The voters need to wise up and play the system.

Absolutely, and when Labour get in they need to introduce some form of PR

The LibDems have traditionally been very good at exploiting local issues in one-off elections and targeting resources effectively. In this case, looks like HS2/green belt type stuff.

Can Labour find relevant issues in the seats they need to win, and get better at grassroots engagement and campaigning?

Absolutely, and when Labour get in they need to introduce some form of PR

The trouble with FPTP is that the act of ‘getting in’ seems to make parties think it’s working well for them, so why change it? The opportunity for PR is when you have no majorities and parties trying to do deals. The LibDems didn’t fully exploit* that opportunity when they had the chance, and got rolled over by the Tories with a few token ministerial posts.

LD are always second to Conservatives in parliamentary elections (until now).

Apart from 2015 and 2017…

I think politics has been pretty volatile for a few years and will continue to be

I really don’t care how Labour performed in this seat.

You really don’t care that Labour’s vote collapsed completely, in a thread about Keir Starmer’s leadership? Ok…

We’re often told that Labour can only regain power by moving to the centre – that seems to have failed spectacularly here, and given that the party is haemorrhaging its traditional base, the “blue wall” is exactly where it needs to perform much more strongly to support its current strategy. The party really needs to find out where those 10,000 voters went, and why.

On the other hand I would be much more sanguine if the party made a strategic decision to not campaign too strongly here.

The voters need to wise up and play the system.

Non homogenous groups with little to no systems to allow them to do it, no trust, different requirements and ideologues  need to come together in order to get an outcome that I want…

Absolutely, and when Labour get in they need to introduce some form of PR

Translation for Tory supporters: If you don’t vote, When Labour get in next time, they’ll fix it so you never see the govt you want ever again.

You really don’t care that Labour’s vote collapsed completely, in a thread about Keir Starmer’s leadership? Ok…

If Labour had done better, and the Tories had held the seat, would I pleased? Absolutely not.

The LibDems have been doing awfully for many reasons now (a run of poor leaders, being blamed for Tory policies because of the coalition, etc) and in some seats one of those reasons is because some of their vote went to the Tories where some people saw keeping Corbyn out of power as a prime motivation when it came to vote. Does Starmer inspire those people? I very much doubt it. Are they scared of him being PM in the same way as they were scared of Corbyn being PM? I doubt that as well.

On the other hand I would be much more sanguine if the party made a strategic decision to not campaign too strongly here.

I used to be a member of the Labour party in High Wycombe (just up the road) and really we had really limited funds and limited traction in the gated communities and ‘burbs in Amersham, Marlow, Beaconsfield etc etc. Come election time, Central office were always pretty much saying  “Here’s a teeny amount of cash for “campaigning”, you may as well go to the pub and have a massive piss up”

If Labour had done better, and the Tories had held the seat, would I pleased? Absolutely not.

I believe you, but don’t think that’s relevant to my question.

From my perspective, if Labour’s vote had held up, it would be some evidence that they could compete in more marginal Tory seats in the south.

I believe you, but don’t think that’s relevant to my question.

I’ve told you my answer already. Labour could have lost their deposit in this seat, and if the result is we lose a Conservative MP, I am absolutely fine with that.

As far as Starmer is concerned, I still see him as just keeping the seat warm, and want someone else in there as leader a year out from a general election. I think Labour will stick with him ’till he loses a general election though, as they just don’t have the system in place to move leaders on when they need to be.

it would be some evidence that they could compete in more marginal Tory seats in the south.

I don’t think single by-elections are ever a good indicator of anything are they? I mean, look at Hartlepool a couple of weeks ago. Labour candidate was a doctor who voted to close the local hospital; local issues are always a “thing”. This isn’t a sign that Tory vote is collapsing or that Lib Dems re on the rise anymore that is shows Labour have got a strategy to win over folks that are either farmers or rich Lawyers/fat business cows

I’ve told you my answer already. Labour could have lost their deposit in this seat, and if the result is one fewer Conservative MP, I am absolutely fine with that.

Fair enough: you’re absolutely fine with Labour losing 10,000 votes.

I don’t think single by-elections are ever a good indicator of anything are they? I mean, look at Hartlepool a couple of weeks ago. Labour candidate was a doctor who voted to close the local hospital; local issues are always a “thing”. This isn’t a sign that Tory vote is collapsing or that Lib Dems re on the rise anymore that is shows Labour have got a strategy to win over folks that are either farmers or rich Lawyers/fat business cows

In and of itself, I agree that a single data point isn’t a strong indicator. But as we move through the cycle, and see more by-elections, we will start to build a picture. The next one is going to be very interesting…

you’re absolutely fine with Labour losing 10,000 votes

If the result is that the Conservatives lose a seat, absolutely. Just as I would implore LibDem and Green supporters to vote Labour if there were to be by-election in this seat here.

The next one is going to be very interesting…

Oh absolutely, I I’m not going to wriggle hard to get Labour off the hook here, To mangle Oscar Wilde, To lose a by-election is unfortunate to loose another looks like carelessness…If we give Labour a pass in a seat like this where to be frank, if it was the only candidate they still would lose their deposit, for all the talk of the Tories losing the “blue wall”  it’s not going to happen overnight. Where ever the next one is though I expect Labour to be taking the fight to whoever held the seat.

If the result is that the Conservatives lose a seat, absolutely. Just as I would implore LibDem and Green supporters to vote Labour if there were to be by-election in this seat here.

I know, you’ve already said. I can only marvel at why someone would not be even remotely curious as to why all those people don’t want to vote Labour any more, but there we go.

As far as Starmer is concerned, I still see him as just keeping the seat warm, and want someone else in there as leader a year out from a general election. I think Labour will stick with him ’till he loses a general election though, as they just don’t have the system in place to move leaders on when they need to be.

They also don’t have a queue of talented front benchers (or any MP’s) who are dominating the airways with their ability to cut through to the core of issues and give hope of a decent alternative who inspire confidence

I think Starmer’s problem is that he is a good team leader of talented people which is why he rose to the top at the CPS. He is however leading a Labour party at war with itself with a motley collection of MPs and a dearth of talent. If you can’t put your front bench on the airwaves every day to batter the government on this that or the other and get cut through then you have a problem which is greater than one single person

I can only marvel at why someone would not be even remotely curious as to why all those people don’t want to vote Labour any more, but there we go.

You misunderstand, I don’t want them to vote Labour in a FPTP election for an MP in this seat. I’m not “uncurious”, I am very pleased that the Labour vote collapsed here.

Hard agree big_n_daft.

More of this please. I really don’t want to wait ‘till I’m 90 for an elusive Labour majority government

What on earth makes you think the lib dems would support a labour minority govt or join a coalition? Recent history shows that given a choice they will side with the tories.

We’re often told that Labour can only regain power by moving to the centre – that seems to have failed spectacularly here,

Failed in the way that an actual centre party (Lib Dem) won by a large margin?

It works pretty much the way it does now. Just less of it with a universal basic income to provide the basics for everyone. You really are the life and soul of the party aren’t you?

And where does the UBI money come from if everybody is working less (you still haven’t said how much less) and the output of the country is lower.
And no I have never been the life and should of any party (I have aspergers) but not sure what that has got to do with me questioning your unfounded dreams.

And where does the UBI money come from

The same place it does now. What the government spends is not dependent on production.

but not sure what that has got to do with me questioning your unfounded dreams.

It was a joke. I’ll add a smiley next time to avoid confusion 😊

Recent history shows that given a choice they will side with the tories.

That was what? Over 10 years ago, they had a different leader, and 57 seats, and knew (pretty much) they were going to be powerbrokers in the elections…It’s such a  vastly different scenario that it probably has no bearing at all on what may occur in the future.

I don’t think there is any appetite for another coalition with the Tories in LD HQ or membership.

LDs were until recently in coalition with Lab in Wales, and there’s been some bizarre backroom stitch up in Stockport Council with Lab staying in power only because of Tory support.

It’s such a  vastly different scenario that it probably has no bearing at all on what may occur in the future.

Mabye with Boris in place, but with Sunak or Gove I suspect Davey would be less hostile towards the tories. I’d have more faith if Moran was leader, but she’s not, and the lib dems are still further to the right than they were under Kennedy.

The next one is going to be very interesting…

Definitely – if Labour manage to lose that one, I’d say KS is a gonner. Even if they hold it with a reduced majority, he’s still in big trouble.

The problem for Labour is the big indy candidate who came third and got 6,000 votes last time out with a ‘local Brexit’ flavour:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000548

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Woollen_District_Independents

Don’t appear to be standing this time around, but you’ve got Galloway chipping in with some made-up Workers’ Party plus some type of Yorkshire Party candidate. Could get messy.

The LibDems didn’t fully exploit* that opportunity when they had the chance, and got rolled over by the Tories with a few token ministerial posts.

I don’t think it helps to downplay the role of the LibDems in the Coalition Government, although I can see the obvious appeal for some people to do so.

A quarter of the Coalition Cabinet was LibDem. The Deputy Prime Minister was the LibDem Party Leader.

As a consequence of recent history I can see the logical appeal of voting LibDem for many people who would under normal circumstances vote Conservative.

However for people who would traditionally vote Labour the situation seems different. As far as I am aware the LibDem vote in former Labour Northern strongholds has completely collapsed.

I don’t know where the Labour vote went yesterday in the by-election
Perhaps some went to the LibDems and perhaps a large part of it stayed at home, there was after all 18k fewer people who voted yesterday than had in the 2019 election.

As far as I am aware the LibDem vote in former Labour Northern strongholds has completely collapsed.

Yes, and that gives Labour an opportunity. Personally, I welcome the LibDems ousting Conservatives from seats they consider safe, and hope Labour can mop up potential LibDem voters in “former Labour Northern strongholds” to start bringing them back into contention in seats they have recently lost, or currently look like losing at the next General Election. I want to see many parties doing well, but with voting support spread in a way that results in more actual seats in parliament, not just national vote share.

Failed in the way that an actual centre party (Lib Dem) won by a large margin?

Precisely. Centrists are well catered for. Labour, who were more on the left in 2017, had 10,000 more votes than they managed yesterday.

The same place it does now. What the government spends is not dependent on production.

Ultimately it is. If nobody worked (their choice remember), everybody was on just UBI and nothing was produced (no food, no post, no banks, nothing) the country function would it.

You will need to show your workings on this if you want to convince me (a supporter of the basic premise) never mind convincing the majority who would be against it (brainwashed into current system or not)
i.e, working less means what, is there a max hours per week that any employer can request

If you can’t put your front bench on the airwaves every day to batter the government on this that or the other and get cut through then you have a problem which is greater than one single person

Perhaps its access to the airwaves that is the problem? As an example, I don’t see many journalists making a beeline to the new LD constituency and reporting on the matter. I shouldn’t have to say this really, its obvious where the media’s political allegiances lie.

Or perhaps they view as a protest vote over HS2, and it will turn blue again at the next election.

Precisely. Centrists are well catered for. Labour, who were more on the left in 2017, had 10,000 more votes than they managed yesterday.

10,000 more votes, and still lost. Centrists will be well catered for when the biggest opposition party is aligned to the centre.

Centrists are well catered for. Labour, who were more on the left in 2017, had 10,000 more votes than they managed yesterday.

That is not my interpretation of why it happened. You seriously think that if Corbyn was still the leader they would have got 10,000 seat again?
Guessing you didn’t mention the lower 7,500 votes in 2019 because it doesn’t look as good…

And where does the UBI money come from if everybody is working less (you still haven’t said how much less) and the output of the country is lower.

Oh jeez. Despite all the noise Dezh and I have made you still don’t realise how the government pays for things?

The UK Government’s finances are not limited by £££ – they are limited by real resources and slack in the economy.

You realise the GDP went down massively in the Pandemic and they still found 450 Billion?

Failed in the way that an actual centre party (Lib Dem) won by a large margin?

A pointless band aid in a general election scenario. Lib-dems are on a overall downward spiral.

That was what? Over 10 years ago, they had a different leader, and 57 seats, and knew (pretty much) they were going to be powerbrokers in the elections…It’s such a vastly different scenario that it probably has no bearing at all on what may occur in the future.

Because they are known for their left of centre ideals.

Jo Swansong and co didn’t want anything to do with Labour at the recent G.E

Libs are neoliberal through and through. Besotted by market economics, and faux environmental credentials. Doomed to centrist failure. Unless there’s some change I haven’t spotted.

Ultimately it is. If nobody worked (their choice remember), everybody was on just UBI and nothing was produced (no food, no post, no banks, nothing) the country function would it.

That’s not the same thing as the government can’t afford it.

Of course peope have to produce things.

I’m not an advocate of UBI irrespective. Job Guarantee is where it’s at.

Precisely. Centrists are well catered for. Labour, who were more on the left in 2017, had 10,000 more votes than they managed yesterday.

Honestly – it’s so taking a lot of getting through to defenders of the middle ground that the current Government didn’t win by appealing to the nebulous middle ground.

The appalling result from Jo Swinson’s lot despite the pro EU swell didn’t even make a mark in a GE.

Delighted to be endorsed by Tony Blair as the @UKLabour candidate for the Chesham and Amersham by-election. Thank you so much for your support Tony! 🌹#VoteLabour 17 June@SELabour @InstituteGC pic.twitter.com/iuR8zU2lFI

— Natasa Pantelic (@natasapantelic5) May 28, 2021

Blair endorsing Natasa Pantelic.

Is this part of the tactical voting ploy or what?

Lmfao.

Dear god! Like having your GP endorsed by Harold Shipman

I’d like to think this win is a good thing but they’re spinning it as “if we can win here we can win everywhere” and that’s just not the takeaway from this election, nor is it the right approach for the 4th party… they seem intent on making the Swinson mistakes again.

Let’s be honest, they won because of a combination of tactical voting, and because a long serving and immensely popular MP died and the tory turnout collapsed. There’s little evidence of them winning significant tory votes. But they’re not acting like they know either of those things. It’s possible it’s all just front and they know what’s really happening, but in the light of the last election I don’t think that can be assumed. And tbf after Swinson they should be working hard to show that they’re not still living in a fantasy world.

Lmfao.

Ha! I didn’t know Blair was on Cameo!

the current Government didn’t win by appealing to the nebulous middle ground.

If you’re suggesting that Labour need to move to the right as far as the Conservatives in order to beat them… I really hope you’re wrong.

I also hope that the by-election result is a sign that the Government may start losing as many seats as they gain from their nationalism at all costs approach. It’s a very weak hope though… I think they’ll get away with it for decades. Not least because all their opponents will be too busy fighting among themselves to mount a decent challenge.