Hammering for Conservatives in Chesham and Amersham.

[Vindec]

From memory, Labour were polling at 15,000 in that constituency in 2015, so you'd think that the large majority of them have deserted the party for the Lib Dems. It was an example of tactical voting by people who would not class themselves as Conservatives and it has to be the way to go for, say, Labour supporters in Cornwall and Lib Dems voters who live in most major cities in this country.

I see you seem to want to brush what happened to the Conservatives under the carpet, but there definitely appears to be something going on in some areas in southern England that have traditionally been strongly Tory - there was quite a bit of evidence of this last month when nearly all of the focus was on the woes of the Labour party.

You say Labour's defeat was an example of tactical voting that reduced the Labour vote. That is your opinion. In fact, passing off that opinion as fact is a fabrication in your own mind and a reflection of your own leftish views. How do my words "a crushing defeat for the Tories" equate to my brushing what happened to the Tories under the carpet?

You should know that bi elections are completely different to General Elections where local issues seem to come to the fore and the tendency is always to vote against the Party in power. HS2 was the real issue in that constituency. However I doubt whether the level of Tory defeat was expected by the Tories.

It was a shocking result for the Tories as it was for Labour but your analysis is simply a fabrication of what you think happened. I note the heading of your post indicates it was a hammering for the Conservatives but it was for Labour as well. The next bi election might be an opportunity to gauge the extent of Labour support. If Labour don't win that with a very good candidate they are finished.

[jon1959]

You say Labour's defeat was an example of tactical voting that reduced the Labour vote. That is your opinion. In fact, passing off that opinion as fact is a fabrication in your own mind and a reflection of your own leftish views. How do my words "a crushing defeat for the Tories" equate to my brushing what happened to the Tories under the carpet?

You should know that bi elections are completely different to General Elections where local issues seem to come to the fore and the tendency is always to vote against the Party in power. HS2 was the real issue in that constituency. However I doubt whether the level of Tory defeat was expected by the Tories.

It was a shocking result for the Tories as it was for Labour but your analysis is simply a fabrication of what you think happened. I note the heading of your post indicates it was a hammering for the Conservatives but it was for Labour as well. The next bi election might be an opportunity to gauge the extent of Labour support. If Labour don't win that with a very good candidate they are finished.

You say if Labour don't win the Batley & Spen by election they are finished. That is your opinion. In fact, passing off that opinion as fact is a fabrication in your own mind and a reflection of your own rightish views.

[the other bob wilson]

You say Labour's defeat was an example of tactical voting that reduced the Labour vote. That is your opinion. In fact, passing off that opinion as fact is a fabrication in your own mind and a reflection of your own leftish views. How do my words "a crushing defeat for the Tories" equate to my brushing what happened to the Tories under the carpet?

You should know that bi elections are completely different to General Elections where local issues seem to come to the fore and the tendency is always to vote against the Party in power. HS2 was the real issue in that constituency. However I doubt whether the level of Tory defeat was expected by the Tories.

It was a shocking result for the Tories as it was for Labour but your analysis is simply a fabrication of what you think happened. I note the heading of your post indicates it was a hammering for the Conservatives but it was for Labour as well. The next bi election might be an opportunity to gauge the extent of Labour support. If Labour don't win that with a very good candidate they are finished.

There’s so much a could say in reply to this, but I can’t be bothered, so I’ll just make a couple of comments. First I gave the thread that title because there’s a thread on this page talking about Labour’s hammering at Hartlepool - I used “hammering” for no other reason than that. Second, if you really think the six hundred or whatever the figure is a true reflection of the size of Labour’s support in the constituency then I believe you are deluding yourself. I know what I would have done as a regular Labour voter if I lived in Chesham and Amersham, I would have put that to one side and voted for the party which stood the best chance of keeping the Tory out - I’m not saying that the Labour support would be huge in that constituency, but, clearly lots of of people chose to do that and the Lib Dem majority was enhanced because of it.

[Vindec]

There’s so much a could say in reply to this, but I can’t be bothered, so I’ll just make a couple of comments. First I gave the thread that title because there’s a thread on this page talking about Labour’s hammering at Hartlepool - I used “hammering” for no other reason than that. Second, if you really think the six hundred or whatever the figure is a true reflection of the size of Labour’s support in the constituency then I believe you are deluding yourself. I know what I would have done as a regular Labour voter if I lived in Chesham and Amersham, I would have put that to one side and voted for the party which stood the best chance of keeping the Tory out - I’m not saying that the Labour support would be huge in that constituency, but, clearly lots of of people chose to do that and the Lib Dem majority was enhanced because of it.

The Hartlepool bi election springs to mind where the Labour vote fell off a cliff.

Just because you vote tactically doesn't mean everyone does or will. There are many more points I could make but I can't be bothered either. The fact you have not replied to my response to your contention that I brushed the Tory defeat under the carpet is noted.

Your analysis of what is happening in Southern England is way off the mark in my opinion. In Cornwall and Devon for example the Liberals always have a strong presence in the farming communities and marginally less so the Tories but every single constituency in the South West voted Tory. It might be different next time around as the fishing communities feel short changed by the Brexit deal. What I can say is that Labour are nowhere in these areas. Tactical voting could work but I can't imagine the Labour Party standing aside as they will receive such few votes it wouldn't make any difference. All seats in the South West will be a straight fight between the Liberals and Tories. Possibly your alliance might work in Southern England but I doubt it.

[the other bob wilson]

The Hartlepool bi election springs to mind where the Labour vote fell off a cliff.

Just because you vote tactically doesn't mean everyone does or will. There are many more points I could make but I can't be bothered either. The fact you have not replied to my response to your contention that I brushed the Tory defeat under the carpet is noted.

Your analysis of what is happening in Southern England is way off the mark in my opinion. In Cornwall and Devon for example the Liberals always have a strong presence in the farming communities and marginally less so the Tories but every single constituency in the South West voted Tory. It might be different next time around as the fishing communities feel short changed by the Brexit deal. What I can say is that Labour are nowhere in these areas. Tactical voting could work but I can't imagine the Labour Party standing aside as they will receive such few votes it wouldn't make any difference. All seats in the South West will be a straight fight between the Liberals and Tories. Possibly your alliance might work in Southern England but I doubt it.

I said you brushed it under the carpet because your posts read like "yes it was a bad result for the Conservatives, but let's get on to the real issue here, the size of the Labour vote".

The size of the Labour vote in Hartlepool and many other constituencies in the North of England and the Midlands should be a real cause of concern for the party and it really needs to stop giving the impression that fighting a continuing civil war and coming across as talking down to people who have traditionally supported Labour is their preferred way to go. I'm not a great fan of someone like Lisa Nandy, but I can't help thinking that she is right about how attitudes have changed post Referendum in so called red wall seats and that, whatever many on the left may feel about her, Labour need to listen to what she has to say.

However, Labour is never going to win a seat like Chesham and Amersham and so the reaction to their embarrassing vote on Thursday is less important than what they do and where they go as a result of what happened in Hartlepool.

If Labour are never going to win Chesham and Amersham, I'd say it's equally true that the Conservatives should never lose it, but, perhaps, such thinking is out of touch now because this article (which I know is from the Guardian, but it is written by someone who knows his stuff and has consistently recognised and virtually predicted Labours' problems in the north and midlands) shows that there are demographic changes taking place in traditionally Conservative parts of England which are beginning to affect the way people vote there;-

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...mersham-tories

You talk of me being "way off the mark" in my opinion about what's happening in Southern England, but I didn't say that, I said, what's happening in some parts of southern England. For example, you don't need to tell me that, apart from places like Plymouth and Exeter, Labour has virtually no chance of winning seats in the south west once you go south of Bristol, but the Lib Dems do and it wasn't too long ago that this part of the country was considered something of a Lib Dem stronghold - that's why I said in my opening post that I think Labour needs to give serious thought as to whether it's worth them fielding candidates in places like Cornwall any more.

With electoral changes coming which are generally expected to help the Conservatives and the party that had established itself as one of "the big two" in this country having not won an election in four attempts, the majority of eligible voters who do not favour the Conservatives are looking at a situation whereby their anti tory views are never going to be reflected under the present voting system while we have so many non right wing parties all competing for what are virtually the same section of the electorate. That's why I'm increasingly coming around to thinking that some of these parties (especially Labour) are going to have to swallow their pride and stand with the "enemy" against a bigger foe.

Here's another Guardian article which, probably correctly, argues that a so called progressive alliance will never happen, but what happened on Thursday shows that the Tories are not as impregnable as they may appear and so it is incumbent on those non Conservative parties to provide the most effective opposition possible as a service to the majority who decided in December 2019 that they did not want to be governed by the Conservative party.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...d-middle-class