@The Corbyn Haterz; Go on. Admit it. You’re GUTTED aren’t you?

Assuming you’re talking about me, I’m not gutted. He’s a nice guy living a nightmare, I’m glad to see the pressure off him for a day or two.

As others have said it doesn’t really tell you anything. It was one of Labours safest seats (number 63 if you really want to know), so wasn’t ever likely to change.

Turn out was terrible mind, 10,000 less than on general election numbers.

“McMahon’s victory, in the early hours of Friday morning, was viewed by many present at the count as a triumph in spite of Corbyn than because of him. “

You can almost smell the disappointment in that article that they’re not reporting a UKIP win.

“UKIP’s stunning win was viewed widely as a damning indictment of Corbyn’s leadership.”

@v8 its far too soon for Corbyn to be forced out in my opinion so no I’m not gutted at all.

This is the most ‘UKIPy’ thing I’ve read in a while…

Labour’s deputy leader also dismissed as “sour grapes” claims by the Ukip leader Nigel Farage that the result lacked legitimacy because of the high number of postal ballots from black and minority ethnic voters, some of whom have poor English. Farage, whose candidate John Bickley finished a distant second on 6,487, is to lodge a formal complaint.

I’d like to hear it in his own words, but it sounds a lot like…

“We thought we could win because people are fed up of the high number of immigrants. But it turns out those immigrants are allowed to vote too!”

On another note. I wish someone in the media would actually make it clear that ‘Shoot to Kill’ is not what a lot of people were made to believe it was. i.e. it isn’t about using lethal force in an event like the Paris shootings.

On another note. I wish someone in the media would actually make it clear that ‘Shoot to Kill’ is not what a lot of people were made to believe it was. i.e. it isn’t about using lethal force in an event like the Paris shootings.

Since it was the media who deliberately created that mistaken impression, I doubt that they will be in a hurry to clear it up.

Since it was the media who deliberately created that mistaken impression, I doubt that they will be in a hurry to clear it up.

I agree in part, but Jeremy should have known better than to use the phrase without giving the proper context in the very first interview.

or make voting compulsory, it does help down here in Oz. You at least have to think about it for a few seconds to avoid a fine.

It helps formal turnout but it doesn’t help engagement

Forced voting undermines the incentive for parties and movements to emerge that enthuse and engage people

If Labour want to get anywhere they need some younger people from outside London with ideas, not old folk in their London commie luvvie bubble.

Corbyn is the first London-based Labour leader since Attlee in 1955.

Strange, could have sworn Ed lived in Primrose Hill. And pretty sure Mr Blair didn’t really live in his 2up 2 down house in the grim North.

So the “Oh shit,what have we done?” that goes with a Tory vote has probably kicked in earlier.

To be fair very few Tory voters expected the Tories to win the last general election, not even Cameron and Osborne expected to win, so I guess the “Oh shit,what have we done?” reaction from people who voted Tory but didn’t expect them to win was/is probably quite significant.

dragon – Member

As others have said it doesn’t really tell you anything. It was one of Labours safest seats (number 63 if you really want to know), so wasn’t ever likely to change.

It tells us loads.

It tells us that the claim by Tory supporters such as yourself and jambalaya that Corbyn would without any question put off Labour voters is nonsense.

It’s early days yet but Oldham has proved that Corbyn as leader does not automatically mean catastrophic electoral consequences for Labour – something which jambalaya and others said was an absolute certainty.

so wasn’t ever likely to change

Why not?

Why not a spectacular and historical UKIP by-election victory in Oldham?

Plenty of stranger things have happened in recent by-election history, eg, 3 years ago George Galloway won the equally solid Labour seat of Bradford with a 10,000 majority. And a year ago in a by-election UKIP won a “safe” seat from the Tories after overturning a 10,000 Tory majority.

So come on, explain why the Labour vote didn’t collapse in Oldham?

Guess you mean? Locally popular candidate from the sane wing of the party plus voters with a strong desire to keep ukip out. I’d have voted for McMahon in Oldham and I’m not Corbyn’s biggest fan.

Mr Woppit – Member
Then: 14,784
Now: 10,722
Just saying.

just saying you haven’t looked into the result very much? 😆

Then 55%
Now 62%

Just saying!

Guess you mean?

I mean where’s the predicted collapse in the Labour vote which Corbyn was supposedly guaranteed to bring?

According to you a “Locally popular candidate from sane wing of the party with a strong desire to keep ukip out” is completely immuned from the “Corbyn effect”

So the cracks are starting to appear in the “Corbyn is guaranteed to bring Labour electoral disaster”……now there’s a surprise!

Btw Oldham, according to the press/media, should be absolutely futile territory for UKIP ……. remember “UKIP are threatening Labour in their heartlands”?

So what happened? Wasn’t Corbyn being Labour leader suppose to be their wet dream? Or was that the Tories wet dream?

Not a bad result for the Tories. UKIP doing badly. Corbyn doing well enough he might still be leader in 2020. I’d think they would be quite happy to face a Corbyn led Labour in a general election.

As for postal votes? I think they should be restricted to anyone who has a good reason they can’t vote in person. If you just can’t be arsed popping into your local school then tough luck. Too open to abuse.

A senior judge made a scathing attack on the postal voting system yesterday, condemning the government for complacency in the face of fraud which would disgrace a “banana republic”.

Richard Mawrey QC, presiding over a special election court in Birmingham, warned that there were no realistic systems in place to detect or prevent postal voting fraud at the general election. “Until there are, fraud will continue unabated,” he said.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/apr/05/politics.localgovernment

Not a bad result for the Tories. UKIP doing badly.

The Tory share of the vote fell by almost 10% compared to 6 months ago, and the UKIP vote went up nearly 3%.

You obviously have your own meaning for the term “not a bad result”.

The Tory share of the vote fell by almost 10% compared to 6 months ago, and the UKIP vote went up nearly 3%.

Tactical voting to UKIP obviously. I wouldn’t infer too much from the Tory vote in a safe Labour seat.

Tactical voting to UKIP obviously.

Is that a joke? You’ve just claimed “UKIP doing badly”.

Forgive me if the joke was obvious and I failed to recognise it as such.

Yes odd point this tbh

It may be fair to say it tells us nothing about the Tories but

Not a bad result for the Tories

is over egging it somewhat. I bet not even the Tory PR spokesperson said that one today,

It may be fair to say it tells us nothing about the Tories

Dunno………the Labour vote went up 7%, the UKIP vote went up by 3%, and the Tory vote went down by 10%.

Where did most of the support that the Tories lost go?

UNfortunately what happens in safe labour seats probably wont be replicated elsewhere and By elections are not great barometers of public opinion GE outcomes anyway

That said its certainly not a good day for them and it may indicate they will lose voters to labour but I would want to see much more evidence of that.

I read a bit of the telegraph today, might as well have been reading the mail. Jesus it was depressing.

By elections are not great barometers of public opinion

They are certainly treated as such by the media, look at all the fuss created over recent UKIP by-election victories. Much was made with regards to them being a barometer of public opinion and a reflection of UKIP’s standing.

And certainly had the Labour share of the vote in Oldham fallen by 10% yesterday, and the UKIP and Tory vote increased by 3% and 7% respectively, then I have little doubt that a great deal of fuss would have been made by the media.

I agree though that by-elections are different, very different. They almost never result in a change of government – people know that how they vote will make no difference, so they tend to vote with their hearts. This can result in hugely unexpected and stunning results in otherwise safe seats.

The very fact that nothing spectacular happened in Oldham yesterday is in fact in itself very revealing.

ernie the media get excited when summer is hot and winter is cold that said i agree with it it was remarkable because it was not.

ALso agree they would be droning on endlessly had the result been other than this

Is that a joke? You’ve just claimed “UKIP doing badly”.

They did do badly. They hoped to win or get close. They didn’t. Yhey hoped to take votes from Labour

There was a very sweary and sensible blog by the guy behind @election_data on Twitter, if I was a Labour supporter and it reappears – he seems to have taken it down – I would read it and take it to heart. Many on here could learn alot from it.

Well, okay, then, what did it say ?

I am a bit pissed, but my recollection is, in UKIP facing seats, essentially fight local on your achievements however small (potholes etc), recognise their issues with immigration rather than call them racists, but point out how you can help their economic prospects, and that is about all I can recall. This makes UKIP stressing Corbyn look like the Westminster Establishment because that is what they are discussing, whichis contrary to their anti establishment message. There is more about walking the streets but that escapes me other than it is a slow burn.

ernie_lynch – Member

Dunno………the Labour vote went up 7%, the UKIP vote went up by 3%, and the Tory vote went down by 10%.

Where did most of the support that the Tories lost go?

Argentina?

JC (not Jesus Christ) must stay as a Labour leader otherwise there will be lack of entertainment. It is too soon for him to go as the seat is just getting warmer and comfortable.

Make it easier for me to vote next time.

😆

There was a very sweary and sensible blog by the guy behind @election_data on Twitter, if I was a Labour supporter and it reappears – he seems to have taken it down – I would read it and take it to heart. Many on here could learn alot from it.

I am a bit pissed, but my recollection is, in UKIP facing seats, essentially fight local on your achievements however small (potholes etc), recognise their issues with immigration rather than call them racists, but point out how you can help their economic prospects, and that is about all I can recall.

Surely the people who “could learn alot from it” are the Tories?

Since we now know that UKIP can win by-elections in very safe Tory seats but not it would appear in very safe Labour seats.

An open mind is always good- but one swallow does not make a summer

As someone who lives in Oldham can I respectfully say we are still coming to terms with the mini-roundabout, I would therefore caution against any assumptions of voter thinking or logic.

Though in East Oldham we can proudly boast an anti bombing MP.

UKIP will defnitely win seats from Labour. Voting irregularity still being investigated from the GE I understand. Formal compaints where issued by Tories and UKIP back in May. There is no lesson for the Tories in Oldham, its not a seat worth putting a lot of effort into, way more winnable seats elsewhere.

Video released today from Stop the War rally the day atfer the aid volunteer Alan Henning was beheaded showing Corbyn saying that his death was the “result of warmongering and jingo-ism”. Another massive own goal from the terrorist sympathiser. He neglects to me tion the 10’000’s of Yazhidi lives saved by striking IS in Iraq.

Another massive own goal from the terrorist sympathiser.

It doesn’t seem to stop people voting Labour though, how bizarre.

No wait, it does stop people voting Labour it’s just that the election in Oldham was rigged – is that correct?

Video released today from Stop the War rally the day atfer the aid volunteer Alan Henning was beheaded showing Corbyn saying that his death was the “result of warmongering and jingo-ism”. Another massive own goal from the terrorist sympathiser.

Seems to be another massive own goal from jambalaya ^

Video released today from Stop the War rally the day atfer the aid volunteer Alan Henning was beheaded showing Corbyn saying that his death was the “result of warmongering and jingo-ism”.

Did you know that this is the only page on the whole internet with the phrase “result of warmongering and jingo-ism” on it? Perhaps that’s because those words are not what Corbyn said. In fact, he said

Mr Corbyn, who was speaking at a Stop The War rally, said: “I am pleased that we started with a period of silence for Alan Henning and all those others that have died in this appalling conflict.

“Because we have to remember them and remember that the price of war, the price of intervention, the price of jingoism is somebody else’s son and somebody else’s daughter either being killed or being killed by somebody else.”

jambalaya – Member

Another massive own goal from the terrorist sympathiser.

Which you had to invent.

For those interested in reality, rather than making stuff up, here’s the video

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFZSLw7y10s[/video]

It’d be funnier except I see the Telegraph is running with the exact same lie.