If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Labour fails - comes third after lib dems in local elections
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
BBC research suggests the party has fallen into third place nationally, taking 24% of the vote, beaten by the Tories on 44% and Lib Dems on 25%.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7372860.stm
Whilst the labour party spokesman says there is 'no crisis', obviously there is.
I am thinking we're going to be see a tory government at the next general election. I mean, anything can happen between now and then, but do you think people trust gordon brown to run the country?
If Boris Johnson takes the London mayorship it may well be the last nail in the coffin for the current labour government. I can already see dissent in the backbenchers brewing, and it won't be long after that there will be squabbles over all manner of things, paving the way for the tories.
Maybe I'm predicting doom and gloom though, but gordon brown cannot say he is pleased with the worst result for 40 years, and I expect neither can any members of the labour party.
0
Comments
Still, even (Call Me Dave) Cameron was cautious in his proclamations of success this morning; i suspect he realises that this is a vote against Labour rather than for the Tories. I mean, who the fuck knows what Tory policy even is these days? I guess with Labour hastily banging nails in their own coffin the Tories just need to sit by and watch.
Basically put Labour have been around too long, people have forgotten how crap the Tories were last time around and they want change, we're fickle.
But, if anyone wants a scary vision of how the Tories are going to be they should read the Ian Duncan Smith report into social welfare. Basically poor people deserve it and the rich shouldnt be expected to support them.
I'm very scared for London now.
I know what you mean, how people in all seriousness actually voted for Boris I dont know.
Having met him a few times professionally I can say the man is as bright as a button, (and has the added advanatge of not cosying up to far right homophobes, crooks and terrorists)
He does a good job in keeping that quiet.
They're best to stick with him. If they do get rid of him they look panicy and divided and the public don't vote for parties like that.
they're best chance is to hope for anotjher 1992, ie the public go the polls and think better the devil we know
I think that's what happened at the last election. By getting rid of the 10% tax rate after claiming to be somewhere near the left Brown has proved that we don't really know him at all. The only thing I know about whatever he'll decide next is that it will involve destroying another aspect of people's lives.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7378792.stm
By the way things are looking labour are going to need to do something special to stay in government after the next general election.
http://vbulletin.thesite.org/showthread.php?t=82314
A weeks a long time in politics, two years even more so....
Can you think of an example of an opposition 'winning' an election, as a matter on interest? I can maybe think of one example ...
But also Laboour have gone into meltdown. I guess it's of interest because there was a subtext that the Tories were doomed (and its a thread I remember because I can remember the same thing being said about labour in the late 80s) and yet only a few years later we're saying Brown is. We could equally be wrong on that as well...
I agree with Budda, the Tories are exactly the same as before, with the slight alteration that they will happily spend at the same level as Labour. They're accusing Gordon Brown of not putting anything aside for a rainy day, but I can't remember any of their recent campaigns being run on the promise of lower taxes. They're like the Republicans in America: all of the worst parts of conservatism (poor social policy), with none of the benefits (low taxes). Opportunism of the worst kind, but I guess that's all that's needed in politics nowadays. Incidentally, I don't understand why those who have gone off Labour don't vote Lib Dems. There's not a whole lot between Lib Dem policy and traditional Labour values, as far as I can tell.
On a local note, practically our entire council (Labour and Conservative) was voted out in favour of independents and the local socialist party.
I dont think they have gone into 'meltdown' really, its just that's the media line now, and people are generally sick of Labour. Labour haven't really done anything drastically different over the last couple of years, its just people wanting something fresh
Possibly because the Lib Dems are the most opportunist of all the parties (see how eurosceptic they claim to be in the SW, in the middle class constituency my wife used to live in they claim to be anti-tax, in my working class constituency they talked about higher taxes for the rich).
Against that all political parties are are going to blame the others for things they would have done themselves - Labour would probably have followed more or less the same policy as Lamont on ERM (and Lib Dems probably even more so), but they're not going to say that. It's hard to see any Government doing much different on Northern Rock.
I'm also not convinced weak Governments are neccessarily good things - I remember the Major Govt. It hardly seemed like a Government doing what the people wanted (and who are these 'people' and aren't some of them in Government?), more a series of panic measures in a desperate attempt to remain in power.
meltdown is probably the wrong word. All Governments have a finite life. Labour basically has the same MPs as in 1997, and there pool of talent is starting to run dry. Many of the decent MPs have already been Ministers or are just too rebellious (aka Kate Hoey) to be one, and so there more and more dependent on second raters.
It was the same for the Tories in the 90s
It is true that history repeats itself, once as tragedy, the second time as farce.
I think thats a very fair way of putting it, it took me a while to realise it but the sweep to power of New Labour was a lot more to do with the Tories than it was NL. I suspect it will be the same next time round, but I dont think the Tories will get such a victory as Labour did in 97.
probably not - though Labour had a bit of luck in 97 in that the boundaries at the time meant they won lots of constituencies with small numbers, and the Tories won there ones with large majority.
With the changes in boundaries the Tories will need to get 40% to get a slight majority and Labour need a bit less (about 38% if I remember). With 44% they'll get a pretty strong majority (though I suspect that they won;t get 44% some protest voters will swing back to labour and some Labour supporters stayed at home
The war ...The ethos of privatisation ...threatening to throw the unemployed out of their homes ...reclassyfying cannabis to b ...Hundreds of thousands of labour people like me are sick to death of this fruadulent Laboiur party. Bulklying and threatening people ...they can go kiss my arse.
I could never bring myself to vote tory ...or liberal ...i'll turn up at the booth and write piss off or something on the slip.
QFT.
Dear god, this is the end times, isn't it?
lol @ london (and londoners)
It wasn't anti-semitic, in poor taste certainly but given the history of Ken vs. the Standard it was understandable.
He didn't know he was jewish. It was a comment, and it was entirely down to the way the recipient interpreted it that made it anti-semetic, not the comment nor the meaning. I'm not a ken livingstone supporter either.
Besides, I said lol @ londoners because have you seen Boris Johnson? He is more comedian than politician. Arguably politicians are just performers anyway so it may actually aid him, but still.
I expect his first act as major will be to set up the ministry of silly walks