Jeremy Corbyn

JY, it was more of a sarcastic thing really - the media would have had us believe that UKIP had a real chance what with all those unsophisticated northern folk being easy prey for Xenophobes like UKIP. Which I always thought to be bullshit anyway.

UKIP had a real chance what with all those unsophisticated northern folk being easy prey for Xenophobes like UKIP. Which I always thought to be bullshit anyway.

Yep, bullshit....... it was the BNP that appealed to unsophisticated northern xenophobes. I'm guessing UKIP was a little too sophisticated for them.

The BNP got their best ever general election result in Oldham.

I wonder what the result would be like if they cancel the postal ballot (% wise) ... hmmm ... 😀 ... in a cold rainy day.

Labour's Jim McMahon has won the Oldham West and Royton by-election with a majority of over 10,000.
Mr McMahon increased Labour's vote share by over 7% from the general election, with UKIP in second and the Conservatives third.

but the turnout - just over 40% -

40% turnout at a by election is not particularly remarkable in any sense. They are most usually a fair bit lower than general election turnouts.

Edit; Although Jambalaya will be along in a while to explain that it is all Corbyn's fault, and if Labour had had the sense and decency to have elected Boris Johnson or someone as leader instead then it would have all been MUCH better...

which still doesn't make 40% a good turnout, just the fact that people are mostly apathetic about democracy and more likely moan about stuff on Facebook than do something about it.

which still doesn't make 40% a good turnout, just the fact that people are mostly apathetic about democracy and more likely moan about stuff on Facebook than do something about it.

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.

There was a drop of 10% in the Tory vote in Oldham yesterday, the Tories are going to have to do better than that if they are to stand any chance of winning the next general election.

And only 6 months after their general election victory the Tories should still be enjoying their honeymoon period.

Good news for Labour.

So if this was a referendum on Corbyn as many had claimed.....

Probably best for UKIP to pick something other than a rock solid Labour seat to claim they're about to wipe out the party in the north of England. They, and the Telegraph look pretty foolish this morning.

Referendum on Corbyn, that would be a yes then.

Ukip really really tried to play the anti-Corbyn card too. And lets face it, he's had a tough week!

15% increase in postal ballots aparrently...

On the downside there's one more 'Blairite' MP to deselect.

15% increase in postal ballots aparrently...

*laughing smiley*

On the downside there's one more 'Blairite' MP to deselect.

On the upside potentially one less "Blairite" on the NEC.

Then: 14,784

Now: 10,722

Just saying.

Just saying

By election so obviously turnout was down, overall share of the vote up, therefore Corbyn is the saviour of Labour 😉

Of course I'm sure even corbs knows when your biggest opponent is the last dying fart of UKIP it's not exactly a challenge, whatever fantasies the telegraph spins to try and keep its readership

Solid win for Labour, sounds like the new MP will be a good addition to the House too. UKIP firmly establised as main challenger though.

Postal voting wouldn't had changed the result (7,100 votes and a 10,000 majority) but its quite worrying when only 40% of postal votes are cast early and one individual carrying many (family/friends ?) postal votes into polling station on voting day. It's not hard to imagine postal votes are registered centrally and then a person goes round on polling day to ensure they are completed and then carries them to the polling station. This isnt illegal but is a worrying trend.

Tory result;

Then: 8,817

Now: 6,487

Just saying.

Your point is?

UKIP firmly establised as main challenger though.

The postal one is something that will raise suspicion but I suspect its just the usual UKIP BS that Farage likes to spout rather than just accept that folk dont really like the [s]gently racist[/s] proudly patriotic anti EU bastards very much.

UKIP firmly establised as main challenger though

Then: 8,892

Now:6,487

Losing ground to Labour, and only a modest 2.8% increase in vote share overall, on the back of the Tories calamitous 9.6% loss in vote share.

ernie_lynch - Member

"And only 6 months after their general election victory the Tories should still be enjoying their honeymoon period."

But they started in a hurry,only in power a month befor IDS is soiling himself as Gideon puts forward the prospect of making the disadvantaged worse off. So the "Oh shit,what have we done?" that goes with a Tory vote has probably kicked in earlier. I could be wrong as I live in Scotland and we don't really bother with them in National elections.

Cannot help you there fella I now I live in Englandshire but i draw the line at hanging out with Tories 😉

Just saying...

Oh. That's a 10,722 [i]majority[/i].

Solid for Corbyn, then. In an already solid Labour seat, however. No spin to be had either way...

Solid for Corbyn, then. In an already solid Labour seat, however. No spin to be had either way...

That's my take. Good news for Corbyn, but very hard to draw any wider conclusion because it's a solid Labour seat and there are so many other variables.

@The Corbyn Haterz; Go on. Admit it. You're GUTTED aren't you? You were properly hoping to stick the knife in and twist it this morning. Ah well. You're time will come, I'm sure. Just not today...

It's not hard to imagine

No you don't find it hard to imagine all sorts of bizarre nonsense.

@The Corbyn Haterz; Go on. Admit it. You're GUTTED aren't you? You were properly hoping to stick the knife in and twist it this morning.

100 times this. ^^^^^

INteresting to see how the corbyn haters spin this - they won because he stayed away?

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/dec/04/labour-sweep-to-conclusive-victory-in-oldham-byelection ]From the guardian, [/url]

"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.

@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.

"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.

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.

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.

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?