Excellent News......

[ToraToraTora]

Labour win only 1 out of 3 By-elections. Poor result for a party aspiring to win a General election.
By-election gains are nearly always lost at the following general election. Who will replace Rodders after he loses the next election?

[Bobbisox1]

He’s going to the Costa del Sol to open a flip flop shop before then ;0)

[Gromit]

Losing 2 out of 3 elections is not winning form.
More likely a hung election with Labour winning back seats in the North, and the LibDems gaining Tory seats in the South.

[Peter Pedant]

Labour win only 1 out of 3 By-elections. Poor result for a party aspiring to win a General election.

is the poster crazy ( crazier)

Tories win only 1 out of 3 By-elections. Poor result for a party aspiring to win a General election.

[ToraToraTora]

All of this is irrelevant anyway, everyone knows that whoever wins Basildon wins the GE!

[anneasquith]

One out of three , hardly anything to celebrate for the Tory’s.

[LadyCG]

Well it's certainly nothing to celebrate for Labour!!

[anneasquith]

Who said anything about Labour ?

[ToraToraTora]

I did anne, it's in the OP.

[anneasquith]

Maybe you should be more concerned about your own parties dreadful results ? One win, two lost .

[Zacs-Master]

They’re not quite a dreadful as some on here predicted tho.

[naomi24]

Mr Starmer says it's a 'cry for change'. The drama of that statement aside, I think he's being a bit previous.

[anneasquith]

Maybe not zac, but still a poor result .

[rowanwitch]

Think it's a reflection of general dissatisfaction , I would expect a poor turnout at the next GE, with apathy getting the greatest share of the electorate as a whole. Still think the conservatives will have a tiny majority afterwards, but doubt enough of a margin to manage a full term.

[ichkeria]

"
They’re not quite a dreadful as some on here predicted tho. "

I disagree: it's pretty terrible, and actually the fact that Uxbridge was held might be a curse, because it might tempt them into a false sense of optimism. Although among actual party activists, other than people trying to put a brave face on things here and elsewhere, I doubt that's the case. Whether you think the country's difficulties are the fault of the govt or not, the fact remains that voters ganged up on candidates from the ruling party (in Uxbridge too) and if that happens in a GE they face oblivion.
Of couse a general election is difterent: you tend to get a higher percentage of tactical voting in a bye-election, probably because it;s mainly the keener people who vote, A GE tends to bring out the "vote for a donkey in a red/blue rosette brigade" in greater numbers.
Also we'll presumably have had pre-election sweeteners and maybe the economy will be looking up.
I stlll feel that come what may, people have had enough of 13 years of Tory or mainly Tory rule.
But we will see.

[ToraToraTora]

12:32, says the SNP supporter! PMSL!

[retrocop]

It is an obvious indication that Uxbridge won the by election because it is a London borough and the people of Uxbridge will be affected by Labour Mayor Khan's prohibitive ULEZ scheme. People of all London boroughs and wards are totally up in arms and will vote with their feet come the GE.
It does not stop there though. The ULEZ scheme will encompass 600 square miles and will not just affect London. This is considerably larger than the 10 square miles in and around Birmingham.
It will affect drivers in the home counties as far as Beds and Essex and other counties on the fringes of London. If their car does not conform to his dictat they will pay £12.50 just to drive to the supermarket. Public transport is not a viable option in outlying areas. Starmer warned the Uxbridge Labour candidate before the local election to go easy on the ULEZ campaign. I appreciate the ULEZ is smaller area than the whole of the UK but can Labour afford to lose so many votes in the proposed ULEZ area. It won't stop there. If successful we will get Pay per Mile soon after ULEZ regardless of vehicle compliancy and that will spread

[Paul22118]

If he doesn't stop King Khan from expanding ULEZ in London, Labour will lose heavily many usual labour voters. There are thousands of diesel car owners in Greater London who will pay £12.50 EVERY day that they drive to work, the dentists, the GP, hospital, down the pub, doing a Tesco run etc etc etc. People won't wear it. Starmer must either back it and lose or force Khan to back off, even for five years, and then pick up the votes.
I live on the south coast and to visit close relatives in the southern area of London, just, will cost me I reckon £600 a year.

[retrocop]

Exactly Paul
ULEZ will be a vote loser as Uxbridge has indicated. If it was not for ULEZ Labour just might have got a treble

[tomus42]

The young lad that looks about 12 overturned a 20,000 majority, and the Uxbridge result was all about ULEZ apparently.

I admire your positivity though.

[ToraToraTora]

Yes I do think the whole ULEZ things is dropped bowloque. The Lib non dems will probably benefit but that also helps the Tories. Labour will struggle in Londinium so fewer seats in total. Though TBH they'll pick up some in Scotland unless the SNP can stop the rot.