Donate SIGN UP

Labour Won Peterborough

Avatar Image
Spicerack | 02:04 Fri 07th Jun 2019 | News
104 Answers
Big turn up for the books.
Gravatar

Answers

61 to 80 of 104rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last

Avatar Image
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/07/seven-reasons-labour-won-the-peterborough-byelection Reason 3 is interesting.
12:56 Fri 07th Jun 2019
//I think what we'll see before too long is that the Brexit Party is, despite people's claims to the contrary, mostly made up of angry Tory voters//

Certainly some of those.

But, I suggest, more by those thickos (add any other insult you want to the list) who think their votes have been disregarded by the cleverer and better informed Jims and his like minded mates who run Parliamennt and report the news.
"I think we should have a second vote as it was so close :-J"

No problem. It is already booked for 2022. Three years seems reasonable. Now, about that EU vote, ...
//Seriously mixed feelings about the Peterborough result. I never want to see Nigel Farage’s party in Parliament. But Lisa Forbes & the Labour Party have a lot to answer for. We must learn lessons & never have a repeat of this. Have formally raised concerns with party leadership.//

Margaret Hodge.
Again, ve -- what you're implying about how I think is utter nonsense.
The message is this:

Labour voters are more likely to remain loyal than Tory ones. That is the great danger for the Tories.
//Again, ve -- what you're implying about how I think is utter nonsense//

Maybe so, Jim.

Are you sure, however, that the verb shouldn't be "inferring"? That's the preferred word for "suggestion" judged by the volume of posts and my textual analysis.
My understanding is that you're the one implying, and I draw an inference from that.
It would appear that some voters in Peterbough, chose to support Anti-Semitism rather than Brexit.

Imply/infer is branded on to my skin, Jim. Fifteen year old VE's English Language O-Level had the question "Construct a sentence using the verbs 'imply' and 'infer' to illustrate their difference". Or some such. Young VE was baffled, because he didn't know the difference. I did, however, check the dictionary afterwards and learnt that the one means "you suggest that" and that the other (expressing it as Cathy Newman would) means "so what you're saying is".

Pedant's corner: Chambers does support the misuse of "infer".

Oh, 55% was my O-Level score for English Language. The days when they were scored numerically: 45% = pass and 90% = top whack. I did get top whack for Greek and Latin, but there's no way I could convince your godfather Peter Pedant of that.
"Now, about that EU vote, ... "

No problem. Suggest the year about 20 years or more after we actually properly exit. After all we've been in the EU and it's earlier incarcerations for 46 years already, so much longer than 20.
"Suggest the year about 20 years or more after we actually properly exit"

Seems a bit premature, since Rees-Mogg says it will be fifty years before any non-millionaires feel any benefit from leaving, but on that basis we haven't given membership a good go yet, have we? Should we commit to a future of permanent austerity, always changing tack just before it comes good for us?

As long as the privileged can continue their national asset stripping, the rest of us should accept our lot. They have plenty of Quislings doing their work for them, don't they?
Question Author
Quite, Professor.
70% of the votes cast were postal. No wonder Labour 'activists' were announcing they'd won before they counted 1 vote last night.
Any connection to last night's Labour Rent-a-Mob is purely uncoincidental.

https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/53ed11f0f1fbbc72a6f79c1d3622801591737745/0_51_3500_2100/master/3500.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=format&;fit=max&s=53b2d21360ac08689ea75fe1d99a70d3
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/a-midlands-labour-activist-has-faced-criticism-after-branding-the-new-home-secretary-a-coconut/

And this illustrates one problem with postal voting - how vulnerable to fraud it can be.
Spicerack; you appear to have put your own spin on Professor Maisie's link. It does not say that 70% of the turnout was postal - it says "turnout among postal voters was 69.4%." Which i read as 69.4% of those who could vote by post, did so.
Yes, Spicerack - those votes were counted early and it was obvious from the TV coverage that news had quickly got around.
There can be no doubt the postal votes were massively in Labour's favour.
SPICERACK, the report says, "So Labour voters were encouraged, more than any other year, to vote by post. It appeared to work – turnout among postal voters was 69.4%."

I read that as 69.4% of those who requested postal votes actually voted (hence turnout) and not that 69.4% of the votes were postal.
Apologies KEN, didn't see your post. Both used similar phrase too, spooky!
Ken4155 - the numbers work very well without spin. Voter turnout was 48.4% of a possible 100%, postal votes 69.4% of a possible 100% - that's a big jump!
Any thoughts on the other link I posted (increased vulnerability to fraud)?
Question Author
It all comes together.
It wasn't my spin on anything, ken. Here's the original Guardian story;

3. Postal votes
Labour realised its core supporters might suffer from voter fatigue after four years in which there have been two general elections, an EU referendum, and local and European elections. So Labour voters were encouraged, more than any other year, to vote by post. It appeared to work – 69.4% of all votes cast were by post.

61 to 80 of 104rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Labour Won Peterborough

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.