/10000 person, then you'll probably know which of the two shifts you'll be doing well in advance, and if you don't, you just apply for a postal. 

Really, not an issue.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 2, 2013)

From the Guardian live Feed


> Ukip could have up to 10 MPs after the next election and help to form a coalition in the event of another hung Parliament, says the party’s treasurer.
> In an interview with the Telegraph, Stuart Wheeler, also a major donor to Ukip, claimed the party could hold the balance of power after the 2015 election and have a minister in a new coalition government.
> He compared the rise of Ukip to the success of the Scottish National Party:
> [T]he Scottish Nats came from virtually nowhere to have a majority in the Scottish Parliament. We could suddenly jump like anything. We may get none, or we could get a few or we could get a lot.​Everyone would be very surprised if we got more than 10 [MPs] but you just can’t rule out us getting much more than that even. I am not forecasting that I am just saying it is a possibility.


Keep dreaming mate


----------



## brogdale (May 2, 2013)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> First hints coming through from political hacks on Twitter.
> 
> From @patrickwintour of the Guardian:
> 
> "Labour in South Shields says its vote share in mid-40s, UKIP reach 30 %, Tories fall from 21 % in 2010 to single figs. Libs obliterated."


 
Good if true, but those 'estimates' still leave 16% to play for; they can't all of gone to Elvis etc., can they?


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

belboid said:


> There aren't that many jobs with 12 hour shifts any more. And unless they are 8.30-20.30 then it wouldn't impinge upon such a worker anyway. If you are that 1/10000 person, then you'll probably know which of the two shifts you'll be doing well in advance, and if you don't, you just apply for a postal.
> 
> Really, not an issue.


Plenty of people I know (If they even manage to get a job) do twelve hours shifts, and when coupled with raising a family, thinking about voting can come well down the list.


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Good if true, but those 'estimates' still leave 16% to play for; they can't all of gone to Elvis etc., can they?


I do hope so.


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

Even the BBC news website live text coverage of the election results doesnt start till 7am. Boo.


----------



## shagnasty (May 2, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> From the Guardian live Feed
> Keep dreaming mate


Yes and if your auntie had balls she would be your uncle


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

This is shit. Worst local elections ever.


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2013)

elbows said:


> Even the BBC news website live text coverage of the election results doesnt start till 7am. Boo.


Out of order innit? it isnt supposed to be convenient, its supposed to be theatre for disfunctional insomniacs ffs.


----------



## brogdale (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I do hope so.


 


They got 14% in 2010, so I wonder just how little of the 16% 'unaccounted for' they're getting to classify as obliteration?


----------



## ferrelhadley (May 2, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> > [T]he Scottish Nats came from virtually nowhere to have a majority in the Scottish Parliament.
> 
> 
> From the Guardian live Feed
> Keep dreaming mate


The Nats were winning Westminster seats back in the 60s. Even in the mid 70s they were getting near 1/3 of the votes in Scotland. 

Not that the kippers are likely to be bothered by little things like reality when drawing analogies.


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

Oh well, the Guardian it is then.

Meanwhile coverage of Question Time via twitter is slightly more lively than the old election tv specials.

 Woodo ‏@woodo79
OOH FUCK RIGHT OFF YOU FUCKING MASSIVE HONKING LEMON COLOURED HYPOCRITE TORY SUPPORTING WASTE OF RED BENCH SPACE. #*bbcqt*

@*OwenJones84*
1m​Wow. Shirley Williams claims the NHS has been saved after voting to privatise it. Satire cruelly bludgeoned to death #*bbcqt*


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)

Might have to mashup our own election coverage mix of nostalgia and current political parping in order to fill the void. Join me.


----------



## elbows (May 2, 2013)




----------



## coley (May 2, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> You'll be lucky. Amazon will have bought up all the library buildings and converted them into fully automated book warehouses.


Foolish optimist, they will be taken over by G4S, their locations are ideal for guard rooms and detention centres, as for reading, we will be allowed carefully selected kindle editions of the thoughts of chairman Ed


----------



## coley (May 2, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Carry on down the thread - I've made perfectly clear that I support and value libraries.


But librarians?


----------



## coley (May 2, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> bus shelter


Another optimist


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

Not a local but, so what. Lib-dems losing yet another deposit in SS. How many out of how many?


----------



## coley (May 2, 2013)

Quartz said:


> I don't like the opening hours being so limited. It can make it difficult for those on the night shift to vote, because they're asleep or commuting during the day. Have them open for a full 24 hours say 07:00 Thurs to 07:00 Friday, then the count proceeds on Friday during the day. Actually, I'd like to see polling day and the Friday be public holidays. (Poll workers would obviously be compensated by having Mon & Tues off instead.) Vote on the Thursday, get plastered on Friday celebrating or commiserating, then recover on Sat / Sun.


I'll vote for that


----------



## coley (May 2, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Not a local but, so what. Lib-dems losing yet another deposit in SS. How many out of how many?


UKip get 30% in SS? Interesting to say the least.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 2, 2013)

Where does everyone find the results in any election? Is there a central website or do we just have to lurk on about 50 pages and several TV channels at the same time?


----------



## butchersapron (May 2, 2013)

coley said:


> UKip get 30% in SS? Interesting to say the least.


Another by-election fuck you all vote. People more than happy to do that in by-elections. Gen elections back to normal. And part of it is to say to the media with their exposes last week, get stuffed, you're part of the same set of thiefs as the MPs. But here, in near ideal conditions for the north, it can't really impact on the labour vote.


----------



## ddraig (May 2, 2013)

bbc init


muscovyduck said:


> Where does everyone find the results in any election? Is there a central website or do we just have to lurk on about 50 pages and several TV channels at the same time?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Where does everyone find the results in any election? Is there a central website or do we just have to lurk on about 50 pages and several TV channels at the same time?


Local elections, here tmw. 

Not a lot happening tonight.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Another by-election fuck you all vote. People more than happy to do that in by-elections. Gen elections back to normal. And part of it is to say to the media with their exposes last week, get stuffed, you're part of the same set of thiefs as the MPs. But here, in near ideal conditions for the north, it can't really impact on the labour vote.


Aye, I think I hear what your saying, but UKIP getting 30% of the vote in a trad safe labour seat? and given the outgoing MP was very well liked? Don't know the turnout but I think millipede needs to rethink his strategy, the backlash might  not just bite Cameron's lot on the arse, just a thought.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Local elections, here tmw.
> 
> Not a lot happening tonight.


But I need something to happen tonight so I have a valid reason for staying awake


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

Turnout in the South Shields byelection was 39.3%, South Tyneside council said. A Tory source predicts Labour would secure about 50% of the vote, with Ukip second, the Conservatives third and the Lib Dems set to lose their deposit, PA reports.

Farage claiming they've got 25% or more, 'mostly' ex-labour


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> But I need something to happen tonight so I have a valid reason for staying awake


You could hop around on the regional boards here. I shall be.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> But I need something to happen tonight so I have a valid reason for staying awake


Try surfing Internet dating agencies? Order your shopping online, surf pictures of cute animals. The interweb is alive with possibilities, just don't visit possible apocalypse  websites, depression guaranteed


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Turnout in the South Shields byelection was 39.3%, South Tyneside council said. A Tory source predicts Labour would secure about 50% of the vote, with Ukip second, the Conservatives third and the Lib Dems set to lose their deposit, PA reports.
> 
> Farage claiming they've got 25% or more, 'mostly' ex-labour



Clegg,I resign, would make a good start to a bank holiday weekend


----------



## UhOhSeven (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> I think millipede needs to rethink his strategy, the backlash might not just bite Cameron's lot on the arse, just a thought.


 
I don't have any polls to back me up on this assertion, but I doubt most voters cast their ballots in locals as though taking part in a General Election. For a start, turn-out would be significantly higher if they did.


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> Clegg,I resign, would make a good start to a bank holiday weekend


sadly, they just doubled their majority in a by-election in a ward in his seat, so the bastard will have some happiness


----------



## shagnasty (May 3, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Where does everyone find the results in any election? Is there a central website or do we just have to lurk on about 50 pages and several TV channels at the same time?


the gruan http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2013/may/02/local-elections-2013-live-coverage


----------



## where to (May 3, 2013)

Hope not hate are running decent coverage if far right results on their website. Ukip have gained seats already.


----------



## pesh (May 3, 2013)

who's the Oompa Loompa?


----------



## Balbi (May 3, 2013)

Oh crikey.

Lib Demolition


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

UhOhSeven said:


> I don't have any polls to back me up on this assertion, but I doubt most voters cast their ballots in locals as though taking part in a General Election. For a start, turn-out would be significantly higher if they did.


No, your right, in these, it's largely about councillors people know, I've just voted for the local LC, but only because he has an excellent track record , in a blind choice I would have preferred to vote Green.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

LD's 6th or 7th in South Shields (BBC says 7th, Grauniad says 6th, neither of them putting any numbers up yet)

Live results from Lincolnshire (one of the few counties to be counting tonight) show LD vote down 20% on results so far in


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

352 votes. Wow. (lib-dems that is) Out of what 80 000 people.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

The disintegrating BNP polled twice as many votes as the lib-dems.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

South Shields (from Grauniad)

Emma Lewell-Buck (Lab) 12,493 (50.51%, -1.51%) 
Richard Elvin (UKIP) 5,988 (24.21%) 
Karen Allen (C) 2,857 (11.55%, -10.04%) 
Ahmed Khan (Ind) 1,331 (5.38%) 
Phil Brown (Ind Soc) 750 (3.03%) 
Lady Dorothy MacBeth Brookes (BNP) 711 (2.87%, -3.65%) 
Hugh Annand (LD) 352 (1.42%, -12.79%) 
Howling Laud Hope (Loony) 197 (0.80%) 
Thomas Darwood (Ind) 57 (0.23%)
Lab maj 6,505 (26.30%) 
Electorate 62,979; Turnout 24,736 (39.28%, -18.42%)


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

So that's 5(?) lost deposits and one kept seat. Guess which ones are more indicative of 2015?


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Turnout in the South Shields byelection was 39.3%, South Tyneside council said. A Tory source predicts Labour would secure about 50% of the vote, with Ukip second, the Conservatives third and the Lib Dems set to lose their deposit, PA reports.
> 
> Farage claiming they've got 25% or more, 'mostly' ex-labour


 
If that's correct, expect a sharp move to the right by labour.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

I'm faintly disappointed that the LD's didn't come behind the MRLP...


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> If that's correct, expect a sharp move to the right by labour.


Why?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> If that's correct, expect a sharp move to the right by labour.


Why? They won by a mile and with the wind in UKIP sails. They don't need to win UKIP votes nor do they need to win UKUIP votes - or at lest not loose them as much as the tories in swing seats in the south and midlands. You're in full on panic mode now, the opposite of left unity have recomposed the left. How about just making a reasoned analysis? You have to stop this.


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

Puddy_Tat said:


> South Shields (from Grauniad)
> 
> Emma Lewell-Buck (Lab) 12,493 (50.51%, -1.51%)
> Richard Elvin (UKIP) 5,988 (24.21%)
> ...


 
Is she a real 'lady'


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> Why?


OMG THE UKIP!!!!!!!!!!!! MUZS B LIK DEM!!!!!


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> Is she a real 'lady'


Always asking the relevant questions.


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

FFS, stop acting like the board policeman, its tantamount to bullying, this board could be a lot more popular if it wasn't for the high octane aggression.


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> OMG THE UKIP!!!!!!!!!!!! MUZS B LIK DEM!!!!!


dunno why I bother tbh. Think the bellend has me on ignore.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

It's bullying to even ask him a question (not that he would bring himself down to earth to answer any questions, engage in debate, recognise other people as people by replying to them, we're just cannon fodder, read my latest piece of why you are all shit).


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> If that's correct, expect a sharp move to the right by labour.


 


killer b said:


> Why?


 
because in the last few decades, that's all labour has done.  a good election result has been taken by the party leadership* to justify them having moved right, and a bad result (or only a close win) has been taken to indicate a need to move further right.

* using the term loosely



I'd like to see labour set itself out as a real alternative, but can't see it happening.

Latest from Lincolnshire -

UKIP effect in Lincoln - broadly, labour gaining seats from tories, LD vote (previously 3rd place) evaporated, UKIP vote more than the labour majority.  Obviously I can't tell where the lost LD / tory voters have gone, or where the UKIP / gained labour voters have come from...

Lincoln (although the parliamentary constituency is bigger than the city boundaries) is the sort of swing seat that tends to elect whatever shade of MP that wins the general election.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Puddy_Tat said:


> because in the last few decades, that's all labour has done. a good election result has been taken by the party leadership* to justify them having moved right, and a bad result (or only a close win) has been taken to indicate a need to move further right.
> 
> * using the term loosely
> 
> ...


Labour exist to win seats. They do that by winning votes, Why would going hard right (what does this even mean?) do that?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Labour exist to win seats. They do that by winning votes, Why would going hard right (what does this even mean?) do that?


 
it depends if they think they would do better by winning the votes of the people who have given up on the whole silly business, or the votes of the few thousand tory press reading floating voters in marginal constituencies.

i would really like to be wrong on this, but with the noises the labour party has made in the last year or so about (for example) benefits and immigration, I can't see it...


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

The tory nightmare is happening. UKIP opening the door to labour, labour hoovering up lib-dems. Staying as they are is fine.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

With 44 of 77 seats in Lincolnshire declared, UKIP have won 7.

Results for Lincolnshire on this site with a variety of graphics and stats, although I believe the number of seats won/lost has malfunctioned as at the time of writing it has the Tories on minus 42 

http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/loca...county-councillor/elections/election-results/


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Make that 8.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

as an aside, I'm also mildly disappointed that the party (sort of) that's so far got 4 seats on Lincs County Council are "Lincolnshire Independents" not "Lincolnshire Independence" as I misunderstood it to be when a friend told me about them earlier today (they weren't on the radar when I lived there)



elbows said:


> With 44 of 77 seats in Lincolnshire declared, UKIP have won 7.
> 
> Results for Lincolnshire on this site with a variety of graphics and stats, although I believe the number of seats won/lost has malfunctioned as at the time of writing it has the Tories on minus 42
> 
> http://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/loca...county-councillor/elections/election-results/


 
It's bollocks - it's mathematically correct in that the tories had 60 seats before the election and (at the time of your post), know they have 18, but there's about 33 seats still to declare...


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Make that 8.


They should be doing well over the 100 then.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

> South Shields's new MP, a 34-year-old social worker, had been fed a laundry list of attack lines to use on the doorstep when a voter confessed they were thinking about voting Ukip. "Did you know [Ukip leader] Nigel Farage wants to decriminalise crack cocaine?" she would tell school-run mums. "Vote for Ukip and we'll lose thousands of jobs in South Tyneside," she informed dockers turned car manufacturers, fearful for their jobs at the Nissan plant.


 
This is almost as bad as the lib-dems wanting to give the vote to paedos (which they do, it's the only manifesto pledge they are yet to renege on).


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

Reading that local elections board Butchers linked to, UKIP have won three of four (I think) seats in Boston, all candidates coming from same family.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

JimW said:


> Reading that local elections board Butchers linked to, UKIP have won three of four (I think) seats in Boston, all candidates coming from same family.


Whatever are you suggesting?


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Whatever are you suggesting?


They also pour the concrete on the bypass fly-overs, so I daren't say any more.


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

Though I suppose boringly it likely just says something about where you find people willing to be candidates when you're building rapidly.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

now 11 ukippers in Lincs CC


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

JimW said:


> Though I suppose boringly it likely just says something about where you find people willing to be candidates when you're building rapidly.


There's that, not ness a problem - but these people, maybe involved in the bypass stuff as a group? Don't know obv.


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

Not sure if I've misunderstood their thread there but seem to be suggesting Labour are going to take control of Essex CC. Is that likely/possible?


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> There's that, not ness a problem - but these people, maybe involved in the bypass stuff as a group? Do't know obv.


I was more thinking about some sort of Japanese politics stylee family-run town, but then realised I don't even know if that's how Japanese politics works. So rambling shite really. Though that same family in Boston also provided a narrowly losing candidate too. Worse than the Millibands.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

JimW said:


> Not sure if I've misunderstood their thread there but seem to be suggesting Labour are going to take control of Essex CC. Is that likely/possible?


That would be beyond astonishing. That would involve almost every seat going opposite.


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That would be beyond astonishing.


It's some 5 am post on the last page of that Essex thread asking:


> Is this the only time Labour have won a county council in the South? Having solid Labour Barking and Dagenham within its boundaries helped Labour massively in those days.
> 
> Read more:http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/526/essex?page=3#ixzz2SBZcIAKz


Can't think they just mean a seat, but from more recent posts looks like first results only just coming in so maybe that's a Labour apparatchik on the sauce.
ETA: Or more likely I've missed some historical discussion preceding.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

JimW said:


> Not sure if I've misunderstood their thread there but seem to be suggesting Labour are going to take control of Essex CC. Is that likely/possible?


 
sounds pretty unlikely - latest here

currently

Tory - 15 seats (1 gain, 7 losses, 14 held)
Labour - 5 seats (4 gain, 1 held)
LD - 4 seats (1 loss, 4 held)
UKIP - 3 seats (3 gain)
Ind - 1 (1 held)

While there's 49 seats to declare, I can't see all that many of them going labour

ETA - can't remember a time there was a labour shire county in the south east.

even in the tory meltdown in 1993 (when Buckinghamshire was the only remaining tory controlled shire) the rest of the south east was 'no overall control' - to some extent reflecting labour voters being prepared to vote LD tactically


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

Puddy_Tat said:


> sounds pretty unlikely - latest here
> 
> currently
> 
> ...


Yeah, think I've seized on that post out of context of a historical discussion they were having. Sorry. I know the thread needs a bit of spicing up while we wait but not with any old random bullshit from me.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

JimW said:


> It's some 5 am post on the last page of that Essex thread asking:
> 
> Can't think they just mean a seat, but from more recent posts looks like first results only just coming in so maybe that's a Labour apparatchik on the sauce.
> ETA: Or more likely I've missed some historical discussion preceding.


Look at the dates on that man. 15 minutes in the electoral shed for that.


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Look at the dates on that man. 15 minutes in the electoral shed for that.


My first scan took it to be someone asking if this was first ever Lab CC win in south and then them older dates being people saying no, not unprecedented. But I'll take the sin-binning as I've definitely got that round my neck.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

Article on Labour List here about Labour's chances for the county elections - recognising that getting councils to 'no overall control' is about the best that can be hoped for with one or two exceptions, especially bearing in mind the major government's gerrymandering* to remove the urban areas from many of the shires to become unitary authorities.

* - my expression not theirs.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

UKIP councillors at the time of writing:

Lincolnshire 16
Essex 8
Hampshire 10
Gloucestershire 3
Dorset 1

edit - updated at 3am and now I'm going to bed.
edit again - ok one last pointless update for the night at 3.21am.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2013)

Puddy_Tat said:


> sounds pretty unlikely - latest here
> 
> currently
> 
> ...


Still looks very good for Labour though. With 49 left to declare and 28 there, and all else being equal, Labour set to gain 7 more (11 total, to 14ish)? Tories 1-2 more (2-3 total, to 41ish)? LDs to lose 1 or 2 more (10ish)? UKIP +8 total? That's 73, so 4 to the others/indies.

Slim Tory control. On a nutty council. Joy.

All else might not be equal. Tories and frothy-mouthed types vote early and often in areas with lots of dutiful civic volunteers and well-funded counts. There might be a small bias towards better off areas declaring early. Dependent on local traditions of course. Relatively high turnout for locals, I think.

Tory hung council not impossible. Coalition with UKIP? 

/thoughts


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

UKIP just got another one in Lincolnshire.

Nearly got one in Dorset but ended up with two votes less than the Tory.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Current Essex:

Tory 41
Labour 9
Lib Dem 9
UKIP 8
Green 2
Others 4

Only a couple left to declare there.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2013)

What's their previous track record in locals? They're standing relatively enormous numbers of new candidates, aren't they? I've only seen N/A on gains. It's astonishing. UKIP is supposed to be for the Euros.

We may have a new third party. And one which might just have an edge over the Lib Dems in terms of efficient geographical distribution of voters (many or few voters, not many wasted in between). Not necessarily in time for 2015, although I think all 4th parties and many indies will do well (if not well enough to win huge numbers of seats).

But if they can avoid implosion, well ... the LDs aren't going to be around in great numbers, although I think the lack of any other tactical vote in areas where UKIP is irrelevant will save their skin, but not Clegg's.

Big if. They're a shambles. And I think the odds of a a Savile-esque problem, or other corruption-cover-up type scandals, might arise from all this publicity and rapid, somewhat reckless expansionism. Farage may come to rue the day, but the snake oil salesman's timing is impeccable. And a lot of people like him.

Interesting times. They'll smash the Euros for sure. Let's hope TUSC puts up a great fight from the left. 2015 is a long shot but I smell seats up for grabs, and Green gains, and non-English parties trumping Labour. The left needs to soak up more of the protest/sick-of-them-all vote and, IMO, they need to do it by loudly proclaiming that austerity is a fraud. It needs fucking shouting until even the BBC report it.

/stuff


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Current Essex:
> 
> Tory 41
> Labour 9
> ...


Greens nicked a couple from Labour. Excellent. 75 seats, not 77, if it is only 2 to declare. Close enough. All else was equal.

Applied statistics.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2013)

Duh. The bias in the sample was the other way round. Labour areas declared a tad earlier on average (smaller turnouts?), Greens too small to be captured by the sample, likely to have made their gains from Labour, later on.

Sorry. Can't help myself. I love a good local election, me.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

To answer one of your questions, I am under the impression that UKIP only had 7 county councillors by the end of the 2009 vote, and I dont think any of them were in the areas that have counted tonight. But I am rather tired now so possibly made an error. Going to bed.


----------



## Fez909 (May 3, 2013)

This counting in the morning business is rubbish.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

I'm still up, just. UKIP now have 16 seats in Lincolnshire!


----------



## Random (May 3, 2013)

Dubbel postering


----------



## Random (May 3, 2013)

Dorest; no tories left on weymouth and portland council as LP take 5. Via Labour List live blog, which has stopped updating till 9am


----------



## Yossarian (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> Is she a real 'lady'


 
I think she might be Robert Kilroy-Silk.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

A lot of this UKIP South Shields analysis is bollocks isn't it? Claims that they've taken Labour votes when the Labour vote share was only down by a couple of points from 2010 and the Tory/Lib Dem vote collapsed. On the face of it, it's just the anti-Labour vote disappearing into UKIP


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 3, 2013)

Emma Lewell-Buck (Lab) 12,493 (50.51%, -1.51%) 
Richard Elvin (UKIP) 5,988 (24.21%) 
Karen Allen (C) 2,857 (11.55%, -10.04%) 
Ahmed Khan (Ind) 1,331 (5.38%) 
Phil Brown (Ind Soc) 750 (3.03%) 
Lady Dorothy MacBeth Brookes (BNP) 711 (2.87%, -3.65%) 
Hugh Annand (LD) 352 (1.42%, -12.79%) 
Howling Laud Hope (Loony) 197 (0.80%) 
Thomas Darwood (Ind) 57 (0.23%) 
Lab maj 6,505 (26.30%)

Lib Dems get only half as many votes as the BNP in South Shields and lose their deposit.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Summary for the morning crew:

South Shields: Labour 50.5%; UKIP 24%; Tories 10%; Ind 5%; Ind Socialist 3%; BNP 3%; Lib Dem 1.5%

Labour's Norma Redfearn has won the North Tyneside mayor vote on the first count with 55% of the vote. Tory incumbent took 36% and Lib Dems 8%

Councils: Tories have lost Gloucestershire and Lincolnshire to no overall control & retain control of Dorset, Somerset, Hampshire, Essex and Hertfordshire. Tories down 66 seats so far, Lib Dems down 15, Labour up 30, UKIP up 42, Independents up 6, Greens up 2 and Residents Association up 1. All this after 7 councils have declared their results. Another 27 to go.

UKIP have gained 9 seats in Essex, 10 in Hampshire, 3 in Gloucestershire, 16 in Lincolnshire, 1 in Dorset, 3 in Somerset

Labour won all five Weymouth & Portland Dorset CC seats

Two Green gains were in Essex - Rochford West & Witham North


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> 352 votes. Wow. (lib-dems that is) Out of what 80 000 people.


 
That _*is*_ obliteration.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Before the live coverage cranks up on the BBC it might be useful to (re)post the Rallings & Thrasher numbers they predicted in April..



> These are their national equivalent vote (NEV) figures - not the share of votes they expect the parties to actually get, but an estimate of what they parties would have got if local elections had been held in every ward in Britain based on the votes that were cast.
> 
> *Labour: 38%*
> *Conservatives: 29%*
> ...


 
Although the 'kippers have already exceeded that prediction with only a fraction of seats called!


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Council results so far:

*Dorset*
Conservative hold
C 27 (-2); LD 12 (-2); Lab 5 (+4); UKIP 1 (+1); Ind 0 (-1)

*Essex*
Conservative hold
C 42 (-18); Lab 9 (+7); LD 9 (-2); UKIP 9 (+9) Ind 3 (+2); Green 2 (+2); RA 1 (nc)

*Hampshire*
Conservative hold
C 45 (-6); LD 17 (-7); UKIP 10 (+10); Lab 4 (+3); Ind 2 (+1); G 0 (-1)

*Gloucestershire*
Conservatives lose to no overall control
C 23 (-11); LD 14 (+2) Lab 9 (+5); Ind 3 (+1); UKIP 3 (+3); Green 1 (nc)

*Somerset*
Conservative hold
C 28 (-5); LD 18 (-4); Lab 3 (+1); UKIP 3 (+3); Ind 2 (+2); Vacant 1 (Coker, candidate died, postponed to May 16th)

*Lincolnshire*
Conservatives lose to no overall control
C 36 (-26); UKIP 16 (+16); Lab 12 (+7); Ind 10 (+4); LD 3 (-1)

Hertfordshire still counting but def Conservative hold

Labour reckon they're on course to regain Derbyshire and will be close in Nottinghamshire and Staffordshire

Gloucestershire UKIP gains were all in the Forest - Drybrook & Lydbrook, Blakeney & Bream and Lydney


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

All three UKIP councillors elected in Boston are related. Insert punchline here. UKIP also won a by-election to Boston Borough Council

UKIP vote share in Hampshire 24.61%


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

Think Stroud played a big part in swapping Tories for Labour to bring NOC in Glos, besides those UKIP wins in the Forest.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

JimW said:


> Think Stroud played a big part in swapping Tories for Labour to bring NOC in Glos, besides those UKIP wins in the Forest.


Yep, Stroud all Labour other than Central which stayed Green as ever. People Against Bureaucracy won a seat in Cheltenham and the Lib Dems nabbed a couple off the Tories in the Cotswolds - Bourton-on-the-Water and Cirencester Beeches, UKIP vote exceeded the Lib Dem margin of victory in both cases


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

8.23am BST
*John Curtice,* the elections expert, has just told the BBC that Ukip seems to have achieved "*an astounding performance of a historic scale*". It was getting 26% of the vote in local elections and that was likely to continue when as the full results come in today. This would be its best performance in an election and the biggest incursion by a minor party in a local election, he said. Ukip had a chance to "*reshape the structure of English party politics*", he said.


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

How is TUSC doing, still elephant graveyard territory?


----------



## Ponyutd (May 3, 2013)

Tories splitting the UKIP vote.
_Twitter_


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> How is TUSC doing, still elephant graveyard territory?


Among my several misreadings of that local election results forum butchers linked was getting excited thinking they'd won a seat then realised that it was just the candidates listed in ballot paper order and actual votes was usual low hundreds.


----------



## chilango (May 3, 2013)

Unconfirmed reports from Oxfordshire claim that skips full of thousands of ballot papers with "Proletarian Democracy" written on them have been found near the count.


----------



## JimW (May 3, 2013)

chilango said:


> Unconfirmed reports from Oxfordshire claim that skips full of thousands of ballot papers with "Proletarian Democracy" written on them have been found near the count.


I still can't believe the bourgeois have fallen for our UKIP front in such large numbers.


----------



## chilango (May 3, 2013)

Btw there proper rolling election coverage on BBC News Channel now. Maps, graphs the lot.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 3, 2013)

chilango said:


> Unconfirmed reports from Oxfordshire claim that skips full of thousands of ballot papers with "Proletarian Democracy" written on them have been found near the count.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 3, 2013)

Empower those people, disenfranchise UKIP supporting idiots


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> How is TUSC doing, still elephant graveyard territory?


 
Didn't they beat the lib dems in South Shields?  Or was that a different socialist grouping?


As someone on that Twitter pointed out, you wouldn't realise from the BBC coverage that the Greens actually have more councillors than UKIP.  Not sure if they're being given the 'oxygen of publicity' or 'enough rope'.  Or is it just that it makes a 'good story' for the news, pushing the far-right just because it's interesting/entertaining in the dull sphere of the main three-party political system?

Maybe it's strategic - more UKIP councillors gives more opportunity for a few of the hatstands to spout bigoted shite which can be held against them come the grown-ups election in 2015.


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2013)

William of Walworth said:


> disenfranchise UKIP supporting idiots


 
why?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> Didn't they beat the lib dems in South Shields? Or was that a different socialist grouping?
> 
> 
> As someone on that Twitter pointed out, you wouldn't realise from the BBC coverage that the Greens actually have more councillors than UKIP. Not sure if they're being given the 'oxygen of publicity' or 'enough rope'. Or is it just that it makes a 'good story' for the news, pushing the far-right just because it's interesting/entertaining in the dull sphere of the main three-party political system?
> ...


South Shields was an indy socialist

Negative resentful shit makes better news and faster gains than patient, positive stuff. Not everyone sees the Greens as positive obv but - in general - they don't get involved in the same level of fear mongering shite as the rest. Doesn't make for great news


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:
			
		

> Didn't they beat the lib dems in South Shields?  Or was that a different socialist grouping?
> 
> As someone on that Twitter pointed out, you wouldn't realise from the BBC coverage that the Greens actually have more councillors than UKIP.  Not sure if they're being given the 'oxygen of publicity' or 'enough rope'.  Or is it just that it makes a 'good story' for the news, pushing the far-right just because it's interesting/entertaining in the dull sphere of the main three-party political system?
> 
> Maybe it's strategic - more UKIP councillors gives more opportunity for a few of the hatstands to spout bigoted shite which can be held against them come the grown-ups election in 2015.



Maybe the greens aren't looking like getting 25%?


----------



## ChrisD (May 3, 2013)

Devon CC don't start the count until 10am !   results will be here:
http://www.devonnewscentre.info/follow-the-election-action-live-online/


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> Empower those people, disenfranchise UKIP supporting idiots



Maybe a short prison term would encourage them to be grown ups and vote for one of the big three?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Seen a tweet saying that in Westminster terms, the Lib Dems held Eastbourne, Colchester, Eastleigh, Yeovil & Cheltenham but lost Wells, Taunton, Somerton & Frome


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe a short prison term would encourage them to be grown ups and vote for one of the big three?


 
I'm sure putting my grandma in jail for voting UKIP would be a sensible and proportionate response.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Michael Crick tweeting that not one Lib Dem MP had been to South Shields to campaign


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Seen a tweet saying that in Westminster terms, the Lib Dems held Eastbourne, Colchester, Eastleigh, Yeovil & Cheltenham but lost Wells, Taunton, Somerton & Frome


Yeh there's all manner of stuff tweeted for no apparent reason


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe a short prison term would encourage them to be grown ups and vote for one of the big three?


Community payback ftw


----------



## chilango (May 3, 2013)

William of Walworth said:


> Empower those people, disenfranchise UKIP supporting idiots



I think you missed a "d" somewhere in that post.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Michael Crick tweeting that not one Lib Dem MP had been to South Shields to campaign


 
Wonder just how low the figure could have been if they had?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh there's all manner of stuff tweeted for no apparent reason


Morning


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Seen a tweet saying that in Westminster terms, the Lib Dems held Eastbourne, Colchester, Eastleigh, Yeovil & Cheltenham but lost Wells, Taunton, Somerton & Frome


 
V difficult to infer GE stuff from locals.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:
			
		

> Wonder just how low the figure could have been if they had?



We could have been through the looking glass


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2013)

Where's moon23?


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> Didn't they beat the lib dems in South Shields? Or was that a different socialist grouping?
> 
> 
> As someone on that Twitter pointed out, you wouldn't realise from the BBC coverage that the Greens actually have more councillors than UKIP. Not sure if they're being given the 'oxygen of publicity' or 'enough rope'. Or is it just that it makes a 'good story' for the news, pushing the far-right just because it's interesting/entertaining in the dull sphere of the main three-party political system?
> ...


 
You can't find more bigoted people than the Greens in my opinion


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Having said that about Yeovil, UKIP took Yeovil Central off the Lib Dems


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Cor, them _the UKIP are nasty_ plans worked out well then?


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Hope Not Hates campaign worked well


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Remember, this is them _holding back_ from a full frontal attack,


----------



## redsquirrel (May 3, 2013)

I could very well be eating my words about the 100 seats.


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Vote UKIP to beat the BNP


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> I could very well be eating my words about the 100 seats.


 
I was going to mention this yesterday


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Simon Hughes on SS:



> "It's a seat where we've had not presence," he said.


 
Apart from them consistent 14% votes. Even the liberal, the proper liberals used to be able to get around that. Once people see that you have no chance, they will not turn up. You now only have a real chance in 5-10 seats. Your total vote is going to just walk away.


----------



## Random (May 3, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> I could very well be eating my words about the 100 seats.


You thought they'd get fewer?


----------



## redsquirrel (May 3, 2013)

Aye, quite a lot less. I thought they'd get a decent share of vote but I didn't think it would translate into (that many) seats


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

Puddy_Tat said:


> because in the last few decades, that's all labour has done. a good election result has been taken by the party leadership* to justify them having moved right, and a bad result (or only a close win) has been taken to indicate a need to move further right.
> 
> * using the term loosely
> 
> ...


dunno, a vote like this for ukip is pure gold as far as the LP are concerned. they don't need to do anything - they can still mop up the 'pragmatic' left vote without having to do anything leftish, and why would they want to appeal to the UKIP voters who're cutting deep into the tory vote? can't see a bit rightward shift on the back of this myself, at least not from labour...


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> Aye, quite a lot less. I thought they'd get a decent share of vote but I didn't think it would translate into (that many) seats


 
vacancy at Permanent Revolutions political forecasting mutual


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Early evidence of the differential damage inflicted by UKIP:-


> The BBC has just released some figures showing how the share of the vote has gone up in key wards. These are provisional figures, of course, because most results are not in.
> Here are the figures for wards won by the Conservatives in 2009.
> Ukip: up 21
> Labour: up 6
> ...


 
So, no surprise that they're denting the tories hardest, but Farage's affected concern for 'the working man' is having an impact on Labour as well.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> vacancy at Permanent Revolutions political forecasting mutual


Think I better stick to chemistry


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> dunno, a vote like this for ukip is pure gold as far as the LP are concerned. they don't need to do anything - they can still mop up the 'pragmatic' left vote without having to do anything leftish, and why would they want to appeal to the UKIP voters who're cutting deep into the tory vote? can't see a bit rightward shift on the back of this myself, at least not from labour...


Yep, the UKIP surge is hardly hitting them, and where it does it's tiny compared to how its hitting the tories, so they can swallow it. It's fantastic for them and the tory nightmare come true.


----------



## ymu (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> A lot of this UKIP South Shields analysis is bollocks isn't it? Claims that they've taken Labour votes when the Labour vote share was only down by a couple of points from 2010 and the Tory/Lib Dem vote collapsed. On the face of it, it's just the anti-Labour vote disappearing into UKIP


They clearly haven't taken (net) Labour votes in SS. Tory + LD losses and never voters attracted to the circus, account for the UKIP vote. They'll get SDP-type ex-Labour LD-defectors down south and some midlands/north rarities. North is centre-right protest takings, not seat-winning swings from Labour.

Outside the south the 4th parties that _could_ fatally weaken Labour are the Greens and Respect in the Midlands and north plus Asian strongholds in the north. Rich pickings in the rural east (Norfolk, fens etc) too. Plaid in parts of Wales might be tactically forgiven for their collaborationist ways, SNP is the obvious way for Scotland to send a message to Westminster, irrelevant though they know the party to be down there.

I think it could be enough to hang Labour, if they don't pull their finger out soon and appeal to the massively obvious and numerically massive base of hacked off and impoverished cynics who will nevertheless turnout for a 'great deal better than the alternatives, and good riddance New Labour' type platform even if we can never hope for it to pay more than lip service to socialism. Tens of millions would benefit immediately from Keynesian stimulus to developing a fully sustainable economy within five parloaments with front-loaded tech and green investment with serious funding behind it.**

I think people are threatening to give all three a right good kicking in 2015, with some complex possibilities arising. Electoral chess. 2015 is many, many moves ahead. Time to compute outcome: approx 2 years.

/fantasy elections

**fantasy politica

Backed by all of us via taxes and ethical banking services with guaranteed open access free current and good value savings accounts with a public board sitting in public (on TV)selected jury style for paid 5 year non-executive terms with access to all training and technocratic translation as requested.

A million new sustainable homes in one parliament, priority urban brownfield sites, rebalancing family sizes catered for and offering public buyout of struggling home-owners who want to swap for a social tenancy for life.

Future building targets then to be determined by population growth and industrial shift with government guarantees to build up to the annual area targets if private builders are sitting on sites with planning permission and targets are missed. All new planning permission time limited. Social units to be selected by the council after private builds are complete and across a range of sizes, especially one and two bed flats.

Wages to be restored pro rata to the 65^ of the 1960 and 1970s with a 30 hour working week to ensure zero involuntary unemployment with tax breaks for companies that allow flexible working and use temporarily un-needed workers to work on improving product quality and reviewing management procesures.

Plenty of research shows that a high minimum wage this aids growth and prevents tax credits and in-work benefits from subsidising private profits rather than redistributing monies to families with higher costs, whilst keeping working in poverty and prone to insecure employment and periods of needing help to survive between jobs.


tl;dr Disavoy neoliberalism.

/fantasy politics

Wakes up.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Lib Dems in meltdown in Bristol, lost three so far to Inds, Greens and Tories


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe a short prison term would encourage them to be grown ups and vote for one of the big three?


And mebbes they could end up as one of the " big three"? though TBH you can hardly count the LDs as " big"


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> And mebbes they could end up as one of the " big three"? though TBH you can hardly count the LDs as " big"


Well clearly this can't be allowed to happen. Only these three existing parties are acceptable. Are 'legitimate'.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Lib Dems in meltdown in Bristol, lost three so far to Inds, Greens and Tories


Four now. Just finished third in a seat they held, behind Labour and Green. This is fun, go on Bristol, more to come


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Well clearly this can't be allowed to happen. Only these three existing parties are acceptable. Are 'legitimate'.



All of whom seem to be trying on Some of UKIPs clothes on for size, guaranteed EU referendum, tighter immigration controls? I expect some frantic scrambling from messrs Milliband and Cameron, and if Salmond prevails? Interesting times ahead


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Tory leader of Warwickshire CC has lost to the Greens


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Bristol so far: LD 1 (-4); L 1 (+1); C 2 (+1); G 1 (+1); Ind 1 (+1)

17 more to come in


----------



## Joe Reilly (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Vote UKIP to beat the BNP


 
Or maybe the other way round?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Rogers gone then. Lovely.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Rogers gone then. Lovely.


really?  I know (sort of) 3 candidates in that ward


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Rogers gone then. Lovely.


Yep. Lib Dems five down in Bristol, pushed into third in more than one of them


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

I thought i was on the bristol thread there. Do you really articul8? That's great.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

Who won Ashley then?  Labour?


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I thought i was on the bristol thread there. Do you really articul8? That's great.


No, not really


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Who won Ashley then? Labour?


Greens. if they weren't beating lib-dems i would be starting to get pissed off.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

Greens, eh?  How did TUSC do?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Who won Ashley then? Labour?


Labour finished strong second. Bodes well for Bristol West in 2015, Stephen Williams must be crapping himself


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Greens, eh? How did TUSC do?


Dreadful


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Greens, eh? How did TUSC do?


Why don't you just fuck off and have a wank in the house of commons bogs with a hilary mask on or something?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Bristol so far: LD 1 (-4); L 1 (+1); C 2 (+1); G 1 (+1); Ind 1 (+1)
> 
> 17 more to come in


LD down 5 in Bris now, Greens up 2


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Why don't you just fuck and have a wank in the house of commons bogs with a hilary mask on or something?


 on the pop so early?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> on the pop so early?


you're a sad obsessive articul8, and a sad obsessive with all the political nous of a brain-damaged nematode.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

they teach you about lesions in the nerve system of the nematode at that posh school of yours?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> they teach you about lesions in the nerve system of the nematode at that posh school of yours?


School. 

Sort yourself out and stop doing this.


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Early evidence of the differential damage inflicted by UKIP:-
> 
> 
> So, no surprise that they're denting the tories hardest, but Farage's affected concern for 'the working man' is having an impact on Labour as well.


those figures replicated nationally would win Labour every single one of the 105 target seats.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

I will when he stops the cretinous abuse


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I will when he stops the cretinous abuse


No you will not and you often initiate this stuff. It's pathetic.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I will when he stops the cretinous abuse


perhaps you could post something political and then we can see that ripped to shreds. that would be more fun that watching you post cretinous abuse like your pop post above.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

> you often initiate this stuff


No, I don't.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Tory leader of Warwickshire CC has lost to the Greens


 
Ha ha. To be honest its due to a NIMBY new housing estate issue in that Nuneaton seat, just as it was when the same green candidate won there in the borough council election. But its still very funny since the Tories sent big hitters here to launch their nationwide election campaign. (Cameron, Pickles and later Ken Clarke)


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps you could post something political and then we can see that ripped to shreds. that would be more fun that watching you post cretinous abuse like your pop post above.


 
Your political posts to trivial bollocks ratio is about 1:99. And the "politics" is generally sub-adolescent oh-so-radical wanking over dead coppers. So won't be taking lessons from you.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> Your political posts to trivial bollocks ratio is about 1:99. And the "politics" is generally sub-adolescent oh-so-radical wanking over dead coppers. So won't be taking lessons from you.


i wasn't asking you to take lessons from anyone, i was asking you to post something political. go on, i dare you.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

See the Owen Jones thread


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> See the Owen Jones thread


so you're not posting anything political on this political results thread. t'rrifick.


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

I said I'm interested in TUSC's performance.  But then I got a load of cretinous abuse


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> those figures replicated nationally would win Labour every single one of the 105 target seats.


 
Yep, but patterns of voting in LE do not readily translate into GE behaviour.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Yep, but patterns of voting in LE do not readily translate into GE behaviour.


They are a pretty good indicator for the main parties though.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> They are a pretty good indicator for the *main parties* though.


 
Which now include...?

yep, accepted...but caveats re. translations into GE.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I said I'm interested in TUSC's performance. But then I got a load of cretinous abuse


that's all you've said. and you're not interested in tusc's performance, you just want to knock them. it's not political analysis, it's sectarian bile. and not particularly good sectarian bile at that.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Which now include...?
> 
> yep, accepted...but caveats re. translations into GE.


Includes UKIP for these and euros. Think general election will be rather different - old split between first and second order elections. BNP were unable to break that barrier.


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Yep, but patterns of voting in LE do not readily translate into GE behaviour.


Yes, but I'm just saying there's nothing in there to worry Labour at all.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 3, 2013)

articul8 said:


> I said I'm interested in TUSC's performance. But then I got a load of cretinous abuse


 
This is sub-Luke Akehurst level stuff, articul8.


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Includes UKIP for these and euros. Think general election will be rather different - old split between first and second order elections. BNP were unable to break that barrier.


And of course, the papers have spent the last year doing free agitprop for UKIP, which will probably fall off in the run up to a GE.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Lib Dems have now lost seven seats on Bristol City Council out of eight they were defending. More still to come


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> And of course, the papers have spent the last year doing free agitprop for UKIP, which will probably fall off in the run up to a GE.


Yep, that will not be happening in 2015. No chance. Too dangerous.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> Yes, but I'm just saying there's nothing in there to worry Labour at all.


 
Early days and all that, but I'm really not so convinced that they've got nothing to worry about from UKIP.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yep, that will not be happening in 2015. No chance. Too dangerous.


 
It will be very interesting to see what kind of scrutiny and attention that UKIP get from the media and other areas in the next couple of years...


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Early days and all that, but I'm really not so convinced that they've got nothing to worry about from UKIP.


 
Really? Which parts of the 35-40% support that Labour have been polling for a while now do you see them eating into? Even at the bottom of that range they'll probably win a majority.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> It will be very interesting to see what kind of scrutiny and attention that UKIP get from the media and other areas in the next couple of years...


They will have started their work right now, could expose a lot of the ways that the parties and the media work together.


----------



## mwgdrwg (May 3, 2013)

I wonder how Anglesey will turn out. I predict a mix of self-serving independents, Plaid, and UKIP/Tory freaks. It's nearly enough to put you off democracy and want the commissioners back in.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> They will have started their work right now, could expose a lot of the ways that the parties and the media work together.


 
Yes absolutely, saving it up for maximum impact... I'm not an expert but the first round would presumably be next year before the Euro elections?


----------



## articul8 (May 3, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> This is sub-Luke Akehurst level stuff, articul8.


why?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Yes absolutely, saving it up for maximum impact... I'm not an expert but the first round would presumably be next year before the Euro elections?


Yep, has to be if they're going to derail them before the general election.


----------



## sunny jim (May 3, 2013)

Fozzie Bear said:


> It will be very interesting to see what kind of scrutiny and attention that UKIP get from the media and other areas in the next couple of years...


 
This. I think getting loads of wingnuts elected will only spell doom for UKIP.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> Really? Which parts of the 35-40% support that Labour have been polling for a while now do you see them eating into? Even at the bottom of that range they'll probably win a majority.


 
It's worth pointing out these elections aren't a typical cross-section of the population too - this is predominantly the countryside voting, not the cities, so results are already skewed in the direction of the tories & the reactionary right.

Looking at overall percentages is meaningless from this sample, since for example UKIP's score is a percentage of *something*, but that *something* isn't the same as the full UK electorate. It's going to exaggerate their capabilities. Sympathetic media will focus on their percentage as though that's what they're capable of across the board. I suspect there will be some intelligent weighted analysis somewhere, but the Mail et al will be calling it for UKIP and calling on Dave to steer further to the right.

It was a similar thing with the BNP, media pointing out a few elections ago that they'd won 8% or whatever, but this was _where they'd stood_ - places where they had some support, and nothing like they'd get if they fielded candidates everywhere.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Greens down 3% to 7% so far.


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> All three UKIP councillors elected in Boston are related. Insert punchline here. UKIP also won a by-election to Boston Borough Council
> 
> UKIP vote share in Hampshire 24.61%


 
isn't it Boston where they have been organising anti-immigration rallies?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> isn't it Boston where they have been organising anti-immigration rallies?


UKIP haven't been organising them. They attended them.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Doncaster mayor too close to call. Apparently


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> Really? Which parts of the 35-40% support that Labour have been polling for a while now do you see them eating into? Even at the bottom of that range they'll probably win a majority.


 
That's difficult to substantiate because those % are based on GE intentions polling, but the evidence on the ground is that in some of labour's LE targets their progress back from the 2009 debacle has been adversely affected by the UKIP surge.


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Greens down 7% so far.


 
Following Lib Dem trend


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Lib Dems have now lost 8 and held 3 in Bristol. Labour up 3, Greens up 2, Tories up 2 and Independents up 1


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> It's worth pointing out these elections aren't a typical cross-section of the population too - this is predominantly the countryside voting, not the cities, so results are already skewed in the direction of the tories & the reactionary right.
> 
> Looking at overall percentages is meaningless from this sample, since for example UKIP's score is a percentage of *something*, but that *something* isn't the same as the full UK electorate. It's going to exaggerate their capabilities. Sympathetic media will focus on their percentage as though that's what they're capable of across the board. I suspect there will be some intelligent weighted analysis somewhere, but the Mail et al will be calling it for UKIP and calling on Dave to steer further to the right.
> 
> It was a similar thing with the BNP, media pointing out a few elections ago that they'd won 8% or whatever, but this was _where they'd stood_ - places where they had some support, and nothing like they'd get if they fielded candidates everywhere.


That it's these seats is why it's so potentially devastating for the tories and so good for labour.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Following Lib Dem trend


I meant down 3% to 7%


----------



## J Ed (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Doncaster mayor too close to call. Apparently


 
Between who? the Independent and Labour?


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> That's difficult to substantiate because those % are based on GE intentions polling, but the evidence on the ground is that in some of labour's LE targets their progress back from the 2009 debacle has been adversely affected by the UKIP surge.


what evidence on the ground? The evidence you presented earlier that showed them winning a sufficient swing to win ALL their target seats? Even in an electoral contest that suits UKIP better than a GE will?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

i always like seeing previously unknown psephologists emerge at this sort of event


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

BNP lost last seat in Burnley.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> BNP lost last seat in Burnley.


 
Hope Not Hate seem to be very excited about it.


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i always like seeing previously unknown psephologists emerge at this sort of event


do you have to be a psephologist to speculate on election results?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Between who? the Independent and Labour?


Dunno, presume so

*Hertfordshire:*
Conservative hold
New council: C 46 (-8); LD 16 (-1); Lab 15 (+12); G 0 (-1); Ind 0 (-1); Eng Dem 0 (-1)


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yep, that will not be happening in 2015. No chance. Too dangerous.


 Why not? the papers do like to cause mischief and they don't seem particularly enamoured of the 'old guard' these days.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> Why not? the papers do like to cause mischief and they don't seem particularly enamoured of the 'old guard' these days.


 
They know what side their bread is buttered, ultimately.

Plus "the spectacular rise and fall of UKIP" and "UKIP sex scandal" stuff makes for better stories.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> Why not? the papers do like to cause mischief and they don't seem particularly enamoured of the 'old guard' these days.


Because the potential ramifications of a _you are all illegitimate_ campaign (and one based around anti-EU which big capital likes) are far beyond what they find acceptable. At best they can use it to discipline labour and the tories, at worst it escapes their control and ends up attacking what they are there to protect.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> do you have to be a psephologist to speculate on election results?


i'm not talking about people speculating on election results.


----------



## J Ed (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Yep, that will not be happening in 2015. No chance. Too dangerous.


 
I'm not so sure, Murdoch is still smarting from Leveson, UKIP is playing the same role as the Tea Party did in the US with Murdoch's papers playing the role of Fox News.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I'm not so sure, Murdoch is still smarting from Leveson, UKIP is playing the same role as the Tea Party did in the US with Murdoch's papers playing the role of Fox News.


No chance. He will publicly toy with them now to gain leverage but that's it - and only over specific issues. He's not that stupid. I think the UKIP/TP comparison is way off as well.


----------



## J Ed (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I think the UKIP/TP comparison is way off as well.


 
Why?


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i always like seeing previously unknown psephologists emerge at this sort of event


we only like cricket when the ashes is on too. shameful.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> we only like cricket when the ashes is on too. shameful.


you may only like cricket during the ashes but do you understand it all any better then?


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 3, 2013)

One good thing for Labour, there's no chance of TV debates now. None at all. With a bit of luck Ed's strange face and strange voice can be hidden away from the electorate until it's too late.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Why?


Because the TP was a hastily constructed Potemkin party based around opposition largely to one single measure - UKIP have been around for near 3 decades now, steadlily building up support and electoral performances. They might be liked by the media, but they are not a media event which was all the TP proved to be in the end. And it only existed _within_ the orbit of republican-electoralism - whereas UKIP are challenging the tories from without.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> we only like cricket when the ashes is on too. shameful.


Ditto rugby and the six nations, should be ashamed of our part time affectations


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> (...) the EU which big capital likes.


 
I wonder if, given the likely UKIP gains at the Euro elections, and maybe gains for other far-right parties in other countries, that the emergence of a strongly libertarian/more transparently corporate-owned EU would be a 'long game' for big capital, and would eventually lead to an anti-EU consensus amongst the left?  The tories/UKIP only hate the EU because it is more lefty that they'd like the UK to be.  If it pushed the other way, against minimum wages, workers' rights, state ownership, corporate taxation and so on, they'd be enthusiastic supporters.  I don't think euroscepticism is an idealistic position about nationality & accountability, more down to the flavour of euro-government we currently have.

(and yes, I know it is already strongly neo-liberal and pushing things like break-up of the post office - but that's not the perception - it's all those 'uman rights, windmills and bananas that the public latch on to).


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

BBC report labour have won Derbyshire


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Puddy_Tat said:


> BBC report labour have won Derbyshire


One of their 'bare minimum' results that


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

that is quite significant


----------



## Random (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> I wonder if, given the likely UKIP gains at the Euro elections, and maybe gains for other far-right parties in other countries, that the emergence of a strongly libertarian/more transparently corporate-owned EU would be a 'long game' for big capital, and would eventually lead to an anti-EU consensus amongst the left?


 Maybe for some wingnut capitalists, but based on the last five shocking years capital desperately needs the state interventions that strong EU institutions can deliver.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> that is quite significant


 
Derbyshire? No, it would have been significant if they hadnt won it.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> I wonder if, given the likely UKIP gains at the Euro elections, and maybe gains for other far-right parties in other countries, that the emergence of a strongly libertarian/more transparently corporate-owned EU would be a 'long game' for big capital, and would eventually lead to an anti-EU consensus amongst the left? The tories/UKIP only hate the EU because it is more lefty that they'd like the UK to be. If it pushed the other way, against minimum wages, workers' rights, state ownership, corporate taxation and so on, they'd be enthusiastic supporters. I don't think euroscepticism is an idealistic position about nationality & accountability, more down to the flavour of euro-government we currently have.
> 
> (and yes, I know it is already strongly neo-liberal and pushing things like break-up of the post office - but that's not the perception - it's all those 'uman rights, windmills and bananas that the public latch on to).


I really don't think so - the political/capital nexus that runs these things know such wages-cutting strategy can only come through active state intervention (this, in fact, is the medium-long term plan). They have even wrote this stuff into the constitution. A sort of UKIP style EU is impossible i think.


----------



## Streathamite (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Dunno, presume so
> 
> *Hertfordshire:*
> Conservative hold
> New council: C 46 (-8); LD 16 (-1); Lab 15 (+12); G 0 (-1); Ind 0 (-1); Eng Dem 0 (-1)


Hertforshire is traditionally a strong Tory area (home counties, suburban, m/class, well-heeled), with a strong LD challenge, and with isolated pockets offering possibilities for Labour (stevenage etc).
All told, that is a bloody good result for Labour.


----------



## dennisr (May 3, 2013)

THE Greens have wrested Hythe from Tory control with a 300-vote majority over the Tories.David Monk, Conservative, was beaten into second place by Martin Whybrow by 300 votes, with Ukip in third.
Read more: http://www.thisiskent.co.uk/KCC-elections-Greens-Hythe/story-18881559-detail/story.html#ixzz2SEFD66xW​


----------



## Streathamite (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> Why not? the papers do like to cause mischief and they don't seem particularly enamoured of the 'old guard' these days.


Because their overlords in their boardroom will be too shitscared of british politics spinning off into the realms of utter unpredictability and rejection of the mainstream, and will be desperate to herd people back into their traditional; corrals. _Especially_ the Tory ones.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Lib Dems nine down in Bristol now, just lost the former deputy leader of the council to Labour by one vote


----------



## J Ed (May 3, 2013)

The kipper that said homosexuality can be cured through exercise has been elected


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

red herring


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Streathamite said:


> Hertforshire is traditionally a strong Tory area (home counties, suburban, m/class, well-heeled), with a strong LD challenge, and with isolated pockets offering possibilities for Labour (stevenage etc).
> All told, that is a bloody good result for Labour.


 
get a lot of Arsenal supporters from there as well


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Warwickshire (my area) results:

Tory loss to NOC.

Tory 26, Lab 22, LD 9, Green 2, Ind 3

In 2009 it was:

Tory 39, Lab 10, LD 12, Others 1.

Labour are back to where they were here before the 2009 disaster.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

lib-dems holding some of their seats in Surrey.

Including Epsom West, where the result was Lib Dem, then residents association, then labour, then UKIP then tory.


----------



## J Ed (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Because the TP was a hastily constructed Potemkin party based around opposition largely to one single measure - UKIP have been around for near 3 decades now, steadlily building up support and electoral performances. They might be liked by the media, but they are not a media event which was all the TP proved to be in the end. And it only existed _within_ the orbit of republican-electoralism - whereas UKIP are challenging the tories from without.


 
I wasn't fully referring to the party's position in electoral politics, I think that there were some vague attempts to create a TP-like party in the Tory party but they met with little success. UKIP have been around for a long while but their current success is unprecedented and I think that success can be put down at least in part to constant and more often than not positive media coverage. I don't think this is totally a media event but it's certainly an event that would not have been possible without the positive media coverage that UKIP has received. I'm not sure you can say that the TP was/is only a media event, there are a lot of TP aligned elected Republican representatives.

The utopian right-wing populist policies of UKIP are remarkably similar to the TP.

BTW, I think it's also worth considering Murdoch's support for Alex Salmond. He's not happy with Cameron.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UKIP have come 2nd and 3rd in the last two euro-elections. This result is not unprecedented really. 

And that's the difference - the TP could only result in TP aligned elected Republican representatives., UKIP can only result in the loss of tory seats. The actual policies are not what counts right now, but what they represent - and the TP was (and i mean was, it's dead) an explicitly right-wing response to a single policy, UKIP is a representation of a general you're all thieves and can get to fuck type view


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

The UK attempt at a 'Tea Party' movement comes in the form of the Taxpayer's Alliance - and although they haven't managed to reach out directly to the 'man on the streets' (the 'March for Cuts' was laughable) they do have the ear of the media across the country, willingly and uncritically regurgitating their press releases every day, able to set out their agenda unchallenged.


----------



## J Ed (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> The UK attempt at a 'Tea Party' movement comes in the form of the Taxpayer's Alliance - and although they haven't managed to reach out directly to the 'man on the streets' (the 'March for Cuts' was laughable) they do have the ear of the media across the country, willingly and uncritically regurgitating their press releases every day, able to set out their agenda unchallenged.


 
I dunno, the Tax Payer's Alliance doesn't use dog whistle racism etc


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Another Tory council leader lost his seat, Isle of Wight to an independent candidate by 10 votes.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Austin Mitchell   @*AVMitchell2010* 
Lib Dems are the first protest party in history to generate protest against themselves


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I dunno, the Tax Payer's Alliance doesn't use dog whistle racism etc


They do. They hide it under a 'neutral' cost/benefit analysis though. Their job is to provide the arguments for the political movements rather than being the movements though.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Another Tory council leader lost his seat, Isle of Wight to an independent candidate by 10 votes.


 
Close !


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Labour Press Team        *✔*  @*labourpress* 
Labour GAIN Witney Central from Conservatives #*OneNation* #*Labour*


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2013)

my local council now has 6 ukip councillors and one labour councillor, 2 of the lib-dems lost seats and 6 of the tories lost theirs.


----------



## Streathamite (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> get a lot of Arsenal supporters from there as well


yeah yeah yeah zzzzz. 
Actually, far more spurs than labour, especially south herts, unless it's changed radically in recent years.


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

Dogsauce said:


> The UK attempt at a 'Tea Party' movement comes in the form of the Taxpayer's Alliance - and although they haven't managed to reach out directly to the 'man on the streets' (the 'March for Cuts' was laughable) they do have the ear of the media across the country, willingly and uncritically regurgitating their press releases every day, able to set out their agenda unchallenged.


 

who funds the TPA? I am aware US style thinks tanks like the Heritage Foundation see the U.K as fertile ground for their ideological manouvering..


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Who said they're racists?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Lot of vulnerable people going to pay for this UKIP vote.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> i always like seeing previously unknown psephologists emerge at this sort of event



Well here's something from some _known _psephologists...



> 1.31pm BST
> Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher are number-crunching for Sky. I don't think they have published a national equivalent vote figure yet (see 11.31am), but they have must an internal one because they have put out figures showing how many seats the parties would win at Westminster if yesterday's voting was replicated at a general election.
> 
> Adam Boulton  @*adamboultonSKY*
> ...


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Devon*
Conservative hold
C 38 (-3); LD 9 (-4); Lab 7 (+1); UKIP 4 (+4); Ind 3 (+1); Green 1 (+1)


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Well here's something from some _known _psephologists...


52 Lib Dems. LOL.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Well here's something from some _known _psephologists...


Which, given we know these are weak seats for labour, and the tories best bets, must have the latter shitting it proper. Chuck in the urban areas and we're talking big big labour majority.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Which, given we know these are weak seats for labour, and the tories best bets, must have the latter shitting it proper. Chuck in the urban areas and we're talking big big labour majority.


 
I've no idea of their methodology, though. The fact they're calling the LDs at 52 seats (losing only their 5 most marginal?) leads me to believe there's some heavy manipulation/extrapolation etc. factored into their conclusions on this battering of the LDs.


----------



## Lo Siento. (May 3, 2013)

the Lib Dems have 10 seats to defend with sub 2% majorities, the idea that they'll lose 5 seats is fucking laughable, given that they're currently polling 10+ per cent below their 2010 showing


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> I've no idea of their methodology, though. The fact they're calling the LDs at 52 seats (losing only their 5 most marginal?) leads me to believe there's some heavy manipulation/extrapolation etc. factored into their conclusions on this battering of the LDs.


It seems to just be basic extrapolation from vote share in these areas. Areas which, as you noted earlier, are heavily tory and rural. I doubt they'd be happy with that but as sky demands and they want to get paid...


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Well here's something from some _known _psephologists...


 That looks like 'scaling up' of the results of just the areas voting yesterday, which doesn't represent how the nation as a whole would vote. I bet somewhere there's a 'seat calculator' where you can just plug in the percentage results and get that sort of result.  Someone will do the maths properly later.  Boulton's a clown.

A labour/lib dem coalition would be pretty revolting though, wouldn't it?  Milliband & Clegg on rostrums in the Downing St garden. Christ. Though chances are that Clegg will give us a 'portillo moment' in 2015 and not be part of that picture, relegated to Andrew Neil's sofa and begging for a eurocrat job.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Lo Siento. said:


> the Lib Dems have 10 seats to defend with sub 2% majorities, the idea that they'll lose 5 seats is fucking laughable, given that they're currently polling 10+ per cent below their 2010 showing


They are more likely to be left with 5. Only 3 of their seats are nailed on. Every other one is at real serious no messing about risk.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Cumbria*
Remain NOC
Lab 35 (+10); C 26 (-13); LD 16 (+2); Ind 7 (+1)


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> They are more likely to be left with 5. Only 3 of their seats are nailed on. Every other one is at real serious no messing about risk.


 
Agreed. That 52 figure undermines any confidence in their methodology, and anyway we're only half-way through the results from yesterday!

This is good for the LD deathwatch...
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/libdemdefence/


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Tories have lost control of Norfolk. Previously held 60 of 84 seats


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

That's got to be UKIP coming through?


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's got to be UKIP coming through?


 
it is, and they've taken seats Lab were targetting like in Gt Yarmouth.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's got to be UKIP coming through?


Probably. Dunno if the Greens were targeting any further seats round Norwich way, not sure what they were starting out with


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

hmm, so Labour failed to gain Lancashire, not by much, but still.  They'll need to gain Notts & Staffs to be able to claim any kind of good night


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> it is, and they've taken seats Lab were targetting like in Gt Yarmouth.


Ok, that might then be part of what you were saying earlier about UKIP's effect on labour. Will need to have a closer look.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> hmm, so Labour failed to gain Lancashire, not by much, but still. They'll need to gain Notts & Staffs to be able to claim any kind of good night


Yeah, bit mixed in Bristol. Romped home in some areas but failed to take some of the suburban estates that they need to be winning


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Ok, that might then be part of what you were saying earlier about UKIP's effect on labour. Will need to have a closer look.


 
Like this one...


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's got to be UKIP coming through?


 
UKIP got 15 seats there.

http://elections.norfolk.gov.uk/seats.aspx


----------



## _angel_ (May 3, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> my local council now has 6 ukip councillors and one labour councillor, 2 of the lib-dems lost seats and 6 of the tories lost theirs.


With deepest sympathy.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

Doncaster mayor election undergoing recount of first preference votes - close between incumbent Davies (Independant) and Labour.  About 300 votes in it, reportedly leaning labour.

Quite a lot of postal voting involved, so expect Davies to whine like a stuck pig if he loses it.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Derbyshire*
Labour gain from no overall control (NOC)
Lab 43 (+20); C 18 (-13); LD 3 (-4); Ind 0 (-2); UKIP 0 (-1)
*Lancashire*
Conservatives lose to NOC
Lab 39 (+22); C 35 (-16); LD 6 (-3); Ind 3 (nc); Green 1 (-1); BNP 0 (-1); Idle Toad 0 (-1)

*East Sussex*
Conservatives lose to NOC
C 20 (-9); LD 10 (-3); Lab 7 (+3); UKIP 7 (+7); Ind 5 (+2)
*Norfolk*
Conservatives lose to NOC
C 40 (-20); UKIP 15 (+14); Lab 14 (+9); LD 10 (+1); Green 4 (-2); Ind 1 (-2)


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

BBC just explained discrepancy between LD's 11% fall only resulting in loss of 62 seats, (so far), as opposed to the tories loss of 175 seats on basis of smaller fall in popular vote, (9%). Answer = in 80% of LD held seats its the tories ij second place; hence little flak to defend.

Based on the YouGov defence list a GE fall of 11% would leave the LDs with just 29 seats.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> BBC just explained discrepancy between LD's 11% fall only resulting in loss of 62 seats, (so far), as opposed to the tories loss of 175 seats on basis of smaller fall in popular vote, (9%). Answer = in 80% of LD held seats its the tories ij second place; hence little flak to defend.
> 
> Based on the YouGov defence list a GE fall of 11% would leave the LDs with just 29 seats.


And remember this is the seats they do better, not best, in - their second tier of seats.


----------



## sim667 (May 3, 2013)

Nothings changed where I am, I still live in a little pocket of green party surrounded by swathes of tories and a spattering of lib dems


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

2.20pm BST
On the BBC Michael Gove has just hinted that David Cameron will formally withdraw his "fruitcakes, lunatics and closet racists" remark about Ukip when he speaks to the media this afternoon.

LOL


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

He can't. 'Formally withdraw', eh? They are shitting it.


----------



## toggle (May 3, 2013)

looks like we're back to no overall control here, libs ahead of tories, but a lot of independents who tend to vote tory. so far, 4 seats each for ukip, labour and mk. main thing i'm interested in now is whether any of the freinds of mine standing for mk get in.

not that i'm admitting this is england or anyhting


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Even somewhere like Derbyshire where UKIP lost out despite fielding plenty of candidates, running my cursor over the interactive map shows that they got plenty of votes.

http://www.derbyshire.gov.uk/counci...ault.asp?VD=electionresults#9/53.1006/-1.7207


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Are UKIP actually going to get to 100? They certainly dont look likely to explode well past that target, but I've done no analysis of the specifics of the areas still to declare in full.


----------



## Fedayn (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> *Derbyshire*
> Labour gain from no overall control (NOC)
> Lab 43 (+20); C 18 (-13); LD 3 (-4); Ind 0 (-2); UKIP 0 (-1)
> *Lancashire*
> ...


 
Pretty sure Derbyshire was the council mentioned on TV last night that unless Labour Took that council then they hadn't really anything to crow about.....


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

That racist Tory in Sussex lost his seat to an independent


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> Pretty sure Derbyshire was the council mentioned on TV last night that unless Labour Took that council then they hadn't really anything to crow about.....


Yeah, Derbyshire's been Labour for 40 years until four years ago


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> That racist Tory in Sussex lost his seat to an independent


 
You mean one of them? The one who made it into the national press.


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> Pretty sure Derbyshire was the council mentioned on TV last night that unless Labour Took that council then they hadn't really anything to crow about.....


the New Statesman was saying they need Derbyshire,Notts, Staffs and Lancs to have a godd night. They got Derby, have narrowly missed Lancs, so still touch and go for them - especially as Derby was the easiest of the four to win


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Are UKIP actually going to get to 100? They certainly dont look likely to explode well past that target, but I've done no analysis of the specifics of the areas still to declare in full.


Going to on thereabouts, 6 to declare 4 from each and they will have it


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

Not a good day for TUSC or any of the left alternative parties I am sad to say, double digit votes in many places. The eternal wait for a left organisation that actually strikes a chime with significant swathes of the working class continues...


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

BBC projected national share (locals):-

*Lab 29%*
*Con 25% (worst ever)*
*UKIP 23%*
*LD 14% (worst ever)*

e2a : correction; tory result would have been worst since 1982, not ever.


----------



## Fedayn (May 3, 2013)

Has anyone got details of the TUSC results? Stop laughing at the back.....


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> BBC projected national share (locals):-
> 
> *Lab 29%*
> *Con 25% (worst ever)*
> ...


Labour actually winning, or being in any kind of position to claim they won, these elections is quite astounding.


----------



## Fedayn (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> BBC projected national share (locals):-
> 
> *Lab 29%*
> *Con 25% (worst ever)*
> ...


 
Again, the predicitons for the Tories worst ever results are in areas they haven't struggled in previously. It's amongst their 'safest' areas....?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Final Bristol result (one third of the council up for election, 23 seats altogether):
L 9 (+6)
C 6 (nc)
LD 5 (-9)
G 2 (+2)
Ind 1 (+1)

Council stays NOC but now Labour are the biggest party:
L 28 (+6); LD 23 (-9); C 14 (nc); G 4 (+2); Ind 1 (+1)


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> Has anyone got details of the TUSC results? Stop laughing at the back.....


the website says they got their highest percentage vote in Hesters Way in Gloucerstershire. 8%, 155 votes


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Are UKIP actually going to get to 100? They certainly dont look likely to explode well past that target, but I've done no analysis of the specifics of the areas still to declare in full.


 
The last to declare will probably be big rural areas where physically collecting in all the votes takes longer.  More likely to be tory areas, with reactionary country folk maybe leaning UKIP because of hunting ban etc.

I'm kind of enjoying the tory disarray, not that it really counts for anything at the moment.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Labour actually winning, or being in any kind of position to claim they won, these elections is quite astounding.


They did - once the 2009 elections and where they take place in are put in place. By a mile.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> Has anyone got details of the TUSC results? Stop laughing at the back.....


 
http://www.tusc.org.uk/press030513.php

According to twitter they got 1900 votes in the Doncaster Mayoral election and beat the Lib Dems, which used to mean something far more than it does now.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> BBC projected national share (locals):-
> 
> *Lab 29%*
> *Con 25% (worst ever)*
> ...



23%? some protest vote for a party of loonies and fruitcakes


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> You mean one of them? The one who made it into the national press.


Yeah him


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> They did - once the 2009 elections and where they take place in are put in place. By a mile.


Indeed.  but you dont even need to mention 2009 or where they're taking place, they are actually straightforwardly ahead in numbers of votes. Even in the good years (I'll have to have a look for figures from closest to 97) I dont think they've done that before


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> 23%? some protest vote for a party of loonies and fruitcakes


 
Are you suggesting that UKIP's activists are well-balanced and judicious individuals?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Indeed. but you dont even need to mention 2009 or where they're taking place, they are actually straightforwardly ahead in numbers of votes. Even in the good years (I'll have to have a look for figures from closest to 97) I dont think they've done that before


Saw summat somewhere saying Labour reckoned they'd done even better than in 1997 in Harlow and Hastings for example


----------



## Fedayn (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> http://www.tusc.org.uk/press030513.php
> 
> According to twitter they got 1900 votes in the Doncaster Mayoral election and beat the Lib Dems, which used to mean something far more than it does now.


 
The Mayoral candidate was/is a very well know former Miners Wives activist, belboid will almost certainly know her, Mary Jackson. She was a pretty good locally respected activist.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Here's Phil Brown from the "Indepedent Socialist Party" (who they?)

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/...l-brown-independent-socialist-party-1-5631538

apols. trying to embed the video.

I've thought for a while that people would get a much better result if they stood a "indepedent socialist" on the ballot paper rather than TUSC or Respect or whatever. He did ok as it happens.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Are UKIP actually going to get to 100? They certainly dont look likely to explode well past that target, but I've done no analysis of the specifics of the areas still to declare in full.


 
To partially answer my own question, it looks like UKIP got at least 9 in Suffolk, 8 in Kent, and 5 in Cornwall, so they should end up with 100 or so given the 77 UKIP already declared ones the BBC are presently reporting (not final results and I'm missing a few other areas totally but they may not do much in those)


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Indeed. but you dont even need to mention 2009 or where they're taking place, they are actually straightforwardly ahead in numbers of votes. Even in the good years (I'll have to have a look for figures from closest to 97) I dont think they've done that before


It'd have to be the 95/96 elections to compare. Oh hang on, you were saying that labour were able to win these is astounding, not the claim that they have won them being astounding - sorry. My mistake.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> The Mayoral candidate was/is a very well know former Miners Wives activist, belboid will almost certainly know her, Mary Jackson. She was a pretty good locally respected activist.


Was expecting to do well in some of the outlying villages I believe?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/...l-brown-independent-socialist-party-1-5631538
> 
> apols. trying to embed the video.


Onlu certain sites can be embeded. Sheff gazz not high priority.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> Are you suggesting that UKIP's activists are well-balanced and judicious individuals?


Nope, that the country is sick of the current crop and is ready for a change, significant that the change is towards the right even after the last few years?


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Onlu certain sites can be embeded. Sheff gazz not high priority.


 
There's a Karl Polyani joke in there somewhere but I'll be damned if I'm the one to find it.


----------



## Fedayn (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Was expecting to do well in some of the outlying villages I believe?


 
Probably, she's from Thorne if I remember right.


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> The Mayoral candidate was/is a very well know former Miners Wives activist, belboid will almost certainly know her, Mary Jackson. She was a pretty good locally respected activist.


Yeah, she's a really strong local candidate, well known and respected, and she has - with the Bedroom Tax - a strong issue to campaign around locally.   twitter says she is beating the Libs - into 7th.  A recount is apparently taking place in Donny at the moment.

Meanwhile, Weddington, Warwickshire, TUSC got 8 votes. That's eight, no missing digit.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> Nope, that the country is sick of the current crop and is ready for a change, significant that the change is towards the right even after the last few years?


 
I wouldn't be surprised, it's not like recessions and crises in capitalism by default favour the left electorally. If there's fuck all class consciousness and fuck all by way of a nationally organised left movement then of course anti-establishemnt sentiment will go to the right electorally.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> Nope, that the country is sick of the current crop and is ready for a change, significant that the change is towards the right even after the last few years?


 
Yes, that's certainly interesting, and doesn't say much for the electorate, but surely no-one had high hopes for that lot. The good news is that the anti-austerity, populist party is so obviously a bunch of braying saloon-bar shits that they are unlikely to take much of the angry Labour vote, meaning that Miliband will tack towards an electable and sensible position.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> the website says they got their highest percentage vote in Hesters Way in Gloucerstershire. 8%, 155 votes


 
Fuckin' hell! Paper candidate in derisory vote shocker.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> The good news is that the anti-austerity, populist party is so obviously a bunch of braying saloon-bar shits that they are unlikely to take much of the angry Labour vote, meaning that Miliband will tack towards an electable and sensible position.


 
If that's the good news then don't bother telling me the bad news, I'll just shoot myself now and get it over with.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

coley said:


> Nope, that the country is sick of the current crop and is ready for a change, significant that the change is towards the right even after the last few years?


Totally significant -doesn't mean that the anger taking a right turn is a done deal, nor that a UKIP vote necessarily means the anger is right wing in itself. It means the right has, as ever the better options on doing electoral politics. There is no path to anything other than the same old shit through electoral politics though.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> If that's the good news then don't bother telling me the bad news, I'll just shoot myself now and get it over with.


 
That's probably best. The bad news is pretty grim, really.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Oxfordshire*
Conservatives lose to no overall control
C 31 (-21); Lab 15 (+6); LD 11 (+1); Ind 4 (+3); Green 2 (nc)

Think boundary changes there account for why the numbers don't add up


----------



## Random (May 3, 2013)

Is it all about resources? How much money does TUSC have, compared to UKIP? How many volunteers do they each have? I'd guess UKIP can afford some full time staff


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> *Oxfordshire*
> Conservatives lose to no overall control
> C 31 (-21); Lab 15 (+6); LD 11 (+1); Ind 4 (+3); Green 2 (nc)
> 
> Think boundary changes there account for why the numbers don't add up


 

No kipper swing? No candidates?


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Meanwhile, Weddington, Warwickshire, TUSC got 8 votes. That's eight, no missing digit.


 
Thats the seat that the tory county council leader lost to the greens. And the only one in Nuneaton & Bedworth that had a UKIP candidate, although if all their votes had gone to the Tory he would still have narrowly lost to the green candidate.

In my seat in Nuneaton the TUSC got 29, compared to 28 some independent bloke I know nothing about, 87 BNP, 162 Green, 165 ex-Labour bloke who got kicked out of the party for allegedly shouting aggressively at another party member, 252 Tory, and 1133 Labour.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> That's probably best. The bad news is pretty grim, really.


 
Nah I'm only kidding. I can take it. I'm a Huddersfield Town fan - there's nothing that being involved in far-left politics can throw at me that'll ever match the perennial disspointment and cynicism of being a Town fan. Water off a ducks back.

We won the league 3 times in a row y'know.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Totally significant -doesn't mean that the anger taking a right turn is a done deal, nor that a UKIP vote necessarily means the anger is right wing in itself. It means the right has, as ever the better options on doing electoral politics. There is no path to anything other than the same old shit through electoral politics though.


So what is to be done?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> No kipper swing? No candidates?


Took 16% of the vote but no seats. Labour are chuffed to win Witney Central & South


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Random said:


> Is it all about resources? How much money does TUSC have, compared to UKIP? How many volunteers do they each have? I'd guess UKIP can afford some full time staff


 
They have enough resources to be doing a lot better than they are, put it that way. Probably not as much as UKIP but enough to do a lot better in target seats.

I couldn't care less if they get 8 votes in some Tory shire, I don't think they could care either, but if they're getting the same derisory votes in Rotherham and Manchester central then you've got to be asking serious questions about the strategy.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> So what is to be done?


In the short term hard work on bedroom tax and other sort of community based stuff, whilst using the organisation this provides to stop people getting booted out of their house, blocking baillifs  or other small victories so that a viable fighting community exists. The rest of it is paste.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> They have enough resources to be doing a lot better than they are, put it that way. Probably not as much as UKIP but enough to do a lot better in target seats.
> 
> I couldn't care less if they get 8 votes in some Tory shire, I don't think they could care either, but if they're getting the same derisory votes in Rotherham and Manchester central then you've got to be asking serious questions about the strategy.


What strategy? Standing candidates? Using them as a pole of attraction even though the only people who vote for them are already involved? There is no strategy.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Silas Loom said:


> No kipper swing? No candidates?


 
I cant be arsed to click on every single ward but of the 10+ I did click on, all had UKIP candidates. And plenty of them had the 20-25% share of the vote for UKIP, although some were more like 13-14%.


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> the New Statesman was saying they need Derbyshire,Notts, Staffs and Lancs to have a godd night. They got Derby, have narrowly missed Lancs, so still touch and go for them - especially as Derby was the easiest of the four to win


they never really expected to take lancs - just spoke with my dad and they're very pleased with the result as it is. taking control was always a big ask.

he reckons the lib dems will side with the tories, the green likely with labour, leaving Driver in control (just) but everything hinging on the three indies, who we've been able to find very little out about. he's making some phone calls this afternoon...


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

Random said:


> Is it all about resources? How much money does TUSC have, compared to UKIP? How many volunteers do they each have? I'd guess UKIP can afford some full time staff


 
They have a few working full-time at the BBC by the looks of things. Farage has his own parking space there.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What strategy? Standing candidates? Using them as a pole of attraction even though the only people who vote for them are already involved? There is no strategy.


 
The strategy as far as I can make it out is "build the profile of TUSC by standing in as many seats as possible, no matter how shit the results, to prepare for a Labour govt in 2015 and the disillusionment that will set when they start passing cuts" if anyone's got a more detailed summary of the strategy (SP people?) I'd love to know if there's owt beyond this.


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> they never really expected to take lancs - just spoke with my dad and they're very pleased with the result as it is. taking control was always a big ask.
> 
> he reckons the lib dems will side with the tories, the green likely with labour, leaving Driver in control (just) but everything hinging on the three indies, who we've been able to find very little out about. he's making some phone calls this afternoon...


no, they need 26 gains (from 84 seats) and made a mere 24.  Which is pretty good going. Slightly sad (I think) to see they took one seat from the Idle Toad party.


----------



## Wilson (May 3, 2013)




----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> In the short term hard work on bedroom tax and other sort of community based stuff, whilst using the organisation this provides to stop people getting booted out of their house, blocking baillifs or other small victories so that a viable fighting community exists. The rest of it is paste.


So what any decent leftie has been doing or trying to do, really?


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Fedayn said:


> Has anyone got details of the TUSC results? Stop laughing at the back.....


 
They have had to send out for more counting staff


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> The strategy as far as I can make it out is "build the profile of TUSC by standing in as many seats as possible, no matter how shit the results, to prepare for a Labour govt in 2015 and the disillusionment that will set when they start passing cuts" if anyone's got a more detailed summary of the strategy (SP people?) I'd love to know if there's owt beyond this.


It seems not too dissimilar to what the Socialist Party were doing throughout the previous decade. I'll still vote for them when they stand in my area though.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 3, 2013)

Looking like Corby Rural has been taken by the Orcs with the UKIP candidate an uncomfortably close second. Centre bit ward has yet to declare if I'm reading the mapr right

Orcs take half of n'pton as well, waiting on outcome for eastern district- the much poorer side of town.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> So what any decent leftie has been doing or trying to do, really?


Without a pointless electoral vehicle taking priority and having to fulfill union demands in order to receive funding stapled to its back and the needs of these being paramount. Yeah, beyond that the answer is more of the same. You?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> It seems not too dissimilar to what the Socialist Party were doing throughout the previous decade. I'll still vote for them when they stand in my area though.


What are the problems with this strategy?


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Without a pointless electoral vehicle taking priority and having to fulfill union demands in order to receive funding stapled to its back and the needs of these being paramount. Yeah, beyond that the answer is more of the same. You?


Pretty much what I've been doing in the past three years, mostly anti-cuts stuff, particularly opposing benefit cuts (particularly anti-ATOS demos) and the Bedroom Tax, all of which affect me personally anyway.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Pretty much what I've been doing in the past three years, mostly anti-cuts stuff, particularly opposing benefit cuts (particularly anti-ATOS demos) and the Bedroom Tax, all of which affect me personally anyway.


I wasn't asking what you were doing but what is to be done?


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What are the problems with this strategy?


Well in a nutshell, it doesn't work - which is indicated by the lack of councillors relative to, say, the Greens, or the far right for that matter. Also they only seem to be around during election time, and not really a party that does any other campaigning on non-electoral issues. Also I feel that TUSC and the SP tend have tunnel vision when it comes to visualising a working class beyond the unionised workplace.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Well in a nutshell, it doesn't work - which is indicated by the lack of councillors relative to, say, the Greens, or the far right for that matter. Also they only seem to be around during election time, and not really a party that does any other campaigning on non-electoral issues. Also I feel that TUSC and the SP tend have tunnel vision when it comes to visualising a working class beyond the unionised workplace.


Why hasn't it worked, that's what i was after.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I wasn't asking what you were doing but what is to be done?


Thought you already answered that for yourself. Regardless any organisation, be it based on electoralism or otherwise, needs to engage positively with the working class grassroots, and be more than yet another organisation which is by activists, for activists, and confined to the activist ghetto.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> They have enough resources to be doing a lot better than they are, put it that way. Probably not as much as UKIP but enough to do a lot better in target seats.
> 
> I couldn't care less if they get 8 votes in some Tory shire, I don't think they could care either, but if they're getting the same derisory votes in Rotherham and Manchester central then you've got to be asking serious questions about the strategy.


 
In addition to the seat where I live that I already posted about, here are some other Nuneaton & Bedworth results that maybe ought to be target areas for them, regardless of the wider Warwickshire picture:

Camp Hill
TUSC 67, Labour 709, Tory 201, BNP 100, Green 42

Abbey
TUSC 76 , Labour 995, Tory 291, Green 96, BNP 95

Arbury & Stockingford
TUSC 115, TUSC 110, Labour 2092, Labour 1832, Tory 868, Tory 856, BNP 386, Ind 256, Green 163

Bede
TUSC 17, Labour 1357, Tory 338, BNP 147, English Democrat 146, Green 58

Poplar
TUSC 26, Labour 955, Tory 282, BNP 164, Green 64

Bedworth West
TUSC 139, Labour 1219, Tory 569, Green 173

Bedworth North
TUSC 26, Labour 990, Tory 445, BNP 146, Green 85


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Well in a nutshell, it doesn't work - which is indicated by the lack of councillors relative to, say, the Greens, or the far right for that matter. Also they only seem to be around during election time, and not really a party that does any other campaigning on non-electoral issues. Also I feel that TUSC and the SP tend have tunnel vision when it comes to visualising a working class beyond the unionised workplace.


 
In addition - The idea I think is a viable left party that can, if not win, then at least put up a fight and have a coherent electoral campaigning organisation ready, is one of the things they're trying to use to "peel away" the unions from the Labour party.

Which is a sound strategy, certainly shows more nous than the SWP at least, but for the fact private sector union density is 12% at the moment. Infact less coz that's a couple of years old that statistic.

Little bit of that "we've been booted out the Labour party, so let's entryist the Unions instead" mentality behind it. Hangover from the Militant days.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UKIP just about to break 100.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Why hasn't it worked, that's what i was after.


My guess is that they never have a presence long enough to get people talking about them, the only time most people might hear of them is when they see them on the ballot paper, by which time they have probably decided to vote for the mainstream parties. That's assuming they bother to vote at all that is, an electoral vehicle should concentrate less on getting votes from Labour and more on getting votes from those not voting at all.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> UKIP just about to break 100.


 
They've hit 108 on the BBC results. I've given up trying to work out how the table data compares to the map of who is left to declare and therefore my earlier attempts to estimate the final total.


----------



## Streathamite (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> It seems to just be basic extrapolation from vote share in these areas. Areas which, as you noted earlier, are heavily tory and rural.


it is, simple straight, crude like-for liking, and therefore not really much use


----------



## chilango (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> In addition - The idea I think is a viable left party that can, if not win, then at least put up a fight and have a coherent electoral campaigning organisation ready, is one of the things they're trying to use to "peel away" the unions from the Labour party.
> 
> Which is a sound strategy, certainly shows more nous than the SWP at least, but for the fact private sector union density is 12% at the moment. Infact less coz that's a couple of years old that statistic.
> 
> Little bit of that "we've been booted out the Labour party, so let's entryist the Unions instead" mentality behind it. Hangover from the Militant days.



I think a spell away from the Unions (or at least from union politicking) would do the Left a world of good.


----------



## chilango (May 3, 2013)

...although UKIP have at least proved that shit name and logo are not a barrier to creating a successful electoral brand.


----------



## Streathamite (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> it is, and they've taken seats Lab were targetting like in Gt Yarmouth.


Labour seem to have done OK though, in Yarmouth Lynn, and Naarij?
(also, those are the only 'urban' places in a county consisting otherwise of small towns, villages, fields and rivers.)


----------



## DotCommunist (May 3, 2013)

http://www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/election2013/DivisionResults.aspx?id=12

look at how the jaws of Corby rural encircle the town and the estates like a vast crab claw made out of right wing voters.

great boundry drawing there


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

chilango said:


> ...although UKIP have at least proved that shit name and logo are not a barrier to creating a successful electoral brand.


I think the tories and labour have to take their bows as well.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

Weren't the tories talking about the possibility of losing 'up to 500 seats'. Not going to be anything like that, is it?  Classic 'expectations management' - though they'll find it hard to push the story of Labour not making necessary gains when all the story is of the Farage party.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> So what is to be done?


#527 sounds like a workable proposition


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

Sounds like Labour might have won control of Nottinghamshire by 1 seat, got info from that forum so wont take it as gospel quite yet.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Thought you already answered that for yourself. Regardless any organisation, be it based on electoralism or otherwise, needs to engage positively with the working class grassroots, and be more than yet another organisation which is by activists, for activists, and confined to the activist ghetto.



Your last sentence seems to sum up why the left is failing so dismally to impact anywhere outside of said ghettos, most WC around here have never even heard of the likes of TUSC etc.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Suffolk*
Conservative hold
C 39 (-16); Lab 15 (+11); UKIP 9 (+8); LD 7 (-4); Ind 3 (+1); Green 2 (nc)

*North Yorkshire*
Conservative hold
C 45 (-1); LD 8 (-1); Ind 8 (-6); Lab 7 (+6); Lib 2 (nc); UKIP 2 (+2)

*Staffordshire*
Conservative hold
C 34 (-16); Lab 24 (+21); Ind 2 (nc); UKIP 2 (-1)

*Leicestershire*
Conservative hold
C 30 (-3); LD 13 (-1); Lab 10 (+6); UKIP 2 (nc); Ind 0 (-2)

*Surrey*
Conservative hold
C 58 (+3); LD 9 (-4); RA 9 (-1); UKIP 3 (+2); Lab 1 (NC); Green 1 (+1)

*Cambridgeshire*
Conservatives lose to no overall control
C 32 (-7); LD 14 (-7); UKIP 12 (+10); Lab 7 (+4); Ind 4 (+1); G 0 (-1)


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Sounds like Labour might have won control of Nottinghamshire by 1 seat, got info from that forum so wont take it as gospel quite yet.


beeb says its true


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> *Suffolk*
> *Staffordshire*
> Conservative hold
> C 34 (-16); Lab 24 (+21); Ind 2 (nc); UKIP 2 (-1)


apparently that was a Labour hopeful, tho its hard to believe they could really have hoped to win it from having only three seats.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2013)

From twatter:

"Looking at 1st preferences, Peter Davies may well win in *#Doncaster*. Labour 590 ahead, but 8492 rightwing votes to reallocate. 2702 leftwing"

...may be saved by the fact that there were a lot of right-wing candidates for those votes to spread around, but still, not looking great.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

UKIP getting close to 150


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Sounds like Labour might have won control of Nottinghamshire by 1 seat, got info from that forum so wont take it as gospel quite yet.


----------



## toggle (May 3, 2013)

fucking bigoted disablist tory shitwank got re elected.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22403852


----------



## trashpony (May 3, 2013)

Fucking hell - 7 out of 8 seats went to UKIP where I live


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> UKIP getting close to 150


 
Yeah. The BBC table of councillors must have been lagging well behind the 'number of councils declared' earlier otherwise I've got no idea where most of those after 100 came from!


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

To all those sniffy lefties who say that Surrey's just full of tories...I'd like to introduce Mr Robert Evans, County Councillor for Stanwell and Stanwell Moor.

Surrey's only Lab councillor....

58 Conservative
9 Liberal Democrats
9 Residents’ Association / Independents
3 UKIP
1 Labour
1 Green Party


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 3, 2013)

trashpony said:


> Fucking hell - 7 out of 8 seats went to UKIP where I live


 
Somewhere near Dover?


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> 2.20pm BST
> On the BBC Michael Gove has just hinted that David Cameron will formally withdraw his "fruitcakes, lunatics and closet racists" remark about Ukip when he speaks to the media this afternoon.
> 
> LOL


 
Here it is:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22404562



> Responding to the success of UKIP, Prime Minister David Cameron said "It's no good insulting a political party that people have chosen to vote for".


 
In the video he goes on to say that they have to respect people who chose to support UKIP and they will work hard to win them back.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Clegg speaks...

_*Nick Clegg* has now given his response to the local election results._
_I have always said it is understandable why it is that people might be attracted to the simple answers that the UK Independence party is offering to deal with this country's complex problems. But I do not think they do have the answers to the dilemmas we face as a country. I believe that the Liberal Democrats do ..._
_ Of course, it is not good to lose half your councillors, as we have done in these elections, but the Liberal Democrats are on a journey. We are on a journey from..._

Anyone?


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> Here it is:
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22404562
> 
> ...


 
Rowing back from saying that a quarter of the electorate are racist supporters of clowns.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Clegg speaks...
> 
> Nick Clegg has now given his response to the local election results.
> I have always said it is understandable why it is that people might be attracted to the simple answers that the UK Independence party is offering to deal with this country's complex problems. But I do not think they do have the answers to the dilemmas we face as a country. I believe that the Liberal Democrats do ...
> ...


He has always said that. Where?

The complex question you're grappling with. You've just got another clear answer. And after eastleig buoyed your hopes so.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> _ but the Liberal Democrats are on a journey. We are on a journey from..._
> 
> Anyone?


 
The dogs arse to my letterbox.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Clegg speaks...
> 
> _*Nick Clegg* has now given his response to the local election results._
> _I have always said it is understandable why it is that people might be attracted to the simple answers that the UK Independence party is offering to deal with this country's complex problems. But I do not think they do have the answers to the dilemmas we face as a country. I believe that the Liberal Democrats do ..._
> ...


 

sig, to in


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Nottinghamshire*
Labour gain from Conservatives
Lab 34 (+18); C 21 (-14); LD 8 (-1); Ind 4 (-2); UKIP 0 (-1)

*West Sussex*
Conservative hold
C 46 (nc); UKIP 10 (+8); LD 8 (-10); Lab 6 (+3); Ind 1 (-1)

*Worcestershire*
Conservative hold
C 30 (-11); Lab 12 (+8); UKIP 4 (+4); LD 3 (-4); Ind CHC 2 (nc); Green 2 (+1); Ind 2 (+2); Lib 1 (nc); RA 1 (nc)

*Kent*
Conservative hold
C 45 (-27); UKIP 17 (+16); Lab 13 (+10); LD 7 (nc); RA 1 (nc); Green 1 (+1)


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

> _the Liberal Democrats are on a *journey*._



Don't stop beleveeeeeeeevin'........


----------



## DotCommunist (May 3, 2013)

'and the dogs licked up his blood'


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

Donny round one:

Ros Jones (Labour) 21,996
Peter Davies (Independent) 21,406
David Allen (English Democrats) 4,615
Michael Maye (Independent) 4,557
Martin Drake (Conservative) 2,811
Mary Jackson (Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts) 1,916
John Brown (Liberal Democrats) 1,122
Tony Ward (Indepdendent) 1,110
Dave Owen (National Front) 1,066
Doug Wright (Save Your Services) 786

A good show for TUSC!

From the likely split of the parties' votes for round two, it will take the other two indies votes to split overwhelmingly (4-1ish) in favour of Jones for her to win it.


----------



## elbows (May 3, 2013)

So if I am reading the results properly, in each of the two counties where Labour took control, UKIP lost their previously held seat.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

toggle said:


> fucking bigoted disablist tory shitwank got re elected.
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22403852


 Jeez, makes you wonder about some people.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 3, 2013)

elbows said:


> So if I am reading the results properly, in each of the two counties where Labour took control, UKIP lost their previously held seat.



Yep, incumbency is something of a disadvantage for fruitloops.


----------



## trashpony (May 3, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> Somewhere near Dover?


Yep


elbows said:


> So if I am reading the results properly, in each of the two counties where Labour took control, UKIP lost their previously held seat.


Well that's encouraging at any rate


----------



## geminisnake (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Clegg speaks...
> 
> _*Nick Clegg* has now given his response to the local election results._
> 
> ...


 
From the bottom of the pit to the gates of Hades. The Lib Dems as a party are zombies.


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> From the likely split of the parties' votes for round two, it will take the other two indies votes to split overwhelmingly (4-1ish) in favour of Jones for her to win it.


which they must have done!  Ros Jones wins


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

btw, anyone know if Maidmarian stood in Notts? I seem to recall she lost her seat last time round


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

redsquirrel said:


> They won't get anything like 100. I know they're riding a wave ATM but they didn't make any (net) gains in either the 2011 or 2012 local elections.
> 
> I reckon 20 seats would be a good result. Their share of the vote will be pretty good tho.


144 at the mo ...


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

These are unusual times, as I said before, its just sad a progressive but in touch with W/C concerns left hasn't benefited.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

Back on the subject of TUSC and the issue of engagement with the grassroots, I will say that in Manchester at least they are trying to do that, leafleting working class areas of Manchester to build a protest against the Bedroom Tax.

Regarding UKIP, I really hope that this is a high point and people will see them for what they are (I am really concerned about their attitudes towards benefit claimants which will encourage the mainstream to be even more reactionary in that regard).


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Isle of Wight:
Conservatives lose to NOC
C 15 (-8); Ind 20 (+8); Lab 2 (+1); LD 1 (-3); UKIP 2 (+2)


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Donny round one:
> 
> Ros Jones (Labour) 21,996
> Peter Davies (Independent) 21,406
> ...


 
Is it really a good show to have less than half the votes of the English Democrat candidate?


----------



## Red Storm (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Is it really a good show to have less than half the votes of the English Democrat candidate?


 
They were the former ruling party to be fair.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Northamptonshire*
Conservative hold
C 36 (-18); Lab 11 (+5); LD 6 (-4); UKIP 3 (+2); Ind 1 (-1)

Balbi DotCommunist


----------



## belboid (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Is it really a good show to have less than half the votes of the English Democrat candidate?


it's a good vote _for TUSC_, nothing else. Less than half the ED vote and less than a tenth of ex-ED's Davies. No, it really isnt any good in the scheme of things. A much better example of the left's weakness in the WC than UKIP's gains, especially as it _is_ a good result for TUSC.


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Back on the subject of TUSC and the issue of engagement with the grassroots, I will say that in Manchester at least they are trying to do that, leafleting working class areas of Manchester to build a protest against the Bedroom Tax.
> 
> Regarding UKIP, I really hope that this is a high point and people will see them for what they are (I am really concerned about their attitudes towards benefit claimants which will encourage the mainstream to be even more reactionary in that regard).


 
Yes in the hope that it is the Poll Tax mark2 but Labour have got in on this just as quick.

One of  difference between what some of us want to see and the likes of TUSC is that we want engagement to be on the working classes terms and dealing with the issue that they raise not some organisation deciding to engage on the issue that they think will build their organisation.


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Red Storm said:


> They were the former ruling party to be fair.


 
They weren't , the Mayor is just one position and he was the EDs only elected member.He then left the ED. The vast majority of councillors are Labour


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

Did I just read Doncaster mayor won by labour?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

*Isle of Anglesey*
Independents lost to no overall control
Ind 14 (-9); PC 12 (+4);, Lab 3 (-2); LD 1 (nc); Llais 0 (-2); C 0 (-1)

Boundary changes, ten fewer seats on the council


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> One of difference between what *some of us* want to see and the likes of TUSC is that we want engagement to be on the working classes terms and dealing with the issue that they raise not some organisation deciding to engage on the issue that they think will build their organisation.


Could you kindly tell me what organisation are you part of then, that wants to campaign against the bedroom tax on the working class' terms? I am very aware of TUSC's shortcomings, but for the moment they are most viable option I have considering all the other left alternatives are even less credible, and since I have long given up on the Greens filling in that alternative role after the Brighton fiasco. Bring on Left Unity...


----------



## The39thStep (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Could you kindly tell me what organisation are you part of then, that wants to campaign against the bedroom tax on the working class' terms? I am very aware of TUSC's shortcomings, but for the moment they are most viable option I have considering all the other left alternatives are even less credible, and since I have long given up on the Greens filling in that alternative role after the Brighton fiasco. Bring on Left Unity...


 
I am a supporter of IWCA and similar approaches.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Could you kindly tell me what organisation are you part of then, that wants to campaign against the bedroom tax on the working class' terms? I am very aware of TUSC's shortcomings, but for the moment they are most viable option I have considering all the other left alternatives are even less credible, and since I have long given up on the Greens filling in that alternative role after the Brighton fiasco. Bring on Left Unity...


What is the TUSC the most viable option for tom?


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> I am a supporter of IWCA and similar approaches.


Is there any iwca activity in the nw? Looked into it a while ago but couldn't find owt..


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Last results I think:

*Cornwall*
Remains no overall control

Ind 37 (+3); LD 36 (nc); Con 3 (-15); Lab 8 (+7); UKIP 6 (+6); MK 4 (-2); Green 1 (+1)

*Northumberland*
Remains no overall control
Lab 32 (+15); Con 21 (+3); LD 11 (-14); Ind 3 (-4)

*Shropshire*
Conservative hold
Con 48 (-3); LD 12 (-2); Lab 9 (+2); Ind 5 (+3)

*Wiltshire*
Conservative hold
Con 58 (-3); LD 27 (+5); Ind 8 (-5); Lab 4 (+2); UKIP 1 (+1)


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Is it really a good show to have less than half the votes of the English Democrat candidate?


 
It's a decent result for a good working class candidate - It's the sort of result that if TUSC got consistently would be a basis on which to go forward with a bit of confidence in future elections. It's a shame you don't appear to have the character to acknowledge this and would rather reach for a dubious comparison like that so you can shit on what little positives they have for your own narcissistic amusement.



The39thStep said:


> Yes in the hope that it is the Poll Tax mark2 but Labour have got in on this just as quick.


 
Depends which part of Labour your own about. Quite a hefty chunk of Progress, the PLP etc, want Labour to back the bedroom tax, and to try matching the Tories on cutting benefits - a policy which polling shows a fairly large chunk of w/c and lower m/c people support.

For all their faults I don't think that TUSC's opposition to the Bedroom Tax is insincere or simply a vain attempt to relive the Poll Tax stuff. And it's hardly surprising that a political organisation wants to campaign on issues that'll help the organisation grow - a political party that tries to increase it's size and influence? For Shame!


----------



## Red Storm (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> They weren't , the Mayor is just one position and he was the EDs only elected member.He then left the ED. The vast majority of councillors are Labour


 
I meant the ED were the former incumbent party. 

Still a bad result for tusc but not as bad as normal.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Red Storm said:


> I meant the ED were the former incumbent party.
> 
> Still a bad result for tusc but not as bad as normal.


 
It's not a bad result at all considering the context. A bad result is getting beaten by the Pirate Party in central manchester. 1900 votes and coming in between the Tories and Lib Dems is a perfectly respectable result for a fringe left-wing group. In the TUSC context it's not far off being fuckin' miraculous. Maybe they had the advantage of a well known and respected candidate in Mary Jackson? I mean George Tapp gets a respectable vote in Ordsall but I don't put that down to TUSC being popular, but coz he's an excellent candidate.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> I am a supporter of IWCA and similar approaches.


 
I'd never have guessed.


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Don't think I put these up:

*Buckinghamshire: *
*CON HOLD*
C 36 (-8); UKIP 6 (+6); LD 5 (-6); Ind 1 (nc); Lab 1 (nc)

*Devon: *
*CON HOLD*
C 38 (-3); LD 9 (-4); Lab 7 (+1); UKIP 4 (+4); Ind 3 (+1); Green 1 (+1)

*Durham: *
*LAB HOLD*
Lab 94 (+26); Ind 19 (-9); LD 9 (-12); Con 4 (-5)


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What is the TUSC the most viable option for tom?


Well to me personally they are the best option for a left protest vote, considering how the Greens have sold out and the less said about Respect, the better. That may change as events within the left unfold.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> I am a supporter of IWCA and similar approaches.


The only time I have ever heard of IWCA is via these boards (edit to add: oh, and via Indymedia, back when I used to read it). There certainly is no sign of them around where I live.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Well to me personally they are the best option for a left protest vote, considering how the Greens have sold out and the less said about Respect, the better. That may change as events within the left unfold.


So a left protest vote. Anything else? Is this really something to aim for?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> The only time I have ever heard of IWCA is via these boards. There certainly is no sign of them around where I live.


Where do you live?


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Where do you live?


Manchester - in the constituency of Manchester Central to be exact.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Manchester - in the constituency of Manchester Central to be exact.


How long have you lived there? Are you going to tarry awhile?


----------



## Red Storm (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Manchester - in the constituency of Manchester Central to be exact.


 
They did give it a go there about 10 years ago.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> So a left protest vote. Anything else? Is this really something to aim for?


Well no, but at election time one is faced with some stark choices to make.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> How long have you lived there? Are you going to tarry awhile?


Jeezus, all these questions... 

If you must know, about 6 years.


----------



## killer b (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Well no, but at election time one is faced with some stark choices to make.


indeed. do you draw a spunking cock on your voting slip, or just go to the pub?


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Well no, but at election time one is faced with some stark choices to make.


Like what? Stark?


----------



## trampie (May 3, 2013)

Only one area in Wales had voting, 30 seats up for grabs, UKIP fielded a candidate in every ward but failed to win a single seat, they got 7% of the vote which compared very badly to what they got in England, but still beat the Tories who only had 6% of the vote and also won no seats although over in England the Tories still dominated in most areas where there was voting.

Wales and England politically miles apart so it seems, Wales on the left, England on the extreme right.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

killer b said:


> indeed. do you draw a spunking cock on your voting slip, or just go to the pub?


I have spoiled my ballots when it's been just a choice of the Greens, mainstream, and right of the mainstream.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> Jeezus, all these questions...
> 
> If you must know, about 6 years.


Oh no _questions_, how dare people question you about what you've publicly said on a discussion board.

Right, so you're there long enough to have an enduring interest in the area - how are other people expressing this interest?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> *Northamptonshire*
> Conservative hold
> C 36 (-18); Lab 11 (+5); LD 6 (-4); UKIP 3 (+2); Ind 1 (-1)
> 
> Balbi DotCommunist


 
erg, not unexpected


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

trampie said:


> Only one area in Wales had voting, 30 seats up for grabs, UKIP fielded a candidate in every ward but failed to win a single seat, they got 7% of the vote which compared very badly to what they got in England, but still beat the Tories who only had 6% of the vote and also won no seats although over in England the Tories still dominated in most areas where there was voting.
> 
> Wales and England politically miles apart so it seems, Wales on the left, England on the extreme right.


Yes, and Anglesey now has a Socialist council. Oh no, wait


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Oh no _questions_, how dare people question you about what you've publicly said on a discussion board.


It feels like everything I'm posting is being intensely scrutinised.



> Right, so you're there long enough to have an enduring interest in the area - how are other people expressing this interest?


Two groups seem promising, Left Unity, and Greater Manchester Anticapitalists, plus grassroots stuff against the Bedroom Tax and benefit cuts, which have had varying levels of success.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> It feels like everything I'm posting is being intensely scrutinised.


 
You're new here, aren't you?




Tom A said:


> Two groups seem promising, Left Unity, and Greater Manchester Anticapitalists, plus grassroots stuff against the Bedroom Tax and benefit cuts, which have had varying levels of success.


 
These guys? http://acamanchester.co.uk/


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> It feels like everything I'm posting is being intensely scrutinised.
> 
> 
> Two groups seem promising, Left Unity, and Greater Manchester Anticapitalists, plus grassroots stuff against the Bedroom Tax and benefit cuts, which have had varying levels of success.


Why shouldn't it be intensely scrutinised?

Maybe i asked the question wrong, what are the class doing, not what is the left doing. What is the grassroots stuff and why is it only worth a "plus"?


----------



## JTG (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> It feels like everything I'm posting is being intensely scrutinised.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> You're new here, aren't you?


He was here years before you.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

JTG said:


> Yes, and Anglesey now has a Socialist council. Oh no, wait


 
Perhaps the meaning of 'independent' has been lost in translation? Perhaps in Wales it doesn't equate to mean-spirited, small government/lowtax, insular, reactionary social conservatives with a deep suspicion of 'outsiders'. No, they're obviously real leftists out there on that island.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Why shouldn't it be intensely scrutinised?
> 
> May be i asked the question wrong, what are the class doing, not what is the left doing. What is the grassroots stuff and why is it only worth a "plus"?


Strange as this may seem, I do not claim to speak for the entire working class. However, I, as a working class person, am just trying to get by, trying to work to resist all the attacks on me and my class wherever possible, but having to choose my battles carefully since I am liable to get frustrated and burn out. But then that's just me as an individual.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> He was here years before you.


 
Yeah but I'm a quick learner


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Yeah but I'm a quick learner


Yeah?


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> You're new here, aren't you?


No, as BA said, I'm not. Although I admit I might have been a bit naive regarding how posters treat each other (that's not to be treated as a sweeping judgement on all people whom post in P&P). I've changed a fair bit politically during my absence though.




> These guys? http://acamanchester.co.uk/


No, these: http://anticapitalists.org/tag/manchester/
https://www.facebook.com/manchesteranticapitalists/info


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

it is getting very unpleasant on here and i'm certain lurkers, etc are put off contributing, the abuse on Articulate for example is pathetic and mods should take note, imo.


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

prefer the former site


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> it is getting very unpleasant on here and i'm certain lurkers, etc are put off contributing, the abuse on Articulate for example is pathetic and mods should take note, imo.


Fuck right off


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Tom A said:


> No, as BA said, I'm not. Although I admit I might have been a bit naive regarding how posters treat each other (that's not to be treated as a sweeping judgement on all people whom post in P&P). I've changed a fair bit politically during my absence though


 
Yeah, I know, you mentioned it on a thread from earlier on - I said it because it looked like you were replying to butchers inquisition as if you were under sort of some obligation to, like your an errant schoolboy and he's the headmaster, marking your work and letting you know where you've been going wrong. This is a webforum not a court, and butchers isn't the forum police (as much as the idea must appeal to the inner-policeman buried deep inside every Anarchist I've ever met) so don't feel like you have tell anyone about where you live, what you do, and all the other pedantry.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> it is getting very unpleasant on here and i'm certain lurkers, etc are put off contributing, the abuse on Articulate for example is pathetic and mods should take note, imo.


Hardly unpleasant, and actually pretty mild compared to some of the bunfights that have been seen on here.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 3, 2013)

compared to 2002-2006 this place is positively chilled.

Used to be far more tooth and nail


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Yeah, I know, you mentioned it on a thread from earlier on - I said it because it looked like you were replying to butchers inquisition as if you were under sort of some obligation to, like your an errant schoolboy and he's the headmaster, marking your work and letting you know where you've been going wrong. This is a webforum not a court, and butchers isn't the forum police (as much as the idea must appeal to the inner-policeman buried deep inside every Anarchist I've ever met) so don't feel like you have tell anyone about where you live, what you do, and all the other pedantry.


How nice for tom for you to hold his hand,. How presumptuous, How insulting.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Yeah, I know, you mentioned it on a thread from earlier on - I said it because it looked like you were replying to butchers inquisition as if you were under sort of some obligation to, like your an errant schoolboy and he's the headmaster, marking your work and letting you know where you've been going wrong. This is a webforum not a court, and butchers isn't the forum police (*as much as the idea must appeal to the inner-policeman buried deep inside every Anarchist I've ever met*) so don't feel like you have tell anyone about where you live, what you do, and all the other pedantry.


 

WAR


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

treelover said:


> it is getting very unpleasant on here and i'm certain lurkers, etc are put off contributing, the abuse on Articulate for example is pathetic and mods should take note, imo.


 
The unpleasant-ness is a big part of the appeal. Like the dank in Moe's Tavern.


----------



## trampie (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Perhaps the meaning of 'independent' has been lost in translation? Perhaps in Wales it doesn't equate to mean-spirited, small government/lowtax, insular, reactionary social conservatives with a deep suspicion of 'outsiders'. No, they're obviously real leftists out there on that island.


The last election on the island [Welsh Assembly 2011]they voted Plaid a left wing party.


----------



## coley (May 3, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> WAR


What is it good for? absolutely nothing


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

trampie said:


> The last election on the island [Welsh Assembly 2011]they voted Plaid a left wing party.


 
But this time PC have two less councillors than the independents.


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Yeah, I know, you mentioned it on a thread from earlier on - I said it because it looked like you were replying to butchers inquisition as if you were under sort of some obligation to, like your an errant schoolboy and he's the headmaster, marking your work and letting you know where you've been going wrong. This is a webforum not a court, and butchers isn't the forum police (as much as the idea must appeal to the inner-policeman buried deep inside every Anarchist I've ever met) so don't feel like you have tell anyone about where you live, what you do, and all the other pedantry.


I am answering of my own volition (and certainly am not about to give any really personal information), because I feel (probably foolishly) that I have to "set the record straight", although I felt that it came across quite aggressively (that's not to be taking as "me taking offence"). But any more and I will just not rise to it.




			
				DotCommunist said:
			
		

> compared to 2002-2006 this place is positively chilled.


In the main I feel that too, thankfully. Also I feel that I am on more common ground with at least some of the posters on here, thanks to the various experiences that life has given me.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> The unpleasant-ness is a big part of the appeal. Like the dank in Moe's Tavern.


You really really do not know what unpleasantness on here is. treelover does, which makes this whining all the more pathetic.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> You really really do not know what unpleasantness on here is. treelover does, which makes this whining all the more pathetic.


 
I'm sure that's my loss. I'm drawn to misery like a fly round shit. See also - supporting Huddersfield Town.


----------



## trampie (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> But this time PC have two less councillors than the independents.


Traditionally Anglesey councillors don't align along party political lines, the last time out there was 40 seats available, this time only 30, last time out the Independants had 14, Plaid 8, Labour 5, Tories and UKIP nothing, the rest of the seats was spread around various other groups, this time the Independents had 14, Plaid 12, Labour 3 and Libs 1.
Plaid had 32% of the vote up 11% the Independents had 31% of the vote down 25%.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)




----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

That's rubbish. Large rubbish.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

trampie said:


> Traditionally Anglesey councillors don't align along party political lines, the last time out there was 40 seats available, this time only 30, last time out the Independants had 14, Plaid 8, Labour 5, Tories and UKIP nothing, the rest of the seats was spread around various other groups, this time the Independents had 14, Plaid 12, Labour 3 and Libs 1.
> Plaid had 32% of the vote up 11% the Independents had 31% of the vote down 25%.


 
Good to hear that PC are making gains....but 





> Traditionally Anglesey councillors don't align along party political lines


 does sound a little, erm....well backward?


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> That's rubbish. Large rubbish.


 
You're even moodier than usual, is something up butch?


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> You're even moodier than usual, is something up butch?


 
Was a bit harsh. Quite a good likeness really...


----------



## Tom A (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Was a bit harsh. Quite a good likeness really...


Caption competition time...


----------



## trampie (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Good to hear that PC are making gains....but does sound a little, erm....well backward?


Why would the people vote for right wing English parties ?


----------



## Sprocket. (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> Donny round one:
> 
> Ros Jones (Labour) 21,996
> Peter Davies (Independent) 21,406
> ...


 
After counting of the second votes Labour scraped in by just over 650 votes. am amazed that my prediction in post 54 of a narrow Labour victory came true. The consolation TUSC can take away is they finished above the Libdems.
What I find fascinating is the nf polled 1066 in the first vote result. Strange figure with a lot of meaning for the xenophobes!


----------



## ska invita (May 3, 2013)

Sorry all, not been following thread at all, but just saw the final count- UKIP no gain in councils and got 8 more councillors 147 up from  139. Labour are up 538 from  291. Doesn't look like much of a UKIP victory to me - looks flat in fact. Great result for Labour. Am i missing something?


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2013)

Who were "save your services" and why were tusc standing against them?


----------



## treelover (May 3, 2013)

Sprocket. said:


> After counting of the second votes Labour scraped in by just over 650 votes. am amazed that my prediction in post 54 of a narrow Labour victory came true. The consolation TUSC can take away is they finished above the Libdems.
> What I find fascinating is the nf polled 1066 in the first vote result. Strange figure with a lot of meaning for the xenophobes!


 
Where the independents on the left?, that would have come to a decent combined figure.

Froggie got in first


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> Who were "save your services" and why were tusc standing against them?



Why did it matter?


----------



## frogwoman (May 3, 2013)

If those votes had combined they could have got over 2000 votes. Not that I necessarily think that's the right way to go, but you know.


----------



## joevsimp (May 3, 2013)

ska invita said:


> Sorry all, not been following thread at all, but just saw the final count- UKIP no gain in councils and got 8 more councillors 147 up from 139. Labour are up 538 from 291. Doesn't look like much of a UKIP victory to me - looks flat in fact. Great result for Labour. Am i missing something?


 
nope, t'other way round, ukip had 8 before, gained 139


----------



## muscovyduck (May 3, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> Who were "save your services" and why were tusc standing against them?


I always thought one of TUSC's main ways of going about things was to work with candidates who aim to stop the austerity budget (like the SP do, as far as I'm aware). I wonder what happened? Maybe Save Your Services started campaigning after TUSC decided they'd do something in the area. Maybe they refused to work alongside TUSC (or vice versa) due to some really over the top argument with one of the smaller groups within TUSC. maybe it was a legitimate political issue. Maybe it was just a bureaucratic fuck up, or maybe they just weren't aware of each other's existence.

Edit: I'd say what I just wrote was the most pointless post in existence but I've lurked long enough to know better.


----------



## butchersapron (May 3, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> If those votes had combined they could have got over 2000 votes. Not that I necessarily think that's the right way to go, but you know.


I don't know, i can only think that you think is the way to go.

If the conditions existed for these two things to be together then they would be. They're not.


----------



## Wilson (May 3, 2013)




----------



## redsquirrel (May 3, 2013)

belboid said:


> 144 at the mo ...


Yep I was massively wrong (obviously).

Brilliant result for UKIP. Be interesting to see how they manage this success and whether they have learned anything from the BNP comparison. They'll no doubt be some loons among the elected which the leadership will have to deal with but I think they've got two advantages the BNP didn't - (1) they don't face the same outright hostility from the establishment that the BNP did (ATM), Labour won't be too unhappy to see their success (so long as it's kept at a certain level), (2) they've still got the Euro elections next year where they can make strong gains, so in the short term at least, they don't have problem the BNP had of getting 'stuck' at a certain level of support and the membership getting frustrated.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

Times likes our pic too...
The Times splashes with an image of a jubilant Nigel Farage. It reports that Conservatives "fear" that Nadine Dorries will defect to Ukip. Fear may not be the right word.





Mad Nad!

'Defect' seems somehow appropriate.


----------



## brogdale (May 3, 2013)

..and as for the Torygraph*...



> The Daily Telegraph leads with the Conservatives' election postmortem. _*It quotes a Tory insider who argues the party's elitist outlook has cost it dearly. "David Cameron needs to 'break the impression of being privileged and out of touch', according to a senior Tory, if he wants recover from the drubbing in this week's local elections..."*_




Not enough 's for that.

*may make me appear like a member of the slacker generation.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 3, 2013)

Wilson said:


> Nigel Farage


 
That's a terrible blunt he wants to get some better wraps


----------



## J Ed (May 3, 2013)

SEYMOUR! agrees with my analysis haha http://internationalsocialistnetwor...obin-and-richard-syemour?showall=&limitstart=


----------



## ferrelhadley (May 3, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Was a bit harsh. Quite a good likeness really...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 3, 2013)

I'm beginning to think that pictures of farrago ought to follow the rule about potentially disturbing imagaes and be put under a spoiler...


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

Tories -335
Labour + 291
UKIP +139
LD -124

Against predictions of Tories -350 (they did better by 15) and Labour +350 (they did worse by 59).

UKIP either took most of the dead LDs and the ex-Tories, and/or split these with Labour but nicked some from Labour/Indies/Other. May have protected Tories in some areas.

LDs made small overall gains in parts of the south-west too, against a not that big overall loss. Middle of the road worthy types still sticking with them as tactical anti-Tory in the absence of other choices. May or may not mean anything for 2015, they've always been stronger in the locals than Westminster.


----------



## elbows (May 4, 2013)




----------



## where to (May 4, 2013)

The BBC and others seemed intent on playing down labours results yesterday. They certainly did not do badly, as BBC reported. Later in the evening they were lining up Blairites to attack Miliband from the right. 

The bulk of the media class have reached a consensual anti Miliband position it seems. the Blairites will be twisting the knife now.


----------



## butchersapron (May 4, 2013)

Labour just won 2015


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

The under-performed polling predictions by ~17% in terms of seats (not checked popular vote, it could be wildly different).

Labour is either losing ground relative to expectations because of the geographical distribution of the vote (solid-ish, or mass desertion to 4th parties, but not much in between, which would mean more seats lost than votes) or because it is not turning out enough of its base to counter the flight to 4th parties.

And 2/3 of those low-hanging LD seats are Tory marginals, so they can't deploy their anti-coalition vote very effectively. They have to pick it up in the Midlands and East and smash London to counter likely Tory gains due to LD irrelevancy, and probably more than you'd think LD holds given that swing is never actually uniform.


----------



## where to (May 4, 2013)

ymu said:
			
		

> The under-performed polling predictions



But those predictions are a crap basis for analysis. If the predictions had been less optimistic would the labour result now be better?  

As I understand it the predictions were based on April polling. Its May now and things have moved since then. We knew that before Thursday so this analysis misses the actual tangible implications of the election, by steering all analysis to comparisons with April predictions.

What the polls do seem to say is that the ukip vote is real, as are the returning labour voters. And as butchers says this means labour should have 2015 in the bag.


----------



## treelover (May 4, 2013)

where to said:


> The BBC and others seemed intent on playing down labours results yesterday. They certainly did not do badly, as BBC reported. Later in the evening they were lining up Blairites to attack Miliband from the right.
> 
> *The bulk of the media class have reached a consensual anti Miliband position it seems.* the Blairites will be twisting the knife now.


 
Yes, it was very obvious, that odious Dan Hodges was wheeled out with another Blairite on BBC news, talk about balance.


----------



## where to (May 4, 2013)

Aye, pretty transparent.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

where to said:


> But those predictions are a crap basis for analysis. If the predictions had been less optimistic would the labour result now be better?
> 
> As I understand it the predictions were based on April polling. Its May now and things have moved since then. We knew that before Thursday so this analysis misses the actual tangible implications of the election, by steering all analysis to comparisons with April predictions.
> 
> What the polls do seem to say is that the ukip vote is real, as are the returning labour voters. And as butchers says this means labour should have 2015 in the bag.


Yeah. They were wrong so now they're useless. 

Butchers knows his stuff:


butchersapron said:


> The Thrasher and Rallings’s local elections projections came out ever the weekend (n brief anyway, in-depth later this week) - usually broadly reliable: Labour to gain 350 seats, Conservatives to lose 310, the Liberal Democrats to lose 130 and UKIP to win 40, national share: CON 29, LAB 38, LD 16, UKIP 11.


 
I misremembered the Tory prediction. They lost 25 more than expected, which is encouraging. Labour gained 59 fewer still. LD's 6 better. UKIP 99 better. Not seen actual national share yet but I'd bet that it is very close to bang on and that this is an efficient-vote distribution phenomenon.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (May 4, 2013)

where to said:


> The BBC and others seemed intent on playing down labours results yesterday. They certainly did not do badly, as BBC reported. Later in the evening they were lining up Blairites to attack Miliband from the right.
> 
> The bulk of the media class have reached a consensual anti Miliband position it seems. the Blairites will be twisting the knife now.


Attacking Miliband from the right must leave them crammed up against the wall quite hard. Only the media could see things that way. It reminds me of the stories on the Beeb when Blair was leader and there was talk of the non-existent challenge from Brown, where they talked of Blairites and Brownites, thus missing the point that Brown was a Blairite in his policies. So is Miliband you bozos. Where is that cigarette paper when you need it?


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 4, 2013)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Attacking Miliband from the right must leave them crammed up against the wall quite hard. Only the media could see things that way. It reminds me of the stories on the Beeb when Blair was leader and there was talk of the non-existent challenge from Brown, where they talked of Blairites and Brownites, thus missing the point that Brown was a Blairite in his policies. So is Miliband you bozos. Where is that cigarette paper when you need it?


 
The difference between a green and silver rizla never mattered so much...


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

Wow. Wiki has it in the right-hand sidebar here.

25% Tory, 29% Labour, 14% LD, 23% UKIP, [leaves 9% other]

On popular vote, LD's lost 2% vs national polls. Tories 4%, Labour 9%, and UKIP gained 12%.

That means +3% to other 4th parties also.

So, vote/seats drop on national polls + uniform swing-ish predictions:

Tories: -4%/ -11%
Labour: -9%/-17%
LDs: -2%/+5%
UKIP: +12%/+249%

UKIP has demographic clustering on it's side for the locals for sure. They're getting more seats than vote share (similar to Labour but with bells on).

The question is, are they clustered enough to storm Westminster? Well. knock politely on the door. Need a map overlaying wards with consituencies and pinpoint UKIP wins and average vote.

The momentum could carry them over. 4th parties do well when it is widely perceived that they can win.

There must be furious dirt-digging at Tory and Labour HQs right now. The LDs must be loving it. They're getting the social liberal anti-right vote in their stronger-holds.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

Compared to the same-ish seats in 2009, pre-coalition, height of anti-Brown-ism and Tory landslide-ism, popular vote/seats:

Tories: -8%/-22%
Labour: -10%/+35%
LDs: -1%/-26%
UKIP: +23%/+94%
Others: -4%/N/A

There's some hefty ghetto effects going on. Labour not doing well on the popular vote but impressive when accounting for a low base and saved by geography. The rich ghettoise themselves and there's plenty of rural and small-townshire to go around too.


----------



## ska invita (May 4, 2013)

joevsimp said:


> nope, t'other way round, ukip had 8 before, gained 139


Oh right yeah of course  its been a long week


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

The Telegraph has a bit of a map. Tories lost 10 councils but Labour only gained 2. We're heading into FPTP causing coalitions territory. The other effect of divide-and-rule.

Looking for something at ward level.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

Better map here. Showing overall control only, but some results if you click on a constituency.

http://www.local.gov.uk/election-results


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

Ah, BBC has it. Of course. Chief cheer-leader for the right.







Main troops clustered in the East with a small South and West coast pincer movement going on. Non-far North through the Midlands and the mid-South appear broadly similar so far. LD and (more) Labour strongholds are hanging in due to moderate but geographically concentrated Tory losses, but UKIP seem to be taking half their vote off Labour.

These are very right-skewed councils though. A full four year cycle from here would show a lot more and possibly a lot different. And there's a General Election three-quarters the way through. By 2015 it should be clear whether this is an "I agree with Nick" moment or comparable to the birth of another fledgling party 115 years ago.

TUSC for the new new Labour party on the same trajectory? Or will Miliband shift far enough over to meet them that old old Labour is enough within the electoral possibilities?

Or will there be a revolution today? That would be .


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

This is that BBC map modified to show who they're stealing seats from. Not enough support to topple Labour, barring West Sussex (hippies, scratch one), but the Tories are under threat and where the LD's are the major losers, that is where a fair few of the losses are going (lots of Labour gains from Tories and LDs in there too, of course, UKIP is still tiny compared).

Ward level would be lovely, but this is enough!


----------



## Sprocket. (May 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> Who were "save your services" and why were tusc standing against them?


 
 The 'save your services' guy is a lovely, well meaning council employee who sadly came across as a little naive in his literature.



treelover said:


> Where the independents on the left?, that would have come to a decent combined figure.
> 
> Froggie got in first


 
The Independents are the former mayor Peter Davies ex English Dems (the fourth party he has been a member of!). and the rest centre right.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 4, 2013)

I honestly think that the electorate in the Borough did not realise that Peter Davies had left the Eng Dems and voted for them and not the person.
His (Davies) defeat speech was typical of the man.

Not available as yet on a link but it was a bit churlish and dismissive of the electorate IMHO.


----------



## The39thStep (May 4, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> It's a decent result for a good working class candidate - It's the sort of result that if TUSC got consistently would be a basis on which to go forward with a bit of confidence in future elections. It's a shame you don't appear to have the character to acknowledge this and would rather reach for a dubious comparison like that so you can shit on what little positives they have for your own narcissistic amusement.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Desperate


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

I dunno. UKIP are taking a lot of the former BNP vote but socialist-type candidates are doing OK comparatively and seem to be beating up a few right-wing nutters on the way. They do look to be on the up, which is good news in terms of pressure on more mainstream left triangulations, if it can grow. This is a very right wing set of council seats with the Tories holding around 60% of them to start. Fair few clustered indies too.


----------



## Random (May 4, 2013)

Socialist type candidates aren't doing well compared to fascist type ones.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

Well compared to past performances in these seats.


----------



## Random (May 4, 2013)

I'd like to see a cost per vote analysis of UKIP vs TUSC, to see who's getting most bang for their buck.


----------



## The39thStep (May 4, 2013)

I for one , despite my differences with the revo left , would be delighted  socialist type candidates were doing well. But the fact is they are not and Delroys post is just simply self deluded optimistic straw grabbing.


----------



## weepiper (May 4, 2013)

Just found out my cousin got elected as a Tory borough councillor  he's officially disowned (I haven't talked to him since he went off on a rant about how anyone who took part in the London riots 'should have their benefits removed')


----------



## kabbes (May 4, 2013)

*Results for Surrey*

CON No Change
Party Seats​+/-​​Conservative​ 
71.604938271605%​ *58*​ 1​Liberal Democrat​ 
11.111111111111%​ *9*​ -4​Residents Association​ 
11.111111111111%​ *9*​ -1​United Kingdom Independence Party​ 
3.7037037037037%​ *3*​ 3​Green Party​ 
1.2345679012346%​ *1*​ 1​Labour​ 
1.2345679012346%​ *1*​ 0​


----------



## JTG (May 4, 2013)

Amidst all this shire county analysis, the other thing shown up yesterday was the continuing death of the Liberal Democrats in council estate and inner city Bristol. See the Bristol thread for numbers etc but they have effectively curled up and expired in parts of the city that they dominated for the last ten years - barely into three figures in wards they won previously. They thought they could hold on in many of those places and instead they're being kicked to pieces as each tranche of seats comes up annually in the city. It's drawn out but they'll be gone in a year or two


----------



## brogdale (May 4, 2013)

ymu said:


>


 
Looks like a mash up of arable farming and retirement maps..


----------



## Maurice Picarda (May 4, 2013)

It also reflects the divide between the traditional Anglo-Saxons and the Danelaw. Viking rule conferred a legacy of xenophobia and bitterness.


----------



## where to (May 4, 2013)

I wouldn't read too much into that map, as it is as much a result of where elections took place, who stood, local issues candidates and campaigns, history of the party in an area, how widely vote was split, how many seats were up etc.

A similar map using popular vote in 2014 euros will tell us more.


----------



## where to (May 4, 2013)

ymu said:
			
		

> Yeah. They were wrong so now they're useless.



Even if he predictions were right they would not tell us much. What matters is comparison to 2009, as you go on to do,not to April 2013 projections. 

Its like saying if Bayern lose the european cup final that they have had a bad season because they were favorites to win it in April.


----------



## treelover (May 4, 2013)

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/colin-brewer-councillor-who-said-1868172

Just read that the odious Councillor, Colin Brewer, who said "disabled children should be put down" has been re-elected, shame on the scum who voted for him, its only one individual but imo it is an ominous development and to be deplored, I hope the other councillors walk out when he arrives in the chamber.

btw, the Mirror is doing some great reporting now about austerity, the benefit cuts, inequality, etc, if I liked celebs as well I would buy it..


----------



## J Ed (May 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/colin-brewer-councillor-who-said-1868172
> 
> Just read that the odious Councillor, Colin Brewer, who said "disabled children should be put down" has been re-elected, shame on the scum who voted for him, its only one individual but imo it is an ominous development and to be deplored, I hope the other councillors walk out when he arrives in the chamber.


 
I'm just going to hope that most of the people didn't know what he said for the sake of my own sanity.


----------



## treelover (May 4, 2013)

> On BBC Spotlight South West this evening this individual was celebrating his victory and telling reporters that local voters knew he didn't mean it and that it was "just a wind-up". Good grief! Does this guy have any insight at all into how utterly moronic his public pronouncements are? What next?
> 
> Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/colin-brewer-councillor-who-said-1868172#ixzz2SJqHbO40
> Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook


 
he really is a grade one twat, isn't he?


----------



## J Ed (May 4, 2013)

These kippers all have the worst excuses for their behaviour, Falange needs to make creative writing class compulsory or something


----------



## treelover (May 4, 2013)

I know I shouldn't say this but the patience of disabled people is really being tested, one can see someone, perhaps who may be terminal, taking matters into their own hands.


----------



## treelover (May 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> These kippers all have the worst excuses for their behaviour, Falange needs to make creative writing class compulsory or something


 
He is an independent


----------



## J Ed (May 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> I know I shouldn't say this but the patience of disabled people is really being tested, one can see someone, perhaps who may be terminal, taking matters into their own hands.


 
I think it's astonishing that nothing like that has happened yet with ATOS and/or the government.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 4, 2013)

J Ed said:


> I think it's astonishing that nothing like that has happened yet with ATOS and/or the government.


There's been a few incidents.
There was the poor bloke who set himself alight outside Selly Oak Job Centre.


----------



## Tom A (May 4, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> There's been a few incidents.
> There was the poor bloke who set himself alight outside Selly Oak Job Centre.


And the sporadic bit of direct action, such as blockading the DWP during the Paralympics. But it needs to be more than just the one-off incident though, a few leaves taken out of DAN's books from the early 90s wouldn't go amiss.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 4, 2013)

Tom A said:


> And the sporadic bit of direct action, such as blockading the DWP during the Paralympics. But it needs to be more than just the one-off incident though, a few leaves taken out of DAN's books from the early 90s wouldn't go amiss.


What's DAN? What strategies has it/them/him got to offer?
I didn't actually exist in the early 90s, sorry


----------



## JTG (May 4, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> What's DAN? What strategies has it/them/him got to offer?
> I didn't actually exist in the early 90s, sorry


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2013)

I see surprisingly little discussion on the thread of the fact that hardly anyone actually bothered to vote in this election.


----------



## frogwoman (May 4, 2013)

Turnout in my area was something like 27%.


----------



## JTG (May 4, 2013)

True that. Bristol turn out was 27.5%, down from 38% or so four years ago


----------



## Tom A (May 4, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> What's DAN? What strategies has it/them/him got to offer?
> I didn't actually exist in the early 90s, sorry


The Disabled People's Direct Action Network. The are the ones who are responsible for pretty much all buses today being wheelchair accessible (other than on a few minor routes), and partially responsible for ITV getting rid of their patronising Telethon, which portrayed disabled people as objects of pity, in continuous need of charity.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> I see surprisingly little discussion on the thread of the fact that hardly anyone actually bothered to vote in this election.


 
sadly nothing all that new - some data (up to and including the PCC elections) here

Average turnout in Surrey was about 30% (I've been following that more closely than others, since I don't have a county here, and a friend was standing in one seat)

Lincolnshire (also keeping an eye on that as I lived there) doesn't show actual turnout % figures, you have to work it out for yourself, seat by seat, but I'd say 30% seems about average there.   I've found  19% in one Lincoln seat.  I've not done this properly, but at initial glance, it looks as though the seats that went UKIP were mostly lower than average turnout.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 4, 2013)

Tom A said:


> The Disabled People's Direct Action Network. The are the ones who are responsible for pretty much all buses today being wheelchair accessible (other than on a few minor routes), and partially responsible for ITV getting rid of their patronising Telethon, which portrayed disabled people as objects of pity, in continuous need of charity.


Oh they've been discussed (on a different thread probably) before haven't they? I didn't make the connection.


----------



## JimW (May 4, 2013)

So what's the news on my prediction of a Labour landslide in Essex?


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 4, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> I for one , despite my differences with the revo left , would be delighted socialist type candidates were doing well. But the fact is they are not and Delroys post is just simply self deluded optimistic straw grabbing.


 
No you wouldn't. You're far more interesting in seeing Socialist type candidates losing badly so you can gloat and sneer for your own amusement, and possibly because every time someone on the left fails it's hailed as a vindication of the "IWCA approach" which, in case you didn't notice on the other thread, has been "on hold" for the last 7 years. That's why you went to such effort to portray the Doncaster result as terrible, which _is_ a respectable result for a fringe left-wing group and much better than the usual terrible TUSC results were used to, when actually its about par i reckon. That's desperate. Where you expecting them to win or something?

Notice as well I'm not saying it's a great result, it's a respectable result, it's the sort of vote that they ought to aiming for consistently as a building block.

And you can comb through my posts and threads and discussions on the matter, you won't find any evidence of me being any kind of hardened TUSC fanboy. I've no time for TUSC or the SP these days I've been through that revolving door personally but I certainly won't let my own bitterness blind me to ackowledging the few times they actually do ok. Their results have been terrible pretty much everywhere they've ever stood and you'll get no argument from me on any of that, but this isn't one of them, so sorry you'll have to satiate your bitterness with other shitty TUSC results (and there's no shortage of them so have it at)


----------



## CNT36 (May 4, 2013)

treelover said:


> http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/colin-brewer-councillor-who-said-1868172
> 
> Just read that the odious Councillor, Colin Brewer, who said "disabled children should be put down" has been re-elected, shame on the scum who voted for him, its only one individual but imo it is an ominous development and to be deplored, I hope the other councillors walk out when he arrives in the chamber.
> 
> btw, the Mirror is doing some great reporting now about austerity, the benefit cuts, inequality, etc, if I liked celebs as well I would buy it..


Some great reaction too. A councillor was elected by 4 votes with a small turnout. Lets boycott the town http://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbi...782724177042&_mn_=5&relevant_count=1&refid=17 Sorry about the Facebook link I couldn't find it on their proper site.


----------



## The39thStep (May 4, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> No you wouldn't. You're far more interesting in seeing Socialist type candidates losing badly so you can gloat and sneer for your own amusement, and possibly because every time someone on the left fails it's hailed as a vindication of the "IWCA approach" which, in case you didn't notice on the other thread, has been "on hold" for the last 7 years. That's why you went to such effort to portray the Doncaster result as terrible, which _is_ a respectable result for a fringe left-wing group and much better than the usual terrible TUSC results were used to, when actually its about par i reckon. That's desperate. Where you expecting them to win or something?
> 
> Notice as well I'm not saying it's a great result, it's a respectable result, it's the sort of vote that they ought to aiming for consistently as a building block.
> 
> And you can comb through my posts and threads and discussions on the matter, you won't find any evidence of me being any kind of hardened TUSC fanboy. I've no time for TUSC or the SP these days I've been through that revolving door personally but I certainly won't let my own bitterness blind me to ackowledging the few times they actually do ok. Their results have been terrible pretty much everywhere they've ever stood and you'll get no argument from me on any of that, but this isn't one of them, so sorry you'll have to satiate your bitterness with other shitty TUSC results (and there's no shortage of them so have it at)



Desperate part 2 . 

You keep your hopes up that the TUSC result is a building block whilst I watch the last bit of the football.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 4, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Desperate part 2 .
> 
> You keep your hopes up that the TUSC result is a building block whilst I watch the last bit of the football.


 
You're a fool, I never said that it was a building block, and I certainly haven't got my hopes up (LOL).  shall we go through it a word at a time?



> it's the sort of vote that they ought to aiming for consistently as a building block.


 
Why lie? Can't you argue and debate honestly? Is it beyond you? Or are you just a dishonest person in general?

It's the sort of result that they should be considering _standard_ if the strategy they espouse was going to get anywhere. Respectable. Decent. Par. That's just my observation. If they could repeat the doncaster performance across the board, which imo they're actually capable of given the resources and organisation they have, then TUSC might go somewhere. But they can't, and they won't, and I'll be the first to say so. Now an interesting discussion might be why they can't, and why they won't, but that's not a discussion you're likely to contribute anything worthwhile to, is it?

My season's finished so I'll reply right away. Any chance you could reply with something more substantial that one word dismisalls and outright lies aimed at me personally? Or is that the level you operate on?


----------



## muscovyduck (May 4, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Desperate part 2 .
> 
> You keep your hopes up that the TUSC result is a building block whilst I watch the last bit of the football.


Seriously, if you don't care then just go and watch football. What are you actually doing hanging around on the thread if you're so not bothered?


----------



## toggle (May 4, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> Some great reaction too. A councillor was elected by 4 votes with a small turnout. Lets boycott the town http://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbi...782724177042&_mn_=5&relevant_count=1&refid=17 Sorry about the Facebook link I couldn't find it on their proper site.


we forced him out once, we can do it again


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

where to said:


> Even if he predictions were right they would not tell us much. What matters is comparison to 2009, as you go on to do,not to April 2013 projections.
> 
> Its like saying if Bayern lose the european cup final that they have had a bad season because they were favorites to win it in April.


The Labour popular vote is 10% down on 2009.

I agree. It's an appalling performance.


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 4, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Seriously, if you don't care then just go and watch football. What are you actually doing hanging around on the thread if you're so not bothered?


 
_Because he's a fucking crank perhaps?_


----------



## butchersapron (May 4, 2013)

Labour popular vote is projected to be 7% up on 2009. 22% vs 29%.


----------



## sihhi (May 4, 2013)

ymu said:


> The Labour popular vote is 10% down on 2009.
> 
> I agree. It's an appalling performance.


 


butchersapron said:


> Labour popular vote is projected to be 7% up on 2009. 22% vs 29%.


 
Can somebody please set the record straight?

I have paid little attention to stats but I have it that:
Labour is winning back the Lib Dem votes who no longer like the Lib Dems
& UKIP is winning some non-voters and some Tories - strong correlation by class as to which kind of vote.

Making UKIP not dissimilar from European populism like Swiss People's Party, Ataka, Freedom Party of Austria, Five Star, Swedish Democrats, Holland's Party for Freedom and others.
and Labour not dissimilar from big social democratic parties in the core of Western Europe that can bounce back even after defeats (Socialist Party in France, Dutch Labour Party, SPD in Germany).


----------



## where to (May 4, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Looks like a mash up of arable farming and retirement maps..


 
the arable farms propped up by EU subsidies. never understand that one.


----------



## treelover (May 4, 2013)

don't want to start the thread, but Sky News is reporting Nigel Evans MP, and deputy speaker has been arrested on suspicion of rape and sexual assault.

I wonder what UKIP will do..


----------



## brogdale (May 4, 2013)

where to said:


> the arable farms propped up by EU subsidies. never understand that one.


 
Its not the farm owners voting UKIP, is it? Think about it, they profit from the immigrant labour. Its the towns where the exploited A8 workers live that's proving fertile territory for the 'kippers.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

sihhi said:


> Can somebody please set the record straight?
> 
> I have paid little attention to stats but I have it that:
> Labour is winning back the Lib Dem votes who no longer like the Lib Dems
> ...


Dunno. Wiki has 2009 popular vote for Labour as 39%. One council missing in 2013 compared. No idea where butchers is getting his information and no idea which source is right.

E2A: mine is ambiguous, might mean 2012 locals, which would be dim but possible. Just  sec.


----------



## brogdale (May 4, 2013)

ymu said:


> Dunno. Wiki has 2009 popular vote for Labour as 39%. One council missing in 2013 compared. No idea where butchers is getting his information and no idea which source is right.


 
This might be helpful?



> The BBC’s Projected National Share of the vote was CON 25%, LAB 29%, LDEM 14%, UKIP 23%. The results for both the Conservatives and Labour are strikingly low… but this is more an artefact of the high level of UKIP support. I’ve said it in almost every post I’ve made this week, but note again what the Projected National Share of the vote is and isn’t.
> It is a projection of what the BBC think the shares of local vote would be if there were elections across the whole country and if all four parties stood in every council division. In other words, it takes account and corrects for the fact that only rather Toryish parts of the county voted, and that UKIP and the Lib Dems only stood in three-quarters of the divisions. Secondly, it isn’t the votes that were actually cast – if you totted up the votes cast in every ward on Thursday you’d come up with a different, but probably less meaningful, number. Thirdly, it’s not an attempt to measure or predict national support for a general election – general elections have much higher turnout and, more importantly, _people can and do vote differently in them._


----------



## butchersapron (May 4, 2013)

Local elections 2009 (pdf). House of Commons research publication:



> At the elections, the estimated national equivalent share of vote was Conservatives 35%, Labour 22%, and Liberal Democrats 25%. Estimated turnout was 35%.


----------



## sihhi (May 4, 2013)

ymu said:


> Dunno. Wiki has 2009 popular vote for Labour as 39%. One council missing in 2013 compared. No idea where butchers is getting his information and no idea which source is right.
> 
> E2A: mine is ambiguous, might mean 2012 locals, which would be dim but possible. Just sec.


 
Local elections 2009 has 22% for Labour according to the House of Commons.

39% for 2012 local elections, but these were very urban wards in large cities so it's not accurate to compare.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

ymu said:


> Dunno. Wiki has 2009 popular vote for Labour as 39%. One council missing in 2013 compared. No idea where butchers is getting his information and no idea which source is right.
> 
> E2A: mine is ambiguous, might mean 2012 locals, which would be dim but possible. Just sec.


Yep. This (on the Threshers & Railings predictions) says butchers is right:



> *Conservative 29%* (-6%),* 1,221 seats* (-310)
> *Labour*: *38%* (+16%), *528 seats*(+350)
> *Lib Dems*: *16%* (-9%), *354 seats* (-130)
> http://www.libdemvoice.org/local-elections-09-the-ldv-verdict-15295.html


 
Labour actual performance up 7% from 22% (compared to +16% expected).

Corrected version of the vote/seats post:


ymu said:


> Compared to the same-ish seats in 2009, pre-coalition, height of anti-Brown-ism and Tory landslide-ism, popular vote/seats:
> 
> Tories: -10%/-22%
> Labour: +7%/+35%
> ...


----------



## JTG (May 4, 2013)

HOWEVER: I believe Durham and Northumberland actually last voted in 2008 so even the 2009 figure isn't directly comparable to this year's.


----------



## ymu (May 4, 2013)

JTG said:


> HOWEVER: I believe Durham and Northumberland actually last voted in 2008 so even the 2009 figure isn't directly comparable to this year's.


There's been a bit of a shift, one less council overall up for election this time. Not sure if it's due to boundary changes or shifting election schedules.


----------



## JTG (May 4, 2013)

I know Anglesey was due last year but got held over to allow for a boundary review. Some other councils may have moved to a full council election every four years rather than a rolling programme. Bristol is due to make the change in 2016


----------



## joevsimp (May 4, 2013)

the three unitaries that they chopped Bedfordshire into voted in 2009 and 2011 for some reason


----------



## toggle (May 4, 2013)

fucking hell, there's some really angry nasty stuff out there tonight about brewer.

Cornwall is not to blame, we didn't all support him

that includes a fuckload of disabled people and families with disabled kids that are apparently included in this tirade of abuse against cornwall and everything cornish

padstow isn't exactly very cornish anyway. no one on a local salary can afford the prices. they don't want rick fucking stein for a neighbour either.

and there were 5 candidates standing against him, the next eprson i see blaming the blonde woman solely for his victory is getting slapped with a rotten fish.

he's a cunt

the cunts that voted for him are cunts

if it was up to me i'd save the council some money and have the cunt put down.

but can we stop blaming a whole fucking nation/country/region for one fucking cunt and a handful of fucking morons please.

rinse and fucking repeat.



bit pissed off at this.


----------



## brogdale (May 4, 2013)

toggle said:


> fucking hell, there's some really angry nasty stuff out there tonight about brewer.
> 
> Cornwall is not to blame, we didn't all support him
> 
> ...


 
Looks like a case for the Red Army Faction of the mind. In the absense of the real thing, just let the imaginary gang loose on that bloke.


----------



## toggle (May 4, 2013)

I've just called out one of the cornish nationalists for linking to the misogynist crap and got an apology. and him spreading my 'warning' what the bloke writing that stuff is like, he campaigns against domestic violence prevention campaigns.

but there's some pissed off people here tonight.


----------



## Quartz (May 4, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> I see surprisingly little discussion on the thread of the fact that hardly anyone actually bothered to vote in this election.


 
Because that's reserved for pompous oafs.


----------



## toggle (May 4, 2013)

*Sarah Maguire* ‏@*WadebridgeEast*  13h
If I'd taken 4 more of the Independent vote we'd not be in this situation. That's 2 doorsteps. And I couldn't, I'm so, so sorry Wadebridge.

*Sarah Maguire* ‏@*WadebridgeEast*  22h
Before judging us please know that 6245 voters are registered in #*Wadebridge* (East & West) 335 (5.4%) voted for Collin. 94.6% of us did not.


----------



## JimW (May 4, 2013)

Quartz said:


> Because that's reserved for pompous oafs.


But you weren't looking to discuss reasons why people are disenchanted, just wanted to wag your finger at them for abrogating their precious democratic duty.


----------



## coley (May 4, 2013)

toggle said:


> I've just called out one of the cornish nationalists for linking to the misogynist crap and got an apology. and him spreading my 'warning' what the bloke writing that stuff is like, he campaigns against domestic violence prevention campaigns.
> 
> but there's some pissed off people here tonight.


Who the hell did vote for him? Given what he said,there must be some very twattish people in that bit of Cornwall.
E2a
Not confined to Tory bastards.
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-mp-ian-lavery-appalled-3182146


----------



## Prince Rhyus (May 4, 2013)

For those of you interested in Cambridgeshire, where the Tories lost to no-overall-control (due to UKIP taking 12 safe-as-houses Tory seats), have a look at:

Local Paper - leader of council losing his seat too
Phil Rogers - ward by ward in Cambridge City


----------



## toggle (May 4, 2013)

coley said:


> Who the hell did vote for him? Given what he said,there must be some very twattish people in that bit of Cornwall.


 
not many people.don't know all the details tbh, this is 40 miles and one out of 120 constituencies. to my shame right now, i was more interested in watching where some of the people I know and trust personally were standing.

there can be a big streak of 'you can't tell us what to do' down here, and considering some of the crap that some of the locals get off second home owners and tourists, I don't blame them for it all. if brewer managed to tap into that, then it could explain. there's also an issue of inertia. it can be harder to move someone out than take an empty seat and brewer had well over 800 votes the last time he stood. he has held that seat a long time. a bit of pc gawn mad, gawds knows.

there are some suggestions he got most of his support out of some of the more isolated areas in the district, but i'm not wanting to play into any kind of yokel stereotype. but as you can see from this, it's as fair to blame the tories or labour for his victory as it was for some tit with a nasty reputation that i'm spreading far and wide, to blame sarah. could even blame the libs, they didn't stand last time.

but there's an academic conference coming up in a few weeks, discussing local politics with some of the people who know this century better than I do. might have an answer then.








 Collin William Brewer Independent 335 25% Elected





 Steve Knightley Liberal Democrat 331 25% Not elected





 Roderick Harrison UK Independence Party 208 16% Not elected





 Adrian Darrell Jones Labour 161 12% Not elected





 Brian Aubone Bennetts Conservative 150 11% Not elected
Sarah Hannah Maguire Independent 146 11% 
Not elected


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> not many people.don't know all the details tbh, this is 40 miles and one out of 120 constituencies. to my shame right now, i was more interested in watching where some of the people I know and trust personally were standing.
> 
> there can be a big streak of 'you can't tell us what to do' down here, and considering some of the crap that some of the locals get off second home owners and tourists, I don't blame them for it all. if brewer managed to tap into that, then it could explain. there's also an issue of inertia. it can be harder to move someone out than take an empty seat and brewer had well over 800 votes the last time he stood. he has held that seat a long time. a bit of pc gawn mad, gawds knows.
> 
> ...



That's still  335 people who are seriously dodgy, not getting at Cornwall,could have happened anywhere, it's worrying that people can be so callous/disinterested regarding the disabled that they would vote bloke with Nazi tendencies in.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

coley said:


> That's still 335 people who are seriously dodgy, not getting at Cornwall,could have happened anywhere, it's worrying that people can be so callous/disinterested regarding the disabled that they would vote bloke with Nazi tendencies in.


 
i know, but i'd suspect he managed to play off a lot of other factors. and i'd suspect i don't understand all of them. but the vast majority of cornish are not natural bigots. and i'd doubt there's many at all of his supporters that voted for him *because* he is shitty to disabled people. i'd suspect i'll find out eventually what line he took to play this. idk atm.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> i know, but i'd suspect he managed to play off a lot of other factors. and i'd suspect i don't understand all of them. but the vast majority of cornish are not natural bigots. and i'd doubt there's many at all of his supporters that voted for him *because* he is shitty to disabled people. i'd suspect i'll find out eventually what line he took to play this. idk atm.



I doubt most of the population are natural bigots, it's just disturbing that given his views that 335 people voted for him? What disturbs me is that there is a significant minority who hold these views and can express them in the  anonymity of the ballot booth.


----------



## The39thStep (May 5, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> You're a fool, I never said that it was a building block, and I certainly haven't got my hopes up (LOL). shall we go through it a word at a time?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
You just need to come clean Delroy.

*I think* : "Is it really a good show to have less than half the votes of the English Democrat candidate?"

*You think* :  3.1% of the vote  is  " a respectable result, it's the sort of vote that they ought to aiming for consistently as a building block,  standard, respectable, decent, par result if "the strategy they espouse was going to get anywhere"  ? That if TUSC  repeat 3.1%  "across the board, which imo they're actually capable of given the resources and organisation they have, then TUSC might go somewhere."

Having set the benchmark at 3%  for the sort of vote that you think they should aim to consistently build across the board  (_standard_ apparantly) that would enable TUSC to potentially go somewhere  you then offer the opinion that "they can't and they won't" even do that?

and I am a fool?

We need to sit down with you and get back to basics Delroy, this sort of contribution just doesn't pass muster.


----------



## where to (May 5, 2013)

Did the candidate get 3% because she was a TUSC candidate or in spite of being a TUSC candidate?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

I am glad that Collin Brewer was re-elected.  I cannot and do not condone his original comment (as reported), but I think the reaction was irrational and hysterical.  The comments on the subject in this thread and elsewhere are symptomatic of a new phenomenon in which people feel the need to react emotionally to issues and assume they have a licence to denigrate and abuse others at will without any thought or consideration in the belief that they are morally right.  One comment made by a local councillor was blown out of all proportion and then exploited cynically by a rather obnoxious and self-satisfied young lady whose tactics, I am glad to see, have soundly back-fired.  No-one here or elsewhere has considered whether it is cruel or unfair to subject Cllr. Brewer to such disproportionate and hysterical comment and scrutiny in local and national media, and in social media, for what was an off-hand remark.  It seems to me that Cllr. Brewer has, rightly, been judged on his record and has been re-elected fairly in accordance with the rules.  This should be accepted, and in my view he should now be left-alone and allowed to serve those who elected him.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

I always wondered what sort of weirdo actually seriously writes letters to local papers.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

I've noticed that insults and bullying of other posters are your stock in trade.  It's not an argument, though, is it.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Can you do your next one in green?

Do you really consider your original post offered 'an argument' Ms Brewer/Tobes.


----------



## Red Storm (May 5, 2013)




----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

I have no association whatever with Mr. Brewer, nor do I support him politically.  As I implied in my first post, most people who comment on this issue, here and elsewhere, are satisfying a need to feel morally superior by over-blowing a trivial incident.  They are also exploiting the plight and challenges of disabled people cynically for their own personal and political ends, including self-promotion.  There has been no debate about the appropriateness of the response to his remark, and indeed whether there should have been any public response at all.  Instead, in effect, you and others are engaging in abuse.  Your comments here in response to my post underscore this point.  You are an abusive poster.  It is not good enough just to denigrate and insult others because they hold a different opinion.  Remember, I have not said I agree with his original remarks and I do not support him politically.  That is not the point.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Haha


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

What's wrong cesare, have I touched a nerve?  While we're here, I'd like to just ask a question: Isn't it a bit hypocritical for someone, on the one hand, to pontificate about disabled people, and on the other hand, call someone else a 'weirdo' merely for having a different opinion?  It strikes me that some people on here like to think of themselves as 'nice' people because of the views they hold, yet they will not hesitate in being nasty and cruel to selected others when they think they can get away with it.  Isn't that a type of hypocrisy?


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

There's nothing wrong, look at the timing of the posts you green-inked huge fonted numpty


----------



## treelover (May 5, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> No you wouldn't. You're far more interesting in seeing Socialist type candidates losing badly so you can gloat and sneer for your own amusement, and possibly because every time someone on the left fails it's hailed as a vindication of the "IWCA approach" which, in case you didn't notice on the other thread, has been "on hold" for the last 7 years. That's why you went to such effort to portray the Doncaster result as terrible, which _is_ a respectable result for a fringe left-wing group and much better than the usual terrible TUSC results were used to, when actually its about par i reckon. That's desperate. Where you expecting them to win or something?
> 
> Notice as well I'm not saying it's a great result, it's a respectable result, it's the sort of vote that they ought to aiming for consistently as a building block.
> 
> And you can comb through my posts and threads and discussions on the matter, you won't find any evidence of me being any kind of hardened TUSC fanboy.* I've no time for TUSC or the SP these days I've been through that revolving door personally but I certainly won't let my own bitterness blind me to ackowledging the few times they actually do ok.* Their results have been terrible pretty much everywhere they've ever stood and you'll get no argument from me on any of that, but this isn't one of them, so sorry you'll have to satiate your bitterness with other shitty TUSC results (and there's no shortage of them so have it at)


 
are you considering Left Unity?


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> What's wrong cesare, have I touched a nerve? While we're here, I'd like to just ask a question: Isn't it a bit hypocritical for someone, on the one hand, to pontificate about disabled people, and on the other hand, call someone else a 'weirdo' merely for having a different opinion? It strikes me that some people on here like to think of themselves as 'nice' people because of the views they hold, yet they will not hesitate in being nasty and cruel to selected others when they think they can get away with it. Isn't that a type of hypocrisy?


Is it hypocrisy to say that you disagree with Brewer's comments but everyone else who disagrees is a) being hysterical b) being manipulated by "by a rather obnoxious and self-satisfied young lady" - or it is just stupid and baseless? Isn't it hypocritical to moan about abuse when in the above you manage in one way or another to abuse everyone who disagrees with Brewer but you, and the person who made the comments public? Isn't it a bit dishonest of you to claim that i've "pontificate about disabled people" when i've not ever mentioned Brewer before? Or was that more stupidity?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Is it hypocrisy to say that you disagree with Brewer's comments but everyone else who disagrees is a) being hysterical b) being manipulated by "by a rather obnoxious and self-satisfied young lady" - or it is just stupid and baseless? Isn't it hypocritical to moan about abuse when in the above you manage in one way or another to abuse everyone who disagrees with Brewer but you, and the person who made the comments public? Isn't a bit dishonest of you to claim that i've "pontificate about disabled people" when i've not ever mentioned Brewer before? Or was that more stupidity?


No it isn't hypocritical to say that I disagree with his comment but also think the reaction to his comment has been inappropriate.  And to say that people have reacted hysterically is not abuse.  It is just an observation, and in my view, an accurate one.  To call me a 'weirdo' is, on the other hand, pure abuse and shows you in your true colours.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> There's nothing wrong, look at the timing of the posts you green-inked huge fonted numpty


I've looked at the timing of the posts.  And your point?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

And also, to call the local election candidate in question an "obnoxious" and "self-satisfied" person is not abuse either.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I've looked at the timing of the posts.  And your point?


I was posted laughing at butcher's comment and the one after. You posted at the same time as me, so it was a cross post. Which you didn't notice otherwise you'd have aimed your comment at the person before me too. 

No, you didn't touch a nerve. I'd be pretty sickened to be approved of by a Brewer fan.


----------



## treelover (May 5, 2013)

coley said:


> Who the hell did vote for him? Given what he said,there must be some very twattish people in that bit of Cornwall.
> E2a
> Not confined to Tory bastards.
> http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/labour-mp-ian-lavery-appalled-3182146


 
It's Ian lavery's son, we don't even know what his politics are, but Ian is appalled

btw, calling Jordan's son, a 'vegetable'

common currency when I was young, but really haven't heard it/seen it posted, for years.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> I was posted laughing at butcher's comment and the one after. You posted at the same time as me, so it was a cross post. Which you didn't notice otherwise you'd have aimed your comment at the person before me too.
> 
> No, you isn't touch a nerve. I'd be pretty sickened to be approved of by a Brewer fan.


Yes, and I was aiming my comment at you. So, I still don't see your point. Is it that, really, you think you're cleverer than me because you hold 'right on' views about things and you feel the need to put me down in some way by suggesting that I am confused by your childish, inane and trivial intervention in a thread? Is that it? Or is it something else that's bothering you? And are you saying I am a Brewer fan? I do hope not.


----------



## treelover (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> not many people.don't know all the details tbh, this is 40 miles and one out of 120 constituencies. to my shame right now, i was more interested in watching where some of the people I know and trust personally were standing.
> 
> there can be a big streak of 'you can't tell us what to do' down here, and considering some of the crap that some of the locals get off second home owners and tourists, I don't blame them for it all. if brewer managed to tap into that, then it could explain. there's also an issue of inertia. it can be harder to move someone out than take an empty seat and brewer had well over 800 votes the last time he stood. he has held that seat a long time. a bit of pc gawn mad, gawds knows.
> 
> ...


 


While, there may be 335 idiots/bigots, Cornwall is much bigger than that and while I understand disabled people's fears(many are on the brink especially with smear in tabloids/being seen as 'useless eaters') some of the comments on the Black Triangle site, which imo, is usually great,are well out of order.


----------



## treelover (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I have no association whatever with Mr. Brewer, nor do I support him politically. As I implied in my first post, most people who comment on this issue, here and elsewhere, are satisfying a need to feel morally superior by over-blowing a trivial incident. *They are also exploiting the plight and challenges of disabled people cynically for their own personal and political ends, including self-promotion.* There has been no debate about the appropriateness of the response to his remark, and indeed whether there should have been any public response at all. Instead, in effect, you and others are engaging in abuse. Your comments here in response to my post underscore this point. You are an abusive poster. It is not good enough just to denigrate and insult others because they hold a different opinion. Remember, I have not said I agree with his original remarks and I do not support him politically. That is not the point.


 
No, they are not, its gut instinct, compassion, empathy, etc, that means people feel genuinely outraged and physically sick , that in the 21st C, a person can make a comment like that, stop being an apologist for him..


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Yes, and I was aiming my comment at you. So, I still don't see your point. Is it that, really, you think you're cleverer than me because you hold 'right on' views about things and you feel the need to put me down in some way by suggesting that I am confused by your childish, inane and trivial intervention in a thread? Is that it? Or is it something else that's bothering you? And are you saying I am a Brewer fan? I do hope not.


What was different about my comment that you wanted to comment on? Aren't I allowed to laugh?

Yes, you're clearly a Brewer fan. You joined the board specifically to cry about how unfair it is that posters think he's a cunt.


----------



## CNT36 (May 5, 2013)

Its sad really that given the austerity that dominates at county hall and the slow privatisation of services through direct payments and the like that are leading experienced and well qualified workers to look for alternative work Colin Brewer may be the least of the problems facing people with disabilities in Cornwall.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> No it isn't hypocritical to say that I disagree with his comment but also think the reaction to his comment has been inappropriate.  And to say that people have reacted hysterically is not abuse.  It is just an observation, and in my view, an accurate one.  To call me a 'weirdo' is, on the other hand, pure abuse and shows you in your true colours.



What kind of reaction do you think a comment such as "disabled children should be put down" deserves?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I am glad that Collin Brewer was re-elected. I cannot and do not condone his original comment (as reported), but I think the reaction was irrational and hysterical. The comments on the subject in this thread and elsewhere are symptomatic of a new phenomenon in which people feel the need to react emotionally to issues and assume they have a licence to denigrate and abuse others at will without any thought or consideration in the belief that they are morally right. One comment made by a local councillor was blown out of all proportion and then exploited cynically by a rather obnoxious and self-satisfied young lady whose tactics, I am glad to see, have soundly back-fired. No-one here or elsewhere has considered whether it is cruel or unfair to subject Cllr. Brewer to such disproportionate and hysterical comment and scrutiny in local and national media, and in social media, for what was an off-hand remark. It seems to me that Cllr. Brewer has, rightly, been judged on his record and has been re-elected fairly in accordance with the rules. This should be accepted, and in my view he should now be left-alone and allowed to serve those who elected him.


 
at least you shout what a complete idiot you are.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

i'm wondering if it's cornwall's own community misogynist prick.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> at least you shout what a complete idiot you are.


Re my earlier post, it is worrying that we have, in our society, the brewers who can regain political influence after making this statement but we also have people who will openly defend them.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

coley said:


> Re my earlier post, it is worrying that we have, in our society, the brewers who can regain political influence after making this statement but we also have people who will openly defend them.


 
nods. i'll know a lot more eventually.

all i can really say atm is that the majority of people I know are very, very upset, not only at brewer's victory, but also at the abuse we are getting. shit blaming all cornish? i live here with a disabled kid ffs. there's people that are doing themselves no favors in abusing all of us


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> nods. i'll know a lot more eventually.
> 
> all i can really say atm is that the majority of people I know are very, very upset, not only at brewer's victory, but also at the abuse we are getting. shit blaming all cornish? i live here with a disabled kid ffs. there's people that are doing themselves no favors in abusing all of us



No, people should be looking for the Brewers in their own locality's I doubt they will have far to look, there are currently 4 disabled people under my roof and I have to admit I am getting more concerned for their futures each day, the cry of "useless mouths" seems to be coming ever more strident


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Isn't it a bit hypocritical for someone, on the one hand, to pontificate about disabled people, and on the other hand, call someone else a 'weirdo' merely for having a different opinion?


 
Nonsense. Oddball.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

ok, picking up on this now.

brewer apparently blamed making those comments on personality change from having recently had a stroke. it's clear that at least one other candidate knew about this, but said nothing until he chose to discuss in public.


cause she has more integrity


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

treelover said:


> No, they are not, its gut instinct, compassion, empathy, etc, that means people feel genuinely outraged and physically sick , that in the 21st C, a person can make a comment like that, stop being an apologist for him..


First, I'm always naturally suspicious of any campaign based on emotion, such as this. I think it's telling that as soon as anyone questions the appropriateness of the reaction, they are immediately subjected to cruel abuse, as I have been on this thread. Yet those same people would like everyone to think they are 'nice' people who care about the disabled and have the "compassion, empathy" you refer to. It's an interesting paradox, no?

I'm not defending Cllr. Brewer's comment, but with respect, I do think I have the right to question the motivations of people who drew attention to his comment by mounting a national media campaign against him, especially when you consider that the campaign inferred all sorts of things about him and what he thinks that cannot possibly be supported by facts. We need to bear in mind the comment was made several years ago, it was off-hand and made in semi-private circumstances, and there is no evidence it reflects either his private or political views. We should also bear in mind he apologised and has repeated the apology a number of times. In those circumstances, I must ask what could motivate a public campaign against him, except publicity for individuals and groups, and perhaps also a dislike of him personally? 

I must also ask, where is your compassion and empathy for Cllr. Brewer, bearing in mind that it would appear he made these comments accidentally, apologised repeatedly and did not ask for the publicity? I am not suggesting you have abused him personally (I do not know what you have done and that is not the issue) but you cannot help but have noticed how as soon as the matter was dragged-up in the media, there was a campaign of vilification against him, involving the most vile abuse, and in some cases, physical threats. Where is your sense of responsibility, and importantly, your sense of proportion and fairness?

You now go on to say, in this thread, that you are worried that there are people in our society who can "regain political influence" after making such a statement and also people who will "openly defend" such people. Again, with the greatest respect, this is rather melodramatic. Let's just consider some facts. First, he did not make a 'statement'. He made an off-hand remark, something we are all susceptible to [indeed, judging by the insults hurled at me on here, it looks like some people are very susceptible indeed]. Second, we are talking about a local councillor. He does not wield considerable political influence, but he is clearly respected by enough people in the community that he can serve as their elected representative. I think you have to accept this. Third, I think it's very sneaky and unfair of you to imply that I am defending his 'statement'/comment. I am doing no such thing, as you well know. Please don't misrepresent me. Fourth, you also mention about how in the "21st. C" people should not have certain views, but I can't see any evidence that Cllr. Brewer holds the views that are attributed to him. If you have any such evidence, then please provide it. But if you can't, then I think a reasonable person would ask why, in all the circumstances, you either can't accept his apology or just drop the matter and move on to more important issues. I think you and others have got very carried away with all this. It's easy to target individuals for scapegoating and to make yourself feel better.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I'm not defending Cllr. Brewer's comment, but with respect, I do think I have the right to question the motivations of people who drew attention to his comment by mounting a national media campaign against him, especially when you consider that the campaign inferred all sorts of things about him and what he thinks that cannot possibly be supported by facts. We need to bear in mind the comment was made several years ago, it was off-hand and made in semi-private circumstances, and there is no evidence it reflects either his private or political views.


 

so perhaps having made these assertions, you could explain where and how this comment was made so we can ascertain why it was 'private'


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

btw, don't try to lie, i already know the answers.


and that you're completely misrepresenting the situation.


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> First, I'm always naturally suspicious of any campaign based on emotion, such as this. I think it's telling that as soon as anyone questions the appropriateness of the reaction, they are immediately subjected to cruel abuse, as I have been on this thread. Yet those same people would like everyone to think they are 'nice' people who care about the disabled and have the "compassion, empathy" you refer to. It's an interesting paradox, no?
> 
> I'm not defending Cllr. Brewer's comment, but with respect, I do think I have the right to question the motivations of people who drew attention to his comment by mounting a national media campaign against him, especially when you consider that the campaign inferred all sorts of things about him and what he thinks that cannot possibly be supported by facts. We need to bear in mind the comment was made several years ago, it was off-hand and made in semi-private circumstances, and there is no evidence it reflects either his private or political views. We should also bear in mind he apologised and has repeated the apology a number of times. In those circumstances, I must ask what could motivate a public campaign against him, except publicity for individuals and groups, and perhaps also a dislike of him personally?
> 
> ...


 
He said these things "_accidentally_"?

Seriously, if he said what is reported he is patently unfit for public office.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> so perhaps having made these assertions, you could explain where and how this comment was made so we can ascertain why it was 'private'


I didn't say it was private.  I said it was semi-private.  The circumstances are well-known and in the public domain.  I am merely repeating what is known.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

the vile lying little apologist has just messaged me, demanding i apologist for 'insulting' him


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

And given you think I am misrepresenting the situation perhaps you would fill is in?  Don't keep us all in suspense...


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I didn't say it was private. I said it was semi-private. The circumstances are well-known and in the public domain. I am merely repeating what is known.


 
then you can explain how it was not a public comment.


go on.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

you make a moronic lying assertion here, you back it up.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> the vile lying little apologist has just messaged me, demanding i apologist for 'insulting' him


Fine.  In that case, I have reported you to the moderators.  

And I am not an 'apologist'.  I am raising an issue that you refuse to consider.  Not liking my comments does not give you the right to insult me.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> you make a moronic lying assertion here, you back it up.


In that case, please correct me and explain the circumstances of Cllr. Brewer's comment.

We're waiting...


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

yay me.


you're a lying apologist idiot.

now report that.


----------



## Balbi (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Not liking my comments does not give you the right to insult me.


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> yay me.
> 
> 
> you're a lying apologist idiot.
> ...


 
or...better still, answer the questions that people put to you. How could such repugnant comments be excused as "_accidental"?_


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> yay me.
> 
> 
> you're a lying apologist idiot.
> ...


I have.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

Balbi said:


>


It may be common practice to insult people on these boards, but that does not make it acceptable.  People should not be bullied into holding particular views.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

and that is somehow not being an apologist.

comments that were made to someone he clearly knew was a representative of a disability charity  who was running a stall at a council run nevent were 'private'.


erm.......


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I have.


 

yay me.

you apologist lier


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> It may be common practice to insult people on these boards, but that does not make it acceptable. People should not be bullied into holding particular views.


 

pmsl

i won't be told what to think, but i'll tell you all how to behave. it's my right


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> or...better still, answer the questions that people put to you. How could such repugnant comments be excused as "_accidental"?_


Gladly.  In the real world, people do make comments such as these 'accidentally': that is to say, without really 'meaning to' or without meaning any offence.  It's normally done out of joviality.  Based on what I know about how this occurred, I suspect that was the case here and the whole thing has been blown out of proportion.  That is not to say that I condone what he said - I certainly don't - but I do think that the reaction and the emotion that has been vested in this is very silly.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> pmsl
> 
> i won't be told what to think, but i'll tell you all how to behave. it's my right


Then tell us how my behaviour is wrong and your behaviour (which has involved repeatedly insulting me) is right?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

Please also finish what you were saying earlier.  You were explaining how I am a liar.....?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

and i think we now have absolute proof of 'stupid.


stupid, lying apologist


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Please also finish what you were saying earlier. You were explaining how I am a liar.....?


 
i already have


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> i already have


No you haven't.  You have done nothing to show this.  You were going to explain how my thoughts on what happened are lies.  You haven't done that.  All you are doing is insulting me, so I will now ignore you.


----------



## Balbi (May 5, 2013)

Get your fucking feet off the sofa, you're not on a fucking punt now.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Gladly. In the real world, people do make comments such as these 'accidentally': that is to say, without really 'meaning to' or without meaning any offence. It's normally done out of joviality. Based on what I know about how this occurred, I suspect that was the case here and the whole thing has been blown out of proportion. That is not to say that I condone what he said - I certainly don't - but I do think that the reaction and the emotion that has been vested in this is very silly.


 
really./

were you there?

do you personally know anyone involved?

what is your evidence for these assertions.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> No you haven't. You have done nothing to show this. You were going to explain how my thoughts on what happened are lies. You haven't done that. All you are doing is insulting me, so I will now ignore you.


 
go read my posts.

a comment made at a council run event by a Councillor to someone running a stall at that event cannot be considered even semi private.

you're a liar to try to claim it was.

and that's just the one of your myriad of evidence free claims i've bothered to test.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

liar

apologist

idiot


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Gladly. In the real world, people do make comments such as these 'accidentally': that is to say, without really 'meaning to' or without meaning any offence. It's normally done out of joviality. Based on what I know about how this occurred, I suspect that was the case here and the whole thing has been blown out of proportion. That is not to say that I condone what he said - I certainly don't - but I do think that the reaction and the emotion that has been vested in this is very silly.


 
I think your choice of the word "_accidental_" is instructive. In general usage it implies an unfortunate incident where no blame might be attributed; are you suggesting Brewer was blameless? Or, are you implying that he "_accidentally" _publicly revealed his true, (repugnant) feelings?

I note your use of the word "_suspect_". As such, it might be best not to rely on suppostion for argument?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

I am sorry, but I am most certainly not a liar.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-21594109 I am well-aware he made the comment at a stall, as you say, not in front of a crowd or audience, or in front of a journalist or a news camera.  This is common knowledge, so to call me a liar is a bit silly.  It was a comment made in a situation that was public, but where there would not have been an expectation that he would be quoted elsewhere.  That is what I meant by 'semi-private'.  It may be that you disagree, but you shouldn't call me a liar or otherwise insult me.  That's wrong and there's no call for that here.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> I think your choice of the word "_accidental_" is instructive. In general usage it implies an unfortunate incident where no blame might be attributed; are you suggesting Brewer was blameless? Or, are you implying that he "_accidentally" _publicly revealed his true, (repugnant) feelings?
> 
> I note your use of the word "_suspect_". As such, it might be best not to rely on suppostion for argument?


You make a fair point here, but I am using the word in a loose way to describe a situation where someone does something that they 'do not mean to do'.  We've all done it.  It may be 'accidental' in that sense, but that needn't imply that it is blameless - and I am certainly not saying that Cllr. Brewer is blameless.  He made the comment and he was at fault.  As for the word 'suspect', I am perfectly entitled to rely on supposition in an argument.  I was not there, nor (I assume) were you.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

then it wasn't anywhere near private in way way shape or form and was made to someone in their capacity as a representative of a disability charity.

you misrepresented the situation, cause you're an apologist, deliberately and have tried to bullshit your way out of being caught at that.

liar

apologist

and a complete fucking idiot for thinking you could get away with it.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> You make a fair point here, but I am using the word in a loose way to describe a situation where someone does something that they 'do not mean to do'. We've all done it. It may be 'accidental' in that sense, but that needn't imply that it is blameless - and I am certainly not saying that Cllr. Brewer is blameless. He made the comment and he was at fault. As for the word 'suspect', I am perfectly entitled to rely on supposition in an argument. I was not there, nor (I assume) were you.


 

full of suppositions and assumptions aren't you.


saves needing any of those pesky and elusive facts to back up your idiocy6


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle,

I have not lied. I looked at the facts and explained the basis of my views. Cllr. Brewer is quoted as saying that he did not mean to make the comment and he doesn't know why he said it. That sounds a lot like a situation where he said something jocular and off-colour in a semi-private situation without really thinking about what he was saying. Of course, that should merit an apology, out of simple manners, if nothing else, but it doesn't merit all this.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

a Councillor at a council run event, talking to a representative of a charity is not in a semi private situation, by any stretch of the imagination.
unless of course, you're an apologist idiot who will claim any old crap in order to make saying bigoted shite acceptable. oh,m i guess you are an apologist idiot, aren't you


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

I can interpret and explain the moon as being made of green cheese. doesn't mean that there is any evidence to support that. just like the evidence does not support your bullshit claims


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> You make a fair point here, but I am using the word in a loose way to describe a situation where someone does something that they 'do not mean to do'. We've all done it. It may be 'accidental' in that sense, but that needn't imply that it is blameless - and I am certainly not saying that Cllr. Brewer is blameless. He made the comment and he was at fault. As for the word 'suspect', I am perfectly entitled to rely on supposition in an argument. I was not there, nor (I assume) were you.


 
In his own words...

"Mr Brewer said he had hoped his comment that "disabled children cost the council too much money and should be put down", would provoke a response and a debate into the issue of service costs provision, but said he "did not get the reaction he wanted".

The context being that he made the comments to a Disability Cornwall member at a stall at County Hall in Truro in 2011.

Do you accept the above as a correct reporting of the incident?

If so, do you also accept that Brewer's explanation does not appear to fall within any definition of accidental, not matter how broadly drawn?

Apart from complaining that some people appear to be very upset by Brewer's repugnant comments, what is your point?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

Then we can agree that he said it at a stall run by a disabled charity.  Or to put it a different way, he was at a Council-run event, but he was not speaking to the media or on behalf of the Council, just to a worker at a disabled charity stall.  That worker then reported him for his remarks.  Is that reasonable?  He later said that he did not mean to say it and could not understand why he had said it.  And he apologised, and repeated the apology.  When this is pointed out to you and others, I am called a 'liar' and a 'weirdo' and an 'apologist'.  I object to the insults because they do nothing to advance your arguments and they dissuade others from contributing their views for fear that they might be insulted too.  But you like it that way, don't you?

Either way, my points still stand, that this whole thing is an overreaction out of a very trivial incident.  I also assert that those who are fuelling this (including yourself) are insincere.   

Now, it seems to me we have nothing further to say to each other.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Then we can agree that he said it at a stall run by a disabled charity. Or to put it a different way, he was at a Council-run event, but he was not speaking to the media or on behalf of the Council, just to a worker at a disabled charity stall. That worker then reported him for his remarks. Is that reasonable?


 

yes.

a member of the council at a council run event in a council building is 'on duty'. they are representing their workplace and constituents when attending that event, and as such should learn not to gob off


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Now, it seems to me we have nothing further to say to each other.


 
off you fuck then


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> In his own words...
> 
> "Mr Brewer said he had hoped his comment that "disabled children cost the council too much money and should be put down", would provoke a response and a debate into the issue of service costs provision, but said he "did not get the reaction he wanted".
> 
> ...


He also said this:-

"I listened to one of the ladies on the Disability Cornwall stall and came out with the comment," he said.
"If only I had not said that. I didn't mean it. I did it to provoke a response and debate the issue of service costs provision.
"It backfired. I was treating her with a lack of respect and I shouldn't have done it."
He added: "I meant no offence. I would defend disabled children to the last."



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    So he said it but the issue seems to be how he 'meant' it. It seems he was trying to make a point, but he put it across in a clumsy way.



 You ask what is my point. I have already covered that exhaustively above: my point here is about the appropriateness of the reaction to his comments.


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Then we can agree that he said it at a stall run by a disabled charity. Or to put it a different way, he was at a Council-run event, but he was not speaking to the media or on behalf of the Council, just to a worker at a disabled charity stall. That worker then reported him for his remarks. Is that reasonable? He later said that he did not mean to say it and could not understand why he had said it. And he apologised, and repeated the apology. When this is pointed out to you and others, I am called a 'liar' and a 'weirdo' and an 'apologist'. I object to the insults because they do nothing to advance your arguments and they dissuade others from contributing their views for fear that they might be insulted too. But you like it that way, don't you?
> 
> Either way, my points still stand, that this whole thing is an overreaction out of a very trivial incident. I also assert that those who are fuelling this (including yourself) are insincere.
> 
> Now, it seems to me we have nothing further to say to each other.


 
"Just" to a worker? Are you for real? And, yes it was 'reasonable' to report his comments because they were vile and I would imagine very hurtful to a 'worker' connected to a disability charity.

Just for the recod, pal, I've not called you anything, merely destroyed your rather feeble attempt to excuse Brewer's comments.

Jog on.


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> He also said this:-
> 
> "I listened to one of the ladies on the Disability Cornwall stall and came out with the comment," he said.
> "If only I had not said that. I didn't mean it. I did it to provoke a response and debate the issue of service costs provision.
> ...


 
Perhaps you'd like to outline exactly how people might be expected to react appropriately to someone who bemoans the cost of disabled children and says he wishes them dead.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I did it to provoke a response and debate the issue of service costs provision.


 

so it wasn't a private comment, but he did it to provoke a response.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Perhaps you'd like to outline exactly how people might be expected to react appropriately to someone who bemoans the cost of disabled children and says he wishes them dead.


 
not just a random someone. someone who is part of the council, who decide how to assign resources to people with disabilities in the area.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> "Just" to a worker? Are you for real? And, yes it was 'reasonable' to report his comments because they were vile and I would imagine very hurtful to a 'worker' connected to a disability charity.
> 
> Just for the recod, pal, I've not called you anything, merely destroyed your rather feeble attempt to excuse Brewer's comments.
> 
> Jog on.


Yes, to one person on a charity stall.  He didn't make the comment to the whole world or in a situation where he might have expected to be quotable.  So you haven't destroyed anything.  I have not tried to excuse his comments.  I have tried to understand what actually happened and also suggest that you, and others, have overreacted, something which I know you would be loathe to admit.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> He also said this:-
> 
> "I listened to one of the ladies on the Disability Cornwall stall and came out with the comment," he said.
> "If only I had not said that. I didn't mean it. I did it to provoke a response and debate the issue of service costs provision.
> ...


 
she got upset, a lot of people got upset and he started pouring out excuses.none of which really mean anything.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> so it wasn't a private comment, but he did it to provoke a response.


Was he speaking to one person or not?  And doesn't that rationalisation sound a bit _ex post facto_?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Yes, to one person on a charity stall. He didn't make the comment to the whole world or in a situation where he might have expected to be quotable


 
are you really that naive?

or just pretending to be, cause ti's the only arguement you have.

he was on the council for how many years and didn't think his comments would get into the press. did he forget we do still have newspapers this far down country. we are still taught to read here.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> she got upset, a lot of people got upset and he started pouring out excuses.none of which really mean anything.


Ok, she got upset.  Fine, that's understandable.  But is the hounding of the man in the national media justified?  Is all this emotional energy you have spent on this justified?  Do you really know what is in his heart and what he really thinks about these issues?  Do you know anything of his record?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> And doesn't that rationalisation sound a bit _ex post facto_?


no where in the same league as his justifications do


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> are you really that naive?
> 
> or just pretending to be, cause ti's the only arguement you have.
> 
> he was on the council for how many years and didn't think his comments would get into the press. did he forget we do still have newspapers this far down country. we are still taught to read here.


Wait, hang on....Is it really naive of me to think that a local councillor's comments would not be quotable in the national media?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Ok, she got upset. Fine, that's understandable. But is the hounding of the man in the national media justified? Is all this emotional energy you have spent on this justified? Do you really know what is in his heart and what he really thinks about these issues? Do you know anything of his record?


 
i'm not hounding him in the national media. i'm doing that locally.

cause i live within the jurisdiction of Cornwall council and i have a disabled child.

and that cunt does not represent me


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> no where in the same league as his justifications do


But those were his justifications - that's the whole point.  It's seems to me that his comments were accidental and he engaged in these rationalisations under pressure from others.  Now, for all I know, it may be that he is a bigot, but there's no evidence for that.  I just think this campaign against him has been very cruel.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Wait, hang on....Is it really naive of me to think that a local councillor's comments would not be quotable in the national media?


 
are you really trying that act?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> But those were his justifications - that's the whole point. It's seems to me that his comments were accidental and he engaged in these rationalisations under pressure from others. Now, for all I know, it may be that he is a bigot, but there's no evidence for that. I just think this campaign against him has been very cruel.


 
there's no evidence for anything youve said, is there


----------



## teqniq (May 5, 2013)

Earendel Why are you shouting?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> i'm not hounding him in the national media. i'm doing that locally.
> 
> cause i live within the jurisdiction of Cornwall council and i have a disabled child.
> 
> and that cunt does not represent me


Fine, and you are entitled to think that, but my point is, the campaign against him was unfair and represented an overreaction.  Have you contacted Cllr. Brewer and asked him what he is doing for the disabled?  Better still, have you contacted him to ask whether, in light of the furore over his comments, he will now dedicate himself to working for the disabled in the area?  Why can't something positive come out of it?  Why do people have to be put on the rack like this for relatively trivial offences?  If he really made the comment out of bigotry and thoughtlessness, then he needs to be educated.  But if he made the comment out of carelessness (which is what I suspect) then his views need to be addressed.  Simply abusing him (and others) doesn't achieve anything.  That's just bullying.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

teqniq said:


> Earendel Why are you shouting?


 
cause he is important.


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Yes, to one person on a charity stall. He didn't make the comment to the whole world or in a situation where he might have expected to be quotable. So you haven't destroyed anything. I have not tried to excuse his comments. I have tried to understand what actually happened and also suggest that you, and others, have overreacted, something which I know you would be loathe to admit.


 
You'll have to explain how I have over-reacted; I'm merely posting on a forum like you are.

By saying that "_He didn't make the comment to the whole world or in a situation where he might have expected to be quotable" _you appear to be suggesting that in such circumstances it was somehow acceptable to suggest that public expenditure could be reduced by 'putting down' disabled children to a person connected with a disabled charity.

You are coming across as an rather ineffective apologist; what on earth would motivate someone to jump to the defence of such loathsome views?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

teqniq said:


> Earendel Why are you shouting?


I'm not. Shouting is when you use capital letters.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Fine, and you are entitled to think that, but my point is, the campaign against him was unfair and represented an overreaction.


 
no it wasn't

brewer made a comment about my child and i think that on behalf of my family the campaign wasn't nearly vitriolic enough


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> You'll have to explain how I have over-reacted; I'm merely posting on a forum like you are.
> 
> By saying that "_He didn't make the comment to the whole world or in a situation where he might have expected to be quotable" _you appear to be suggesting that in such circumstances it was somehow acceptable to suggest that public expenditure could be reduced by 'putting down' disabled children to a person connected with a disabled charity.
> 
> You are coming across as an rather ineffective apologist; what on earth would motivate someone to jump to the defence of such loathsome views?


Now you're just being pompous.  You know full well I am not apologising for his views.


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Now you're just being pompous. You know full well I am not apologising for his views.


 Answer the point(s) or fuck off.


----------



## teqniq (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I'm not. Shouting is when you use capital letters.


quoted for the lolz. It has made me smile which is no bad thing seeing as how I have to go to work in a bit.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Now you're just being pompous. You know full well I am not apologising for his views.


 
do you know what an apologist is?

and how the terms differs from apologising?


----------



## kabbes (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Now you're just being pompous. You know full well I am not apologising for his views.


*I can write in even bigger letters than you*


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)




----------



## goldenecitrone (May 5, 2013)

kabbes said:


> *I can write in even bigger letters than you*


 
*Lightweight. *


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> ok, picking up on this now.
> 
> brewer apparently blamed making those comments on personality change from having recently had a stroke. it's clear that at least one other candidate knew about this, but said nothing until he chose to discuss in public.
> 
> ...


 

quoting this, sure it got missed in the above drivel.

is this an excuse?

if it is an excuse for his comments, he has imo, just declared himself to be not well enough to hold office.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Answer the point(s) or fuck off.


What points?  I thought you'd made a rather ineffective statement, in which you repeat ad nauseum the idea that I am an apologist.  I am not defending his comment.  I have made that clear numerous times already.  I won't repeat myself on this point.

And I thought you said you'd destroyed me already?  That being the case, why would you feel the need to continue to comment on the thread?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> *Lightweight. *


Clearly I must be some kind of heavyweight or you would not have bothered to comment.  I'm glad I've got to you.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

kabbes said:


> *I can write in even bigger letters than you*


Yes, I see that.  Well done, kabbes.  It's good that you are - at last - overcoming your reading and writing 'problems' and finding a place among normal people.  I think the next step for you is to start learning and applying basic punctuation.  Next time you contribute, add a full stop (or period, as it is sometimes called).  That way, people won't assume you're still drooling over the keyboard with your mouth wide open, like you normally do.  Good luck with it - and remember: never be ashamed to ask one of the grown-ups for help.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> quoting this, sure it got missed in the above drivel.
> 
> is this an excuse?
> 
> if it is an excuse for his comments, he has imo, just declared himself to be not well enough to hold office.


Which is rather bigoted and ignorant of you, isn't it?


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Who reckons this is Brewer himself?


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Yes, I see that. Well done, kabbes. It's good that you are - at last - overcoming your reading and writing 'problems' and finding a place among normal people. I think the next step for you is to start learning and applying basic punctuation. Next time you contribute, add a full stop (or period, as it is sometimes called). That way, people won't assume you're still drooling over the keyboard with your mouth wide open, like you normally do. Good luck with it - and remember: never be ashamed to ask one of the grown-ups for help.


This is your approach to people with disabilities? Really?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Which is rather bigoted and ignorant of you, isn't it?


 
how?


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Clearly I must be some kind of heavyweight or you would not have bothered to comment. I'm glad I've got to you.


 
I was responding to kabbes, not you, you worm.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

teqniq said:


> quoted for the lolz. It has made me smile which is no bad thing seeing as how I have to go to work in a bit.


Well, shouting is when you use capital letters.  But I'm glad that mundane fact made you smile.  You must lead a very dull existence.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> This is your approach people with disabilities? Really?


No, it's a joke in reply to a joke.

But this is interesting, isn't it.  Your reaction is immediately to assume that I am being serious and to infer offence, even though it was clearly a joke.  And don't pretend you are not trying to be offended.  It's clear what you are trying to do here - and it's from the gutter.

This is the second time your intervention in this thread has underscored my point.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> No, it's a joke in reply to a joke.
> 
> But this is interesting, isn't it. Your reaction is immediately to assume that I am being serious and to infer offence, even though it was clearly a joke. And don't pretend you are not trying to be offended. It's clear what you are trying to do here - and it's from the gutter.
> 
> This is the second time your intervention in this thread has underscored my point.


Telling what your idea of a joke is. _Very telling._​


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> No, it's a joke in reply to a joke.
> 
> But this is interesting, isn't it. Your reaction is immediately to assume that I am being serious and to infer offence, even though it was clearly a joke. And don't pretend you are not trying to be offended. It's clear what you are trying to do here - and it's from the gutter.
> 
> This is the second time your intervention in this thread has underscored my point.


 
it's not a joke if it's unfunny bigotry mr brewer. surely someone has explained this to you by now


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Telling what your idea of a joke is. _Very telling._​


And?  I could make a joke about all kinds of things.  Get a life, pal.  Try doing a search online for jokes and count the number of sick jokes you encounter.  It doesn't say anything about me or about you.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> it's not a joke if it's unfunny bigotry mr brewer. surely someone has explained this to you by now


I am not Mr. Brewer.  I am not in any way associated with Mr. Brewer.  Please stop suggesting otherwise.  And a joke is a joke.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> And? I could make a joke about all kinds of things. Get a life, pal. Try doing a search online for jokes and count the number of sick jokes you encounter. It doesn't say anything about me or about you.


Nah, it says a whole lot about you that you decided to make that joke on this thread given what's under discussion. Now, you might be too dimwitted to see what it says but i can assure you not everyone else is. Make the most of the time you have left on here.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Nah, it says a whole lot about you that you decided to make that joke on this thread given what's under discussion. Now, you might be too dimwitted to see what it says but i can assure you not everyone else is. Make the most of the time you have left on here.


Ah, so it's OK for you to call me a 'weirdo', even though you know absolutely nothing about me. Nothing. Can you explain how you reconcile this with your views here? You didn't respond when I raised that hypocrisy earlier, so please do so now.

And you're also insinuating that I could be banned. For what? This isn't good enough. You and others have engaged in insults and abuse against me. There is a big difference between that and a mere joke. You pretend that you are a nice guy, but actually you're very nasty and intolerant to anyone who doesn't fit in with your views.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Ah, so it's OK for you to call me a 'weirdo', even though you know absolutely nothing about me.


 
Are you equating disabled people with 'weirdos'?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I am not Mr. Brewer. I am not in any way associated with Mr. Brewer. Please stop suggesting otherwise. And a joke is a joke.


 
so you're allowed to be 'funny' but no  one else is allowed to make a joke?

ok.

when did this rule get made, i've not seen it about before


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Ah, so it's OK for you to call me a 'weirdo', even though you know absolutely nothing about me. Nothing. Can you explain how you reconcile this with your views here? You didn't respond when I raised that hypocrisy earlier, so please do so now.
> 
> And you're also insinuating that I could be banned. For what? This isn't good enough. You and others have engaged in insults and abuse against me. There is a big difference between that and a mere joke. You pretend that you are a nice guy, but actually you're very nasty and intolerant to anyone who doesn't fit in with your views.


 
you will find we're pretty intolerant of apologists for bigots, yes.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Ah, so it's OK for you to call me a 'weirdo', even though you know absolutely nothing about me. Nothing. Can you explain how you reconcile this with your views here? You didn't respond when I raised that hypocrisy earlier, so please do so now.
> 
> And you're also insinuating that I could be banned. For what? This isn't good enough. You and others have engaged in insults and abuse against me. There is a big difference between that and a mere joke. You pretend that you are a nice guy, but actually you're very nasty and intolerant to anyone who doesn't fit in with your views.


What on earth are you weirding on about now Brewer?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

The term 'weirdo' is abuse and the way in which it was used here was abusive.

I am certainly not suggesting that we cannot joke about things - in fact, if anyone is applying a double-standard here in that regard, it is Butchersapron and yourself.  Look back over the thread and note the number of times you have abused and insulted me and the number of 'jokes' and smiley faces that have been inserted.

But this is still a serious issue for you, isn't it?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Are you equating disabled people with 'weirdos'?


 
well, i tend to. i'll introduce you to my fiancee sometime


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> The term 'weirdo' is abuse and the way in which it was used here was abusive.
> 
> I am certainly not suggesting that we cannot joke about things - in fact, if anyone is applying a double-standard here in that regard, it is Butchersapron and yourself. Look back over the thread and note the number of times you have abused and insulted me and the number of 'jokes' and smiley faces that have been inserted.
> 
> But this is still a serious issue for you, isn't it?


 
adds _hypocrite_ to the list


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Brewer in more disability _flippancy_ remarks.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> What on earth are you weirding on about now Brewer?


Hang on, I thought you said that we cannot tell jokes?

Or is it acceptable to only joke about certain people? If so, how do you know I am not disabled and that your 'weirdo' joke in some way would be considered deeply offensive on this Puritan forum?

I note you are not responding to my point about your hypocrisy, so that means we have nothing further to say to each other.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

Oh, and I keep telling you - I am not Mr. Brewer or in any way related to or associated with him.

But you do have this obsession with him, don't you?


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Quite counter productive for Brewer, these postings of his.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Oh, and I keep telling you - I am not Mr. Brewer or in any way related to or associated with him.
> 
> But you do have this obsession with him, don't you?


I note that you don't deny being Brewer - despite having many opportunities to do so.


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 5, 2013)

Look Brewer, we've seen through your thinly veiled disguise. Now, apologise to everyone for wasting our time.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I note that you don't deny being Brewer - despite having many opportunities to do so.


Eh????  In the post above, I confirm I am not Mr. Brewer nor in any way related to or associated with him.  So what are you on about?


----------



## goldenecitrone (May 5, 2013)

There's trouble brewing for you, Brewer.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

goldenecitrone said:


> Look Brewer, we've seen through your thinly veiled disguise. Now, apologise to everyone for wasting our time.


You have a vivid imagination, but I can match you: I'm really 007.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Eh???? In the post above, I confirm I am not Mr. Brewer nor in any way related to or associated with him. So what are you on about?


If you're not Brewer you'd think that you'd be happy to say so, yet...silence...nothing.


----------



## Favelado (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Eh???? In the post above, I confirm I am not Mr. Brewer nor in any way related to or associated with him. So what are you on about?


 
So you're *not* denying you're him then?


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

The journos trawling P&P harvesting snippets are going to love this


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> If you're not Brewer you'd think that you'd be happy to say so, yet...silence...nothing.


Right, whatever.


----------



## Favelado (May 5, 2013)

He's basically admitted it.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> The term 'weirdo' is abuse and the way in which it was used here was abusive.
> 
> I am certainly not suggesting that we cannot joke about things - in fact, if anyone is applying a double-standard here in that regard, it is Butchersapron and yourself. Look back over the thread and note the number of times you have abused and insulted me and the number of 'jokes' and smiley faces that have been inserted.
> 
> But this is still a serious issue for you, isn't it?


 
My objection to your approach here isn't based on the fact it's abusive to other posters. I mean fuck, abusive is what Urban75 is known for a lot of the time; no-one here is a delicate wallflower. My objection to you is based on your chosen use of imagery - which is often associated with disability - in forming that abuse.



> It's good that you are - at last - overcoming your *reading and writing 'problems'* and finding a place among* normal people*. I think the next step for you is to start learning and applying basic punctuation. Next time you contribute, add a full stop (or period, as it is sometimes called). That way, people won't assume you're still *drooling over the keyboard with your mouth wide open*, like you normally do. Good luck with it - and remember: never be ashamed to *ask one of the grown-ups for help*.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

"Earendil" eh. "Droop" would have been more appropriate.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> My objection to your approach here isn't based on the fact it's abusive to other posters. I mean fuck, abusive is what Urban75 is known for a lot of the time; no-one here is a delicate wallflower. My objection to you based on the use of imagery associated with disability as the form of abuse you chose.


Fine, you can object. But in that case, could we have an explanation from Butchersapron for his 'weirdo' comment, please? Or, if he chooses to remain silent on the point (as he has done so far) then I will assume he thinks it's acceptable to go round calling people weirdoes and that, whereas my comment was a joke in poor taste, he uses these matters to attack others, and is in fact, a rank hypocrite.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> "Earendil" eh. "Droop" would have been more appropriate.


Would it?  Thanks for the tip.  It's always good to know that you are spending time thinking about me and coming up with these suggestions.  It shows initiative.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Would it?  Thanks for the tip.  It's always good to know that you are spending time thinking about me and coming up with these suggestions.  It shows initiative.


I'm encouraging you to carry on with your thinly veiled disability "flippancy", Brewer.


----------



## Favelado (May 5, 2013)

What did you do for your birthday yesterday Collin? Did you get a lot of cards through the post or just the usual hate mail?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

Favelado said:


> What did you do for your birthday Collin?


Is Collin your imaginary friend?


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> I'm encouraging you to carry on with your thinly veiled disability "flippancy", Brewer.


And why would you want to encourage me to do that? And who is this 'Brewer' you keep referring to? It sounds similar to 'brewery' - are you on the drink?


----------



## Favelado (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Is Collin your imaginary friend?


 
No, he's not my friend. I hate him.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> It may be common practice to insult people on these boards, but that does not make it acceptable.  People should not be bullied into holding particular views.


Nobody's bullying you into holding views, just castigating you for already defending something pretty horrible.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

Favelado said:


> No, he's not my friend. I hate him.


I didn't say he was your friend.  I suggested he might be your imaginary friend. 

You do seem to have an obsession with him, to the extent that you - and others - are now suggesting that I might be him.  I would say that's a danger sign.  See a doctor.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

coley said:


> Nobody's bullying you into holding views, just castigating you for already defending something pretty horrible.


Not bullying me, really? And you and the other committee members decided this on your own, did you?

You obviously haven't actually bothered to read what I have said here anyway. I have never defended what he said. In fact, I have said quite pointedly that I do not defend it - and I have said this a number of times, but to no avail since you still think otherwise.  There is a difference between approving of, or defending, what someone has said, and disapproving or questioning critically the reaction to what they have said.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> And why would you want to encourage me to do that?  And who is this 'Brewer' you keep referring to?  It sounds similar to 'brewery' - are you on the drink?





> Independent county councillor Collin Brewer, 68, sparked fury when he told a charity worker: “Disabled children cost the council too much money and should be put down.”
> 
> Mr Brewer was recently ordered to apologise in writing after the independent Standards Committee upheld a complaint.
> 
> ...




http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/collin-brewer-councillor-who-said-1734808


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Eh???? In the post above, I confirm I am not Mr. Brewer nor in any way related to or associated with him. So what are you on about?


 
Is this (broken stormcunt link) you?


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Ok, she got upset.  Fine, that's understandable.  But is the hounding of the man in the national media justified?  Is all this emotional energy you have spent on this justified?  Do you really know what is in his heart and what he really thinks about these issues?  Do you know anything of his record?


 Given what he said? too right he deserves to be hounded, I think given the comment we can have a good idea of what is "in his heart"


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Ah, so it's OK for you to call me a 'weirdo', even though you know absolutely nothing about me. Nothing...


Well, we do know you're a weirdo. What you've written was enough for that all by itself, but you had to throw the whackjob font size in to remove any possibility of ambiguity, you oddball.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Is this you?



Break the shirtfront link 

Well found.


----------



## Earendel (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Is this you?


No.


----------



## teqniq (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Well, shouting is when you use capital letters.  But I'm glad that mundane fact made you smile.  You must lead a very dull existence.


He said, shoutingly.


----------



## Favelado (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> No.


 
Wow! All these coincidences eh?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> Break the shirtfront link
> 
> Well found.


 
Will do. Don't want the cunts being directed back here.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

This has been an instructive exchange in one sense; now we know what weirdos do with their Sunday afternoons.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> No.


Your nailed hinny


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Oh dear. Well and truly rumbled -a selection of weirdo views:




			
				Earendel  said:
			
		

> I agree that an openly racist presentation (i.e. the Purist Trap) would not work, but playing the cagey game hasn't worked either. And in my view, compromise (i.e. the UKIP Trap) won't work any better. There is a middle path, which is that we stick to our core beliefs - i.e. the Fourteen Words - but we build a broad social and political coalition under the flag of 'identity' (rather than strict Nationalism).
> 
> Nationalism is what we stand for, yes, and its Rubrick represents the apotheosis of rational racial consciousness, but to become meaningful, Nationalism needs the stanchion of broader movements in society, some of which we might not find wholly palatable in the social or ideological senses, but which we need nonetheless. That's not compromise, just smart politics.


 



			
				Earendel said:
			
		

> All the best to the National Front candidate. There is potential for a big Nationalist vote in Doncaster


 



			
				Earendel said:
			
		

> Of course, for us, the existence of the far-Right in such numbers is only a problem in the sense that there just aren't enough of them.


 



			
				Earendel said:
			
		

> There do seem to be a high number of Jews and homosexuals, and those who aren't either seem to have a pronounced sympathy for both groups.


 



			
				Earendel said:
			
		

> I think you may be falling into the (understandable) error of venerating democracy as an abstract. Hitler despised mass enfranchisement democracy. He was very explicit about this in Mein Kampf and numerous speeches. But he didn't necessarily harbour the same contempt for democracy as an idealised concept in the sense of citizens deciding and running their own affairs. Much depends on what you define as a 'citizen' and also what you put above the citizenry.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> No.


Why lie?


----------



## Bakunin (May 5, 2013)

JimW said:


> This has been an instructive exchange in one sense; now we know what weirdos do with their Sunday afternoons.


 
Not all weirdos, to be fair.

Personally I'm far more into stuffing eels inside live chickens then heading into Truro town centre and juggling the aforementioned eel-stuffed birds while bellowing a crude version of 'The Wild Rover' before managing a neat (if somewhat implausible) segue into something more up-tempo like'Guantanamera' or 'Whoops, Mrs Miggins, You're Sitting On My Artichokes.'

But that's just me.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Not bullying me, really? And you and the other committee members decided this on your own, did you?
> 
> You obviously haven't actually bothered to read what I have said here anyway. I have never defended what he said. In fact, I have said quite pointedly that I do not defend it - and I have said this a number of times, but to no avail since you still think otherwise.  There is a difference between approving of, or defending, what someone has said, and disapproving or questioning critically the reaction to what they have said.


Nobody's denying his right to his loathsome views,just his holding public office while having these views. And there are no "committees" on here


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

Bakunin said:


> Not all weirdos, to be fair.
> 
> Personally I'm far more into stuffing eels inside live chickens then heading into Truro town centre and juggling the aforementioned eel-stuffed birds while bellowing a crude version of 'The Wild Rover' before managing a neat (if somewhat implausible) segue into something more up-tempo like'Guantanamera' or 'Whoops, Mrs Miggins, You're Sitting On My Artichokes.'
> 
> But that's just me.


Can't beat a bracing stroll in the fresh air, and fishy poultry can only improve your perambulations. You need to work on that disappointingly readable font size you've got there, mind.


----------



## Bakunin (May 5, 2013)

JimW said:


> You need to work on that disappointingly readable font size you've got there, mind.


 
NO PROBLEM.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

Bakunin said:


> NO PROBLEM.


 Now could you simultaneously embrace the Fuhrerprinzip and whine about being bullied? Never realised the far right had an odd dialectics of their own too.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Would it?  Thanks for the tip.  It's always good to know that you are spending time thinking about me and coming up with these suggestions.  It shows initiative.


Thinking about you? Well knowing there are people like you about,is certainly food for thought.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

JimW said:


> Never realised the far right had an odd dialectics of their own too.


 
Proletarian Ethnocracy.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

You'd have thought he'd be fully behind Brewer's views as a  proud 14 word ethno-nationalist. Is he really prepared to sell his race out so cheaply?


----------



## Bakunin (May 5, 2013)

JimW said:


> Now could you simultaneously embrace the Fuhrerprinzip and whine about being bullied? Never realised the far right had an odd dialectics of their own too.


 
I'm oppressed by teh Jooz.

Jooz, check your privilege...


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> You'd have thought he'd be fully behind Brewer's views as a proud 14 word ethno-nationalist. Is he really prepared to sell his race out so cheaply?


Does Earendel think Mussolini marched on Rome in the company of weak-kneed bottle jobs such as himself? For shame. And country!


----------



## thriller (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Eh???? In the post above, I confirm I am not Mr. Brewer nor in any way related to or associated with him. So what are you on about?


 
are you BNP?


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

Bakunin said:


> I'm oppressed by teh Jooz.
> 
> Jooz, check your privilege...


 
i'll stop the lass sitting on you if you give me a sec


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

thriller said:


> are you BNP?


 
He used to be, but is no longer a member of any nationalist party "for personal reasons". Whatever they may be.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

not cornish then.

there's a few oddballs in the cornish nationalists, but their tolerance for the far right is zero


----------



## Bakunin (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> He used to be, but is no longer a member of any nationalist party "for personal reasons". Whatever they may be.


 
The drive by the far-right to become 'respectable', probably, decreasing his chances to get acquainted with big, tattooed, crop-headed cavemen in leather Gestapo uniforms.


----------



## frogwoman (May 5, 2013)

> There is a middle path, which is that we stick to our core beliefs - i.e. the Fourteen Words - but we build a broad social and political coalition under the flag of 'identity'


 
wow, it's like a fash version of TUSC


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> He used to be, but is no longer a member of any nationalist party "for personal reasons". Whatever they may be.


Yet counts himself a supporter of the National Front.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

After poking some more through his posts, I don't think Earendel is Brewer, unfortunately.


----------



## Favelado (May 5, 2013)

No but it's better to make the accusation in these cases, as it usually helps flush out the truth.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

Ethno-nationalism and a Tolkienesque username. Not complete red flags for someone whose thinking never got past the simple-mindedness of their troubled teen years, oh no.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> After poking some more through his posts, I don't think Earendel is Brewer, unfortunately.


 
shame. i would have been dining out on that one for months if it was


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

JimW said:


> Ethno-nationalism and a Tolkienesque username. Not complete red flags for someone whose thinking never got past the simple-mindedness of their troubled teen years, oh no.


Nah, tis originally Anglo-Saxon. Tolkien borrowed it.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> Nah, tis originally Anglo-Saxon. Tolkien borrowed it.


You and your "facts". He's plainly dressed as an elf as he types


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> Nah, tis originally Anglo-Saxon. Tolkien borrowed it.


 


when i want to live dangerously I suggest looking at agricola's images of cornish miners. short, warlike, good underground and tolkein's dwarves


----------



## kittyP (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Oh dear. Well and truly rumbled -a selection of weirdo views:


 
Oh god Butchers i am so glad I took you off ignore. 
That is brilliant


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

JimW said:


> You and your "facts". He's plainly dressed as an elf as he types


Though a fash choosing a name that means Morning Star is quite amusing.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

i love urban.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> i love urban.


It has its classic moments for sure.


----------



## butchersapron (May 5, 2013)

Bit of a philosopher this angel:



> 'Marxist' and 'Marxism' (and 'socialist', 'liberal', etc.) are widely-abused terms. Those who positively advocate multi-culturalism have little knowledge or understanding of Marxism, nor any conscious desire to fulfil Marx's stated aims. Marx wanted to unite workers, not exploit them. The people who twisted his ideas are 'neo-Marxists' or 'Marxoid' and are influenced by the Frankfurt School, but my personal view is that such people do not themselves understand Marxism and have corrupted the original writings of Marx/Engels.


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> It has its classic moments for sure.


 
fash trolls seem to feature in quite a few of those


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

What is it with the far-right and all that runic, lord of the rings bollocks anyway?


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> What is it with the far-right and all that runic, lord of the rings bollocks anyway?


It's not LOTR (coincidence that Tolkien also drew on Norse mythology) it's Aryan/Norse fascist symbolism.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> It's not LOTR (coincidence that Tolkien also drew on Norse mythology) it's Aryan/Norse fascist symbolism.


 
Warhammer?


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> It's not LOTR (coincidence that Tolkien also drew on Norse mythology) it's Aryan/Norse fascist symbolism.


No, I'm telling you, his idea of casual wear is tights, a jerkin and a cloak of invisibility.

Though more seriously, that fash view of Anglo-Saxon culture has now gone through the Tolkien lens of misty romanticism.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Warhammer?


I know nothing of Warhammer


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

JimW said:


> No, I'm telling you, his idea of casual wear is tights, a jerkin and a cloak of invisibility.
> 
> Though more seriously, that fash view of Anglo-Saxon culture has now gone through the Tolkien lens of misty romanticism.



I guess it's more populist than scouring the Book of Kells ever was.


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> I guess it's more populist than scouring the Book of Kells ever was.


I started on that just looking at the pictures so I never got past the initial letter.


----------



## frogwoman (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> Bit of a philosopher this angel:


 
Marx was a jew though so how does that fit?


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Warhammer?


Oh! Hang on! Were you referring to Mjolnir?


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

JTG said:


> Tories have lost control of Norfolk. Previously held 60 of 84 seats


 
Not surprised. My dad was saying UKIP had been canvassing the villages near him pretty thoroughly the last couple of weeks, offering a lift to the polls etc.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

cesare said:


> Oh! Hang on! Were you referring to Mjolnir?


 
I've no idea who that is. Was talking about our elven friend, Earendel.


----------



## cesare (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> I've no idea who that is. Was talking about our elven friend, Earendel.


Mjolnir was Thor's war hammer.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

trampie said:


> Only one area in Wales had voting, 30 seats up for grabs, UKIP fielded a candidate in every ward but failed to win a single seat, they got 7% of the vote which compared very badly to what they got in England, but still beat the Tories who only had 6% of the vote and also won no seats although over in England the Tories still dominated in most areas where there was voting.
> 
> Wales and England politically miles apart so it seems, Wales on the left, England on the extreme right.


 
Same old shit from a shitcunt.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

Delroy Booth said:


> Yeah, I know, you mentioned it on a thread from earlier on - I said it because it looked like you were replying to butchers inquisition as if you were under sort of some obligation to, like your an errant schoolboy and he's the headmaster, marking your work and letting you know where you've been going wrong. This is a webforum not a court, and butchers isn't the forum police (as much as the idea must appeal to the inner-policeman buried deep inside every Anarchist I've ever met) so don't feel like you have tell anyone about where you live, what you do, and all the other pedantry.


 
Inner policeman, eh?
(puts Delroy on the list for the wet blanket treatment).


----------



## Prince Rhyus (May 5, 2013)

Just picked up this --> http://www.tusc.org.uk/pdfs/2013/TUSCElectionReport2013.pdf - from the TUSC people regarding their performance in the local elections. Thoughts?


----------



## Delroy Booth (May 5, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Inner policeman, eh?
> (puts Delroy on the list for the wet blanket treatment).


 
History suggests that the shoe will most likely be on the other foot come the day


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

weepiper said:


> Just found out my cousin got elected as a Tory borough councillor  he's officially disowned (I haven't talked to him since he went off on a rant about how anyone who took part in the London riots 'should have their benefits removed')


 
Sorry to hear that, weeps. Always sad when someone confirms their wrong'un status so publicly.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> He used to be, but is no longer a member of any nationalist party "for personal reasons". Whatever they may be.


Chucked out sharpish by "wor dave"


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

coley said:


> Who the hell did vote for him? Given what he said,there must be some very twattish people in that bit of Cornwall.


 
It's not exactly a novel phenomenon. This bloke has played it as him "provoking debate" and "speaking his mind". There's a long history of councillors and MPs pulling the same flanker and getting away with it.
And, frankly, his vote was tiny, so it's only a small number of twats among a much larger constituency of good people.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> I am glad that Collin Brewer was re-elected. I cannot and do not condone his original comment (as reported), but I think the reaction was irrational and hysterical. The comments on the subject in this thread and elsewhere are symptomatic of a new phenomenon in which people feel the need to react emotionally to issues and assume they have a licence to denigrate and abuse others at will without any thought or consideration in the belief that they are morally right. One comment made by a local councillor was blown out of all proportion and then exploited cynically by a rather obnoxious and self-satisfied young lady whose tactics, I am glad to see, have soundly back-fired. No-one here or elsewhere has considered whether it is cruel or unfair to subject Cllr. Brewer to such disproportionate and hysterical comment and scrutiny in local and national media, and in social media, for what was an off-hand remark. It seems to me that Cllr. Brewer has, rightly, been judged on his record and has been re-elected fairly in accordance with the rules. This should be accepted, and in my view he should now be left-alone and allowed to serve those who elected him.


 
Public office requires the holder of the office to be circumspect with their opinions, because those opinions (rightly or wrongly) will carry an official _imprimatur_. That Brewer was taken to task for his comments is right and proper - voicing support for eugenic policies isn't an acceptable part of the public discourse of a public office holder.  If the man had any honour, he would have stood down from public office, and contemplated the disgrace he brought upon that office.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

butchersapron said:


> I always wondered what sort of weirdo actually seriously writes letters to local papers.


 
Me.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's not exactly a novel phenomenon. This bloke has played it as him "provoking debate" and "speaking his mind". There's a long history of councillors and MPs pulling the same flanker and getting away with it.
> And, frankly, his vote was tiny, so it's only a small number of twats among a much larger constituency of good people.



Now, I'll be the first to admit your better informed than me as regards politics and politicians but I can't recall someone coming out with something as loathsome as this and being re-elected and yes,in the greater constituency his vote/following is small but worryingly significant in that he felt he could stand and actually win,and gives others encouragement to slide out from under their stones.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

treelover said:


> No, they are not, its gut instinct, compassion, empathy, etc, that means people feel genuinely outraged and physically sick , that in the 21st C, a person can make a comment like that, stop being an apologist for him..


 
Absolutely. What Brewer did (whether he meant it or was "provoking debate") was propose a eugenic solution to the issue of the cost of care of children born with certain health and/or developmental issues. Whether he's an idiot or Machiavelli isn't an issue, but that he felt it appropriate to say something of that sort, in his position as a holder of public offoce, is.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

coley said:


> Now, I'll be the first to admit your better informed than me as regards politics and politicians but I can't recall someone coming out with something as loathsome as this and being re-elected and yes,in the greater constituency his vote/following is small but worryingly significant in that he felt he could stand and actually win,and gives others encouragement to slide out from under their stones.


 
Just read _Private Eye's_ "Rotten Boroughs" column once a fortnight, and you can "enjoy" a veritable shit-rain of loathesome mouthings by local pols who then get re-elected. The sharpest point about Brewer is merely that he got re-elected quite so soon after shitting on his own shoes.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> i'm wondering if it's cornwall's own community misogynist prick.


 
He comes across as a bit boat-happy. best shoot him!


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> He comes across as a bit boat-happy. best shoot him!


 
not actually that misogenist prick. we are allowed a few you know


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

Earendel said:


> Gladly. In the real world, people do make comments such as these 'accidentally': that is to say, without really 'meaning to' or without meaning any offence. It's normally done out of joviality. Based on what I know about how this occurred, I suspect that was the case here and the whole thing has been blown out of proportion. That is not to say that I condone what he said - I certainly don't - but I do think that the reaction and the emotion that has been vested in this is very silly.


 
So, it's okay "because he was only joking".
Get this, it's *never* okay to joke about euthanising children (that's what "put down" means, after all), whether they have physical or learning difficulties or not.


----------



## ViolentPanda (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> not actually that misogenist prick. we are allowed a few you know


 
Similar language use to Mr. Boat Happy, not enough speeling mistaks to be bosky!


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Similar language use to Mr. Boat Happy, not enough speeling mistaks to be bosky!


 
a battle i'm having elsewhere my dear. if nothing else, it's taught me how many of the cornish nationalists are well sound


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 5, 2013)

It's all gone a bit quiet from our eugenicist warlock druid, hasn't it?


----------



## JimW (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> It's all gone a bit quiet from our eugenicist warlock druid, hasn't it?


He'd type more outlandish remarks in a font to match, but Elf and Safety won't have it. Who are the _real_ fascists?


----------



## brogdale (May 5, 2013)

Did the troll die?


----------



## muscovyduck (May 5, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Did the troll die?


Yes I think so.


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> It's all gone a bit quiet from our eugenicist warlock druid, hasn't it?



Shame, I think he/she could have been turned


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

ViolentPanda said:


> Just read _Private Eye's_ "Rotten Boroughs" column once a fortnight, and you can "enjoy" a veritable shit-rain of loathesome mouthings by local pols who then get re-elected. The sharpest point about Brewer is merely that he got re-elected quite so soon after shitting on his own shoes.


Used to and while there was any amount of dodgy dealing ( Seb Coe and energy springs to mind) and quite a few offensive comments, I saw nowt that plunged this blokes depths, feel free to correct me if I've missed owt, ( I have the last six months unread)


----------



## toggle (May 5, 2013)

coley said:


> Used to and while there was any amount of dodgy dealing ( Seb Coe and energy springs to mind)


 
that's painful, he got fucking voted in down here as well


----------



## coley (May 5, 2013)

toggle said:


> that's painful, he got fucking voted in down here as well



Aye whey, no doubt they would vote into office the winner of 'Britain's got talent' in most other parts of the country, it's not Cornwall it's a general dumbing down of the electorate, and it's no accident.








Bugger, I've just joined the ranks of the conspritaloons


----------



## Nylock (May 6, 2013)

Earendel said:


> First, I'm always naturally suspicious of any campaign based on emotion, such as this. I think it's telling that as soon as anyone questions the appropriateness of the reaction, they are immediately subjected to cruel abuse, as I have been on this thread. Yet those same people would like everyone to think they are 'nice' people who care about the disabled and have the "compassion, empathy" you refer to. It's an interesting paradox, no?
> 
> I'm not defending Cllr. Brewer's comment, but with respect, I do think I have the right to question the motivations of people who drew attention to his comment by mounting a national media campaign against him, especially when you consider that the campaign inferred all sorts of things about him and what he thinks that cannot possibly be supported by facts. We need to bear in mind the comment was made several years ago, it was off-hand and made in semi-private circumstances, and there is no evidence it reflects either his private or political views. We should also bear in mind he apologised and has repeated the apology a number of times. In those circumstances, I must ask what could motivate a public campaign against him, except publicity for individuals and groups, and perhaps also a dislike of him personally?
> 
> ...


----------



## brogdale (May 6, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> Yes I think so.


 
Good


----------



## emanymton (May 6, 2013)

cesare said:


> Break the shirtfront link
> 
> Well found.


They have you might want to do the same.


----------



## cesare (May 6, 2013)

emanymton said:


> They have you might want to do the same.


It is


----------



## muscovyduck (May 6, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Good


I'm that person who takes an inside joke and runs with it until no one who understands it is left hanging around. It's a difficult habit to kick.


----------



## emanymton (May 6, 2013)

cesare said:


> It is


When you quoted the original post you included the link which still works.


----------



## J Ed (May 6, 2013)

cesare said:


> Who reckons this is Brewer himself?


 
Who else could it conceivably be?!


----------



## cesare (May 6, 2013)

emanymton said:


> When you quoted the original post you included the link which still works.


It doesn't work for me (I did break it from the outset)  but I'll go back and make another break if you like.


----------



## CNT36 (May 6, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Who else could it conceivably be?!


http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/05/04/was-this-the-electoral-suicide-blonde/


----------



## J Ed (May 6, 2013)

Also, who the fuck just casually off the cuff jokes about a mass murder of disabled children when talking to a disability rights campaigner? It simply would not occur to you if that wasn't a view you hold and think about a decent amount.


----------



## toggle (May 6, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/05/04/was-this-the-electoral-suicide-blonde/


 
i was thinking that for a minute.

our own resident fruitloop.


----------



## CNT36 (May 6, 2013)

toggle said:


> i was thinking that for a minute.
> 
> our own resident fruitloop.


I may post up some of my favorite articles when I get to a computer.


----------



## toggle (May 6, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> I may post up some of my favorite articles when I get to a computer.


 
*Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war*


----------



## toggle (May 6, 2013)

http://www.facebook.com/groups/637497846265946/

support the cornish people calling for him to be removed from our council


----------



## CNT36 (May 6, 2013)

toggle said:


> *Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war*


 
Some of the worst one I can't seem to find but here's a few.

http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2011/05/22/jail-for-dole-cheat-single-mum/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2011/02/08/family-woes-in-tragic-train-death/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2011/02/04/at-last-an-honest-mp/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/04/03/ss-psychos-kidnap-sick-child-from-hospital/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/02/12/lies-damn-lies-and-statistics/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/02/11/debunk-this-evil-myth/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/05/03/brewers-loop/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/04/29/csa-scum-kill-another-young-dad/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/05/04/was-this-the-electoral-suicide-blonde/


----------



## CNT36 (May 6, 2013)

http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/01/04/feminism-kills-27-at-us-high-school/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/02/19/state-school-or-we-take-your-kids/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2012/10/25/orthodox-cop-takes-top-job/
http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2012/08/09/council-farms-babies-for-gays/


----------



## frogwoman (May 6, 2013)

council farms babies for gays?


----------



## toggle (May 6, 2013)

ti's amazing stuff.


----------



## brogdale (May 6, 2013)

Have brewer's details been removed from all official contact lists?

http://www.cornwall.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=17683


----------



## toggle (May 6, 2013)

probably due to the threats sent to his family a few months ago.


----------



## brogdale (May 6, 2013)

toggle said:


> probably due to the threats sent to his family a few months ago.


 
Isn't there some para-military wing of the Cornish Freedom Fighters or summat that could scare the fecker away?


----------



## JHE (May 6, 2013)

J Ed said:


> Also, who the fuck just casually off the cuff jokes about a mass murder of disabled children when talking to a disability rights campaigner?


 
I guess the sort of people who like making really sick bad-taste jokes of the sort you can hear in many pubs. These jokes are very rarely if ever funny, IMO, but are often less of a guide to the joker's considered political or moral opinions than a guide to what makes the joker feel awkward, uncomfortable, nervous or worried.


----------



## J Ed (May 6, 2013)

JHE said:


> I guess the sort of people who like making really sick bad-taste jokes of the sort you can hear in many pubs. These jokes are very rarely if ever funny, IMO, but are often less of a guide to the joker's considered political or moral opinions than a guide to what makes the joker feel awkward, uncomfortable, nervous or worried.


 
IME many a true word is said in jest.


----------



## toggle (May 6, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Isn't there some para-military wing of the Cornish Freedom Fighters or summat that could scare the fecker away?


 
i was a bit busy making sure they knew what kind of twonk run the fruitloop site first.

it always did amaze me that the paramilitary wing of the cornish nationalists never got any further than vandalizing English heritage signs.

but rest assureds, there's a lot of talk here. demo up at county hall in a couple of days, i'll pop along see if i can get some good pix for my dear freinds here. and let disability cornwall know the internet has their back


----------



## brogdale (May 6, 2013)

toggle said:


> i was a bit busy making sure they knew what kind of twonk run the fruitloop site first.
> 
> it always did amaze me that the paramilitary wing of the cornish nationalists never got any further than vandalizing English heritage signs.
> 
> but rest assureds, there's a lot of talk here. demo up at county hall in a couple of days, i'll pop along see if i can get some good pix for my dear freinds here. and let disability cornwall know the internet has their back


 
Top work agent Toggle!


----------



## barney_pig (May 7, 2013)

Not sure if this is better here or on the ukip or lib dem are shit threads
Yeovil is lib dem centre



Here are the candidates and election results for the electoral division of Yeovil Central

 	Candidate	Party	Votes	 
	BYRNE, David John	Conservative	489	
	DIMMICK, Alan Ivor	UK Independence Party	765	 Elected
	GUBBINS, Peter	Liberal Democrat	748	
	LAVIN, Terry	Labour	239


----------



## Balbi (May 7, 2013)

They put the Tories in third, from first, around here. Dumped Labour into third in places too, and won in a straight Tory/Lib Dem breaking division, after both parties thought the other had targeted it.


----------



## Balbi (May 7, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> council farms babies for gays?


 
Amazing


----------



## Sprocket. (May 7, 2013)

Have heard today that Doncaster Labour Party thought they had no chance of winning the mayoral election!
So much so that the new mayor had booked to go on a two week cruise the week after next!


----------



## ymu (May 8, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> *http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/01/04/feminism-kills-27-at-us-high-school/*
> http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2013/02/19/state-school-or-we-take-your-kids/
> http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2012/10/25/orthodox-cop-takes-top-job/
> http://www.cornwallcommunitynews.co.uk/2012/08/09/council-farms-babies-for-gays/


Yes folks. Adam Lanza killed because the wimmin made him do it.

It's like this terminal inability to take responsibility._ I'm a bigot because decent people make me hate myself._


----------



## toggle (May 8, 2013)

ymu said:


> Yes folks. Adam Lanza killed because the wimmin made him do it.
> 
> It's like this terminal inability to take responsibility._ I'm a bigot because decent people make me hate myself._


 
first time i saw that site was when i saw him on facebook, local community site I thought. the tirade claiming that feminists made the police make up domestic abuse prosecutions and that DV support was all one huge con led me in further and further into the whirlpool of insanity. I eventually escaped, but i will forever be scarred by the experience.

I bow to the superior strength of CNT36, who can clearly traverse these alien shores. I wanted to bring these unusual sights to your attention, but I feared I would not escape again. CNT36 has prooven himself the strongest and most sane man i know for safely returning with such offerings.


----------



## ymu (May 8, 2013)

It's like the furthest reaches of P&P, in mirror-image.


----------



## toggle (May 8, 2013)

I'[ll relate this to our discussion on online anonymity. that loon probably lives within 5 miles of me. judging by the focus in his articles


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 8, 2013)

@"Cornwall Community News"


----------



## toggle (May 8, 2013)

https://twitter.com/PeterjHolland/status/326722393622081536/photo/1

when asked to factcheck one of his rants


----------



## Nylock (May 8, 2013)

wow, looks like you've got a right live one living near you... Some of the comments to them articles are pretty unhinged as well...


----------



## teqniq (May 8, 2013)

toggle said:


> https://twitter.com/PeterjHolland/status/326722393622081536/photo/1
> 
> when asked to factcheck one of his rants


"Re: James and the giant Peach" ?

Lol wtf?

What happens when it's something serious, does he go into meltdown?


----------



## CNT36 (May 8, 2013)

toggle said:


> I'[ll relate this to our discussion on online anonymity. that loon probably lives within 5 miles of me. judging by the focus in his articles


He claims to be living elsewhere and that this is the reason he is able to publish the truth without being restricted by oppressive British privacy laws.


----------



## CNT36 (May 8, 2013)

Disability Cornwall  said:
			
		

> Cornwall Council have arranged a meeting today with Collin Brewer & the DC Chair & Parent Carer Council Manager. This meeting will take place at County Hall while the ‘peaceful protest’ about Councillor Brewers’ re-election takes place outside……


 
The protest that toggle is attending by the sound of it. 30 minutes later...




			
				Disability Cornwall  said:
			
		

> The Council have just informed us that unfortunately Councillor Brewer is unable to attend the meeting today with the Parent Carer Council and Disability Cornwall in relation to his abhorrent comments regarding disabled children as he has been signed off sick.
> 
> We are advised the Council are keen to reschedule this meeting at the earliest opportunity.


 
I assume he will be having himself put down for the sake of the public purse in due course.


----------



## brogdale (May 8, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> The protest that toggle is attending by the sound of it. 30 minutes later...
> 
> 
> 
> I assume he will be having himself put down for the sake of the public purse in due course.


 
Call to ATOS should resolve this?

e2a : I didn't think you could be signed off 'sick' any more?


----------



## toggle (May 8, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> The protest that toggle is attending by the sound of it. 30 minutes later...
> 
> 
> 
> I assume he will be having himself put down for the sake of the public purse in due course.


 
i'm not going to make it, i've got to resolve a 400 quid electric bill


----------



## coley (May 8, 2013)

toggle said:


> https://twitter.com/PeterjHolland/status/326722393622081536/photo/1
> 
> when asked to factcheck one of his rants


Doesn't beat about the bush, does he


----------



## toggle (May 8, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> He claims to be living elsewhere and that this is the reason he is able to publish the truth without being restricted by oppressive British privacy laws.


 
i don't believe that.


----------



## CNT36 (May 8, 2013)

coley said:


> Doesn't beat about the bush, does he


Check the article comments to see how well he responds to criticism.


----------



## CNT36 (May 8, 2013)

toggle said:


> i don't believe that.


No it sounds like bollocks to me as well but that's what he/they say.  Good luck resolving.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (May 8, 2013)

frogwoman said:


> council farms babies for gays?


 
Mary mother of Jesus! What the fiddling fuck? Cornwall newspapers are nutty as squirrel shit.


----------



## CNT36 (May 8, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Mary mother of Jesus! What the fiddling fuck? Cornwall newspapers are nutty as squirrel shit.


Easy now.


----------



## toggle (May 8, 2013)

cynicaleconomy said:


> Mary mother of Jesus! What the fiddling fuck? Cornwall newspapers are nutty as squirrel shit.


 
this isn't a newspaper, it's one fruitloop with a computer


----------



## toggle (May 8, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> No it sounds like bollocks to me as well but that's what he/they say. Good luck resolving.


 
i'm not entirely sure i want to.

i might catch conspiraloonitis


----------



## The39thStep (May 10, 2013)

> *Capitalist parties rejected: Time for a new mass workers' party*


 
Headline from The Socialist Party. Timeless.


----------



## muscovyduck (May 10, 2013)

http://disabilitynewsservice.com/20...od-argument-for-killing-some-disabled-babies/
Oh dear.

"Brewer is currently on sick leave from his duties as a councillor, because of medication he is taking for a long-term health condition." 

I can't cope with the irony.


----------



## dennisr (May 11, 2013)

The39thStep said:


> Headline from The Socialist Party. Timeless.


 

"At this stage, the most common response to profound disillusionment with all the major parties is to stay at home and not vote at all."

http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/issue/764/16645

Anything you disagree with in the article?


----------



## Bakunin (May 11, 2013)

http://disabilitynewsservice.com/20...od-argument-for-killing-some-disabled-babies/

Looks as though he's dropped himself in it again, even deeper this time.


----------



## Libertad (May 11, 2013)

Bakunin said:


> http://disabilitynewsservice.com/20...od-argument-for-killing-some-disabled-babies/
> 
> Looks as though he's dropped himself in it again, even deeper this time.


 
Fancy a trip round to smack _his_ head against a barn wall Bakunin ?


----------



## Bakunin (May 11, 2013)

Libertad said:


> Fancy a trip round to smack _his_ head against a barn wall Bakunin ?


 
I now have a driver and we can pop round at some future point, she's said she'll hold our coats.

I may wish to flog him mercilessly with a dead conger or similar eel-like denizen of the deep, but that's only because I'm a bit strange.


----------



## Libertad (May 11, 2013)

Bakunin said:


> I now have a driver and we can pop round at some future point, she's said she'll hold our coats.
> 
> I may wish to flog him mercilessly with a dead conger or similar eel-like denizen of the deep, but that's only because I'm a bit strange.


 
We have the bare bones of a plan then.
There's not a great deal that I can do on the political activism front atm but I shall certainly do what I can to get this man who is devoid of any humanity driven out of public office.


----------



## Bakunin (May 11, 2013)

Libertad said:


> We have the bare bones of a plan then.
> There's not a great deal that I can do on the political activism front atm but I shall certainly do what I can to get this man who is devoid of any humanity driven out of public office.


 
'Mr. Brewer, you have offended my honour and dignity and I demand satisfaction...'


----------



## coley (May 11, 2013)

muscovyduck said:


> http://disabilitynewsservice.com/20...od-argument-for-killing-some-disabled-babies/
> Oh dear.
> 
> "Brewer is currently on sick leave from his duties as a councillor, because of medication he is taking for a long-term health condition."
> ...


Christ, I'd like to stott his head off a barn wall, the utter bastard.


----------



## Nylock (May 12, 2013)

I don't know who's worse, this brewer character, the bastards that voted him back in or the reprehensible turds that have shook his hand ond offered their agreement and support of his vile views. What a world-class cunt.


----------



## coley (May 12, 2013)

Nylock said:


> I don't know who's worse, this brewer character, the bastards that voted him back in or the reprehensible turds that have shook his hand ond offered their agreement and support of his vile views. What a world-class cunt.


The worrying factor is, that he can say these things and get re-elected ( fair enough by a small margin) but re-elected nonetheless, it can't but help to encourage those with similar views to crawl out from under their respective stones.


----------



## toggle (May 12, 2013)

the short version seems to be, he took the fucking piss out of everyone.

he comments, is forced to apologize, spreads locally his 'outburst' was out of character due to a stroke, on election day, tells another candidate he had loads of people coming up to him saying 'we do that to cows' and the gives an interview describing how many public loos a child's life is worth.


----------



## CNT36 (May 12, 2013)

Nylock said:


> I don't know who's worse, this brewer character, the bastards that voted him back in or the reprehensible turds that have shook his hand ond offered their agreement and support of his vile views. What a world-class cunt.


These deserve an honorable mention -
"



			
				Black triangle facebook said:
			
		

> WADEBRIDGE AND PADSTOW: NAZIS WELCOME HERE ~ DISABLED NOT WELCOME! PUT THEM DOWN BEFORE BIRTH!
> 
> BOYCOTT THIS FOUL COMMUNITY! NAZIS!
> 
> Cornwall county councillor who quit after saying disabled children should be "put down" has been re-elected to the unitary authority. He said disabled children should be put down because they cost the authority too much money."







			
				Black triangle facebook said:
			
		

> "What a filthy, low down, disgusting, excrable 'community'. This election result will go down in infamy. Appalling."






			
				Black triangle facebook comments said:
			
		

> "Shame on the people of cornwall they are as bad has him low life bastards"






			
				Black triangle facebook comments said:
			
		

> "Looks like Cornwall is full of idiots! "






			
				Black triangle facebook comments said:
			
		

> perhaps a sustained campaign against the cornish tourist industry of his constituency is called for untill this man resigns.. cornwall, famous for it's blood clotted cream and cornish nasties








			
				Black triangle facebook comments said:
			
		

> goodbye Cornwall and all things Cornish................If you tolerate this your every bit as bad as the man you voted for.................







			
				Black triangle facebook comments said:
			
		

> They are obviously a bit backward round those parts probably too much scrumpy



Fighting bigotry with bigotry.


----------



## coley (May 12, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> These deserve an honorable mention -
> "
> 
> 
> ...





CNT36 said:


> These deserve an honorable mention -
> "
> 
> 
> ...



Toggle, you like this? BT, whoever they are, condemns a whole county on the basis of a small minority of idiots?


----------



## Nylock (May 12, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> These deserve an honorable mention -
> "
> 
> 
> ...


Just to clarify: I am referring specifically to the people who voted for him -not the several thousand in his community who didn't vote at all, the hundreds who didn't vote for him who actually turned out to vote in the election or the entire population of Cornwall... Just those few hundred who voted for this shitbag and the few who have added their support to him in person...

Personally speaking, i think the black triangle comments are just as bad for singling out the population of an entire county as being pseudo-nazis just because he got voted back in. It would be just as daft for those of us from the celtic fringes to have equated the people of England with being a bunch of fascists back when the isle of dogs returned a BNP councillor (back in the day). A vote for a reactionary bastard in one area does not by default make the region as a whole a bunch of reactionary bastards.


----------



## toggle (May 12, 2013)

coley said:


> Toggle, you like this? BT, whoever they are, condemns a whole county on the basis of a small minority of idiots?


 
i like that CNT36 has highlighted this issue. for the record, i've posted up to black triangle on facebook what i think of that as well as discussing it elsewhere, cnt could probably confirm that, unless he's deleting posts, IDK, i'm too sick of the shit i saw there to follow it too closelty.  other people round here i have a great deal of respect for made simialr commetns. the abuse of cornwall and all things cornish on black triangle's page seems to continue unabated and actively encouraged. ignoring that there are many in cornwall that black triangle claims to be campaigning on belalf of, including my partner and my son.

tbh, i'm utterly astounded i need to clarity my position considering what iv'e already posted on this thread


----------



## coley (May 12, 2013)

toggle said:


> i like that CNT36 has highlighted this issue. for the record, i've posted up to black triangle on facebook what i think of that as well as discussing it elsewhere, cnt could probably confirm that, unless he's deleting posts, IDK, i'm too sick of the shit i saw there to follow it too closelty.  other people round here i have a great deal of respect for made simialr commetns. the abuse of cornwall and all things cornish on black triangle's page seems to continue unabated and actively encouraged. ignoring that there are many in cornwall that black triangle claims to be campaigning on belalf of, including my partner and my son.
> 
> tbh, i'm utterly astounded i need to clarity my position considering what iv'e already posted on this thread



Just puzzled by seeing your "like" on the BT post?

E2 apologise, this stupid thing cuts off the top half of some posts, seemed like you "liked" BT comments, when in fact they were being highlighted, sorry.


----------



## Nylock (May 12, 2013)

toggle said:


> i like that CNT36 has highlighted this issue. for the record, i've posted up to black triangle on facebook what i think of that as well as discussing it elsewhere, cnt could probably confirm that, unless he's deleting posts, IDK, i'm too sick of the shit i saw there to follow it too closelty. other people round here i have a great deal of respect for made simialr commetns. the abuse of cornwall and all things cornish on black triangle's page seems to continue unabated and actively encouraged. ignoring that there are many in cornwall that black triangle claims to be campaigning on belalf of, including my partner and my son.
> 
> tbh, i'm utterly astounded i need to clarity my position considering what iv'e already posted on this thread


 
Same here, i 'liked' it due to CNT36 highlighting the bigotry coming from the opposite camp as opposed to liking the comments he has quoted....


----------



## toggle (May 12, 2013)

coley said:


> Just puzzled by seeing your "like" on the BT post?


 
on cnt36's post.


----------



## coley (May 12, 2013)

toggle said:


> on cnt36's post.



Just hope the local trust decides his medication is outwith local NICE guidelines


----------



## CNT36 (May 12, 2013)

Nylock said:


> Just to clarify: I am referring specifically to the people who voted for him -not the several thousand in his community who didn't vote at all, the hundreds who didn't vote for him who actually turned out to vote in the election or the entire population of Cornwall.


 
Just to be clear I didn't think you were I just think some of those comments are disgusting. Not quite in the same league as Brewer et al but certainly worth a mention on your list of turds. I did find another comment referring to cleansing and a post by black triangle talking about the "scum of Kernow". They might not have meant all people in Cornwall are scum but it's certainly dodgy ground.


----------



## toggle (May 12, 2013)

CNT36 said:


> Just to be clear I didn't think you were I just think some of those comments are disgusting. Not quite in the same league as Brewer et al but certainly worth a mention on your list of turds. I did find another comment referring to cleansing and a post by black triangle talking about the "scum of Kernow". They might not have meant all people in Cornwall are scum but it's certainly dodgy ground.


 
when i posted up, black triangle was talking about the collective responsibility of all of cornwall


----------



## CNT36 (May 12, 2013)

toggle said:


> i like that CNT36 has highlighted this issue. for the record, i've posted up to black triangle on facebook what i think of that as well as discussing it elsewhere, cnt could probably confirm that, unless he's deleting posts, IDK, i'm too sick of the shit i saw there to follow it too closelty. other people round here i have a great deal of respect for made simialr commetns. the abuse of cornwall and all things cornish on black triangle's page seems to continue unabated and actively encouraged. ignoring that there are many in cornwall that black triangle claims to be campaigning on belalf of, including my partner and my son.
> 
> tbh, i'm utterly astounded i need to clarity my position considering what iv'e already posted on this thread


 
I did bring it up a a few pages back but there wasn't much discussion as quite rightly the topic shifted back to Brewer. Now that's been  covered pretty well I thought it was worth a bump. There were a few people commenting about it on their facebook. Black triangle didn;t seem to pay much attention though.


----------



## CNT36 (May 12, 2013)

toggle said:


> when i posted up, black triangle was talking about the collective responsibility of all of cornwall


Words fail me.


----------



## toggle (May 12, 2013)

i'm surprised they didn't fail me beyond 'fuck off' but i did manage something slightly more eloquent


----------



## redsquirrel (May 12, 2013)

Bakunin said:


> http://disabilitynewsservice.com/20...od-argument-for-killing-some-disabled-babies/
> 
> Looks as though he's dropped himself in it again, even deeper this time.


Nasty anti-human "environmental" justification for his views 


> He added: “People are not on this earth for very long. My main concern is planning and environmental [issues] and landscape. In that context, people are just transient. I have heard of terrific amounts of money being spent on specific individuals.”


----------



## CNT36 (May 12, 2013)

toggle said:


> when i posted up, black triangle was talking about the collective responsibility of all of cornwall


 


> *Dave *******Cornish people voted for this evil shit. Maybe it's time Cornwall got the independence they have wanted for years. Cut them loose, they're obviously nothing but a bunch of primative savages. Bastard should be shot!


 


> *Black Triangle Anti-Defamation Campaign in Defence of Disability Rights shared a link via Jo Dereza.*
> 
> 9 hours ago
> The Rearing Up of The Right: Jo Dereza REPORTS 'He's done it again, I cannot believe this repulsive man was elected again - anyone in Wadebridge who didn't vote needs to be ashamed of themselves, he only won by 4 votes.


What were people supposed to do? Vote Lib Dem who are actually engaged in policies as part of the coalition that are having a very real effect on people. Do they really want the people of Wadebridge voting in support of those policies? One bigoted twat who voiced a disgusting opinion about killing people or a coalition that is actually killing people with its policies. Policies black triangle voice opposition to. Its one thing saying vote green or Tusc nationally but neither of them were standing in Wadebridge East.


----------



## toggle (May 12, 2013)

a man who apparently made it clear locally that it was all down to his own ill health, until the votes were in


----------



## Libertad (May 14, 2013)

> A Cornwall councillor who said disabled children should be "put down" is being investigated by police.


 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22518684


----------



## brogdale (May 14, 2013)

Libertad said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22518684


 
Interesting.
Though I'm instinctively in favour of free speech, I can see that the OB may well suspect that Brewer has fallen foul of  Sections 4A/5 of the Public Order Act 1986 (POA) that make it an offence for a person to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour that causes, or is likely to cause, another person harassment, alarm or distress.

Goodness knows they're more than willing to use that 'catch-all' to close down disent and protest; it would make a refreshing change to see them flexing the law to attempt to close down vile, eugenisist clap-trap from such a right-wing nutjob.


----------



## Libertad (May 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Interesting.
> Though I'm instinctively in favour of free speech, I can see that the OB may well suspect that Brewer has fallen foul of Sections 4A/5 of the Public Order Act 1986 (POA) that make it an offence for a person to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour that causes, or is likely to cause, another person harassment, alarm or distress.
> 
> Goodness knows they're more than willing to use that 'catch-all' to close down disent and protest; it would make a refreshing change to see them flexing the law to attempt to close down vile, eugenisist clap-trap from such a right-wing nutjob.


 
Indeed.


----------



## coley (May 14, 2013)

brogdale said:


> Interesting.
> Though I'm instinctively in favour of free speech, I can see that the OB may well suspect that Brewer has fallen foul of  Sections 4A/5 of the Public Order Act 1986 (POA) that make it an offence for a person to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour that causes, or is likely to cause, another person harassment, alarm or distress.
> 
> Goodness knows they're more than willing to use that 'catch-all' to close down disent and protest; it would make a refreshing change to see them flexing the law to attempt to close down vile, eugenisist clap-trap from such a right-wing nutjob.



Though I agree, I doubt anything will come of it, they are responding to a complaint, nothing more, hope I'm wrong though and they find something to nail him with.

Pref 6" mild steel.


----------



## two sheds (May 15, 2013)

> A Ukip county councillor has resigned over sharing offensive material about Muslims on his Facebook page.
> 
> 
> Eric Kitson quit the Worcestershire County Council seat he won less than two weeks ago. The 59-year-old, who represented Stourport-on-Severn, has denied being a racist and claims he shared cartoons and jokes to show how "disgusting" they were.
> ...


 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...muslim-postings-on-facebook-page-8616863.html

oops


----------



## coley (May 15, 2013)

Dangerous place,  thon Facebook .


----------



## kabbes (May 15, 2013)

Reason #23617245 to avoid Facebook.


----------



## belboid (Jul 10, 2013)

Libertad said:


> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22518684


and now he has resigned - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22518684


----------



## Smyz (Jul 10, 2013)

belboid said:


> and now he has resigned - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-22518684


That's from before he got re-elected.


----------



## Smyz (Jul 10, 2013)

aha

There is a new article about his latest resignation --glad to see it's true!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-23251544


----------



## belboid (Jul 10, 2013)

Smyz said:


> That's from before he got re-elected.


d'oh!  well spotted and corrected!


----------



## Libertad (Jul 10, 2013)

Brewer really took some shifting. The word on Molesworth Street is that he's resigning on account of his "ill health". Defiant to the end. Cunt.


----------

