|
Post by thevoid on Jun 7, 2019 17:11:02 GMT
Take last night's result alongside the Euro election and referendum and it highlights the significant Leave support who traditionally vote Labour. Which illustrates that the 'any vote not for Brexit Party is a vote for Remain' crap the other week for the bollocks it is.
It also keeps the pressure off Racist Grandpa internally, which means they remain unelectable- so all eyes now on who our next PM will be.
A pyrrhic victory for Labour.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jun 7, 2019 17:25:15 GMT
Take last night's result alongside the Euro election and referendum and it highlights the significant Leave support who traditionally vote Labour. Which illustrates that the 'any vote not for Brexit Party is a vote for Remain' crap the other week for the bollocks it is. It also keeps the pressure off Racist Grandpa internally, which means they remain unelectable- so all eyes now on who our next PM will be. A pyrrhic victory for Labour. It's interesting that the Labour PLP are yet to have the internal scrap that the Conservatives have been/are having. I noticed the Labour MP on the Politics show last night backed Thornberry in stating that Labour should have another referendum. Corbyn will have to ditch his EU scepticism to keep one lot happy and then upset the other side. John Mann was pushing upholding Brexit on the radio earlier and no doubt other Labour Brexiteers will be providing the other voice to counteract the Labour Remainers in coming days.
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 7, 2019 18:16:42 GMT
Wait a minute, people are just accepting the result & moving on? Shouldn't we be adding together different parties so that the losers are really the winners & the winners are really the losers? Shouldn't we be shouting about 'Russian interference'? Shouldn't we be demanding another vote because "people didn't know what they were voting for"? Shouldn't we be out protesting in the streets screaming "racist" & "fascist" at anyone who disagrees with us? I'm really not comfortable with just accepting it... Nazi's! Well on this thread alone people have counted up the votes for certain parties and declared that leaving the EU was the real winner, and now we have people saying it was a rigged election. It appears the crybaby snowflakes are on both sides of the argument, with plenty of excuses why the result should not be accepted.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 7, 2019 18:24:20 GMT
Speaker Johnny B has said there will be prorogation on his watch and rather than get angry, I think he's doing the Tories and No Dealer's a favour in the long run. That really would give cause for claims of foul play. I know that but he can't stop it, only the PM is required he/she asks the Queen. Bercow has no say whatsoever although there maybe one way but it's by no means a given. The PM can without any other person close parliament for as long as it takes. 7 years last time it happened during the civil war. It can happen but it wont, there will be a genuine constitutional crisis if it does. Is that what taking back control and democracy has become about then, some unelected leader declaring themselves a dictator for a few weeks? The world has genuinely gone mad.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 7, 2019 18:43:43 GMT
I know that but he can't stop it, only the PM is required he/she asks the Queen. Bercow has no say whatsoever although there maybe one way but it's by no means a given. The PM can without any other person close parliament for as long as it takes. 7 years last time it happened during the civil war. It can happen but it wont, there will be a genuine constitutional crisis if it does. Is that what taking back control and democracy has become about then, some unelected leader declaring themselves a dictator for a few weeks? The world has genuinely gone mad. It won't happen. It shouldn't even be considered, and wouldn't be if the cocks in parliament had any decency.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 7, 2019 18:56:05 GMT
Wait a minute, people are just accepting the result & moving on? Shouldn't we be adding together different parties so that the losers are really the winners & the winners are really the losers? Shouldn't we be shouting about 'Russian interference'? Shouldn't we be demanding another vote because "people didn't know what they were voting for"? Shouldn't we be out protesting in the streets screaming "racist" & "fascist" at anyone who disagrees with us? I'm really not comfortable with just accepting it... Nazi's! Well on this thread alone people have counted up the votes for certain parties and declared that leaving the EU was the real winner, and now we have people saying it was a rigged election. It appears the crybaby snowflakes are on both sides of the argument, with plenty of excuses why the result should not be accepted. Farage said all these things on Five Live this morning, I nearly choked on his hypocrisy!
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 7, 2019 18:57:50 GMT
It can happen but it wont, there will be a genuine constitutional crisis if it does. Is that what taking back control and democracy has become about then, some unelected leader declaring themselves a dictator for a few weeks? The world has genuinely gone mad. It won't happen. It shouldn't even be considered, and wouldn't be if the cocks in parliament had any decency. I don't disagree mate but the folly of the strong and stable Election of 2017 is partly to blame for that.
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Jun 7, 2019 19:12:57 GMT
I know that but he can't stop it, only the PM is required he/she asks the Queen. Bercow has no say whatsoever although there maybe one way but it's by no means a given. The PM can without any other person close parliament for as long as it takes. 7 years last time it happened during the civil war. It can happen but it wont, there will be a genuine constitutional crisis if it does. Is that what taking back control and democracy has become about then, some unelected leader declaring themselves a dictator for a few weeks?
The world has genuinely gone mad. Or is the unelected leader just implementing the will of the people as voted for in a democratic referendum?
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 7, 2019 19:15:07 GMT
It won't happen. It shouldn't even be considered, and wouldn't be if the cocks in parliament had any decency. I don't disagree mate but the folly of the strong and stable Election of 2017 is partly to blame for that. Folly or part of the charade?
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Jun 7, 2019 19:24:49 GMT
I know that but he can't stop it, only the PM is required he/she asks the Queen. Bercow has no say whatsoever although there maybe one way but it's by no means a given. The PM can without any other person close parliament for as long as it takes. 7 years last time it happened during the civil war. It can happen but it wont, there will be a genuine constitutional crisis if it does. Is that what taking back control and democracy has become about then, some unelected leader declaring themselves a dictator for a few weeks? The world has genuinely gone mad. I agree it's bizarre I'm not saying it's a good idea, just that because of betrayal an MP has mentioned it as a possibility !
|
|
|
Post by auntiegeorge on Jun 7, 2019 20:36:29 GMT
All this talk of unelected leaders....
Remember Jim Callaghan and Gordon Brown?
Some people have short memories or chose what they want to remember.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 7, 2019 20:59:21 GMT
All this talk of unelected leaders.... Remember Jim Callaghan and Gordon Brown? Some people have short memories or chose what they want to remember. I dunno AG. We've had a women unelected by the masses (or even the members of her own party) effectively lose a subsequent election that she called, now handing over to another leader who wouldn't have faced a public vote who may prorogue a Parliament? That's unprecedented and exceptionally dangerous whatever side of the divide you sit, surely?
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Jun 7, 2019 22:07:08 GMT
I know that but he can't stop it, only the PM is required he/she asks the Queen. Bercow has no say whatsoever although there maybe one way but it's by no means a given. The PM can without any other person close parliament for as long as it takes. 7 years last time it happened during the civil war. It can happen but it wont, there will be a genuine constitutional crisis if it does. Is that what taking back control and democracy has become about then, some unelected leader declaring themselves a dictator for a few weeks? The world has genuinely gone mad. Bercow did this months ago kept in place despite abuse claims against him so he can hinder brexit.
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jun 8, 2019 0:22:21 GMT
I see the labour activist Tariq Mahmood who was jailed for vote rigging with postal votes was at the count last night wearing a labour rosette, labour members, criminals and Peterborough have a couple of things in common then... Well I’ll say it nobody else will labour have history of voter fraud in areas with a large Asian population Here he is:
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jun 8, 2019 0:28:06 GMT
If these postal votes are legit, then the Labour count should average out the same as the ballot vote.
|
|
|
Post by starkiller on Jun 8, 2019 3:26:17 GMT
I see the labour activist Tariq Mahmood who was jailed for vote rigging with postal votes was at the count last night wearing a labour rosette, labour members, criminals and Peterborough have a couple of things in common then... Well I’ll say it nobody else will labour have history of voter fraud in areas with a large Asian population Well you're not allowed to mention it, just like grooming gangs. Also you're not allowed to mention the appeal of anti-semitic Labour to certain groups. Oh, as well as you are not allowed to mention the real reason for the increase in violent anti-semitism in Germany - the media will avoid this elephant in the room so that readers/listeners have the mistaken image of lots of white Germans as in the 1930s.
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 8, 2019 6:00:06 GMT
If these postal votes are legit, then the Labour count should average out the same as the ballot vote. I'm not sure what that means exactly. Do you mean that is the are legit then 30% of the postal votes should be for Labour, because 30% of the overall votes were for Labour?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 8, 2019 6:57:07 GMT
If these postal votes are legit, then the Labour count should average out the same as the ballot vote. I'm not sure what that means exactly. Do you mean that is the are legit then 30% of the postal votes should be for Labour, because 30% of the overall votes were for Labour? Yes
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Jun 8, 2019 7:04:42 GMT
If these postal votes are legit, then the Labour count should average out the same as the ballot vote. I'm not sure what that means exactly. Do you mean that is the are legit then 30% of the postal votes should be for Labour, because 30% of the overall votes were for Labour? I don't know anything about the make up of postal votes but is it not a reasonable assumption to make that the postal votes and actual votes should be roughly equate to the actual result?
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 8, 2019 7:51:02 GMT
I'm not sure what that means exactly. Do you mean that is the are legit then 30% of the postal votes should be for Labour, because 30% of the overall votes were for Labour? I don't know anything about the make up of postal votes but is it not a reasonable assumption to make that the postal votes and actual votes should be roughly equate to the actual result? Not particularly. That would be like expecting every ward within a constituency to have roughly the same voting pattern as the overall outcome, whereas they will be different based on the demographic within each ward. Typically I would expect postal votes to be more anti-no deal Brexit at this time, given the most obvious reason for postal voting would be that you live abroad and on the whole people living abroad want to avoid a no deal Brexit. But there's a lot of local factors that could be involved as well (I don't know Peterborough particularly well) - if there is a big military presence in a constituency then I assume a lot of the troops vote by post. Also I imagine the elderly are more likely to vote by post as well.
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Jun 8, 2019 8:18:08 GMT
I was led to believe the Brexit Party candidate was a strong one ,but if this was the best they could come up with to fight for their first Westminster seat he makes Raab look intelligent…
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Jun 8, 2019 8:45:48 GMT
Let's be honest, if there was a Remain Party(with basically one policy), and they nearly won a bi-election after only being in existence for a few months, the media would take this as proof that there was a demand to overturn Brexit.
The calls for a second referendum would be deafening.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jun 8, 2019 9:02:34 GMT
Let's be honest, if there was a Remain Party(with basically one policy), There is one, they're called Chan... Oh.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 8, 2019 9:05:29 GMT
Let's be honest, if there was a Remain Party(with basically one policy), and they nearly won a bi-election after only being in existence for a few months, the media would take this as proof that there was a demand to overturn Brexit. The calls for a second referendum would be deafening. You mean change with there 11mps oh sorry make that 5 after the other 6 jumped the sinking ship
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 8, 2019 9:17:57 GMT
I don't know anything about the make up of postal votes but is it not a reasonable assumption to make that the postal votes and actual votes should be roughly equate to the actual result? Not particularly. That would be like expecting every ward within a constituency to have roughly the same voting pattern as the overall outcome, whereas they will be different based on the demographic within each ward. Typically I would expect postal votes to be more anti-no deal Brexit at this time, given the most obvious reason for postal voting would be that you live abroad and on the whole people living abroad want to avoid a no deal Brexit. But there's a lot of local factors that could be involved as well (I don't know Peterborough particularly well) - if there is a big military presence in a constituency then I assume a lot of the troops vote by post. Also I imagine the elderly are more likely to vote by post as well. There are a couple of wards in Peterborough that have a very large Asian majority There is a prominent labour Asian activist that has already been jailed for vote rigging postal vote In particular I will leave you to make your own interpretation of the facts with the information above
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 8, 2019 9:35:59 GMT
Not particularly. That would be like expecting every ward within a constituency to have roughly the same voting pattern as the overall outcome, whereas they will be different based on the demographic within each ward. Typically I would expect postal votes to be more anti-no deal Brexit at this time, given the most obvious reason for postal voting would be that you live abroad and on the whole people living abroad want to avoid a no deal Brexit. But there's a lot of local factors that could be involved as well (I don't know Peterborough particularly well) - if there is a big military presence in a constituency then I assume a lot of the troops vote by post. Also I imagine the elderly are more likely to vote by post as well. There are a couple of wards in Peterborough that have a very large Asian majority There is a prominent labour Asian activist that has already been jailed for vote rigging postal vote In particular I will leave you to make your own interpretation of the facts with the information above My interpretation is that your conflating two things that don't have anything to do with each other. I imagine the very large Asian/Asian-British majority in those wards would've mainly voted in person, given that they live there. I'm sure there would've been a few elderly postal voters, and also people who were out of the area on the day of the election. So if there's a significantly higher proportion of postal voters in those two wards then I can see the crossover between the two - is that the case?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Jun 8, 2019 10:04:12 GMT
There are a couple of wards in Peterborough that have a very large Asian majority There is a prominent labour Asian activist that has already been jailed for vote rigging postal vote In particular I will leave you to make your own interpretation of the facts with the information above My interpretation is that your conflating two things that don't have anything to do with each other. I imagine the very large Asian/Asian-British majority in those wards would've mainly voted in person, given that they live there. I'm sure there would've been a few elderly postal voters, and also people who were out of the area on the day of the election. So if there's a significantly higher proportion of postal voters in those two wards then I can see the crossover between the two - is that the case? In this election it is not possible to ascertain the exact percentage of postal votes for each ward as this information has not been released if ever it will be as I have doubts on that I am merely going on the previous election where the person in question was charged and convicted in a court of law As you seem intent on defending the indefensible what is your opinion on a individual convicted of voter fraud being allowed to remain a member of the Labour Party What is your opinion on the for said Labour Party member and activist sharing a platform and being allowed to campaign publicly and maybe not so publicly The Labour Party morality lower than a snakes foreskin
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jun 8, 2019 10:49:31 GMT
All this talk of unelected leaders.... Remember Jim Callaghan and Gordon Brown? Some people have short memories or chose what they want to remember. I dunno AG. We've had a women unelected by the masses (or even the members of her own party) effectively lose a subsequent election that she called, now handing over to another leader who wouldn't have faced a public vote who may prorogue a Parliament? That's unprecedented and exceptionally dangerous whatever side of the divide you sit, surely? Not as dangerous as having a Marxist PM
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jun 8, 2019 10:58:33 GMT
I dunno AG. We've had a women unelected by the masses (or even the members of her own party) effectively lose a subsequent election that she called, now handing over to another leader who wouldn't have faced a public vote who may prorogue a Parliament? That's unprecedented and exceptionally dangerous whatever side of the divide you sit, surely? Not as dangerous as having a Marxist PM What about a daft racist, proven lying bastard, serial philanderer as the next PM, as is the current favourite?
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 8, 2019 11:02:19 GMT
My interpretation is that your conflating two things that don't have anything to do with each other. I imagine the very large Asian/Asian-British majority in those wards would've mainly voted in person, given that they live there. I'm sure there would've been a few elderly postal voters, and also people who were out of the area on the day of the election. So if there's a significantly higher proportion of postal voters in those two wards then I can see the crossover between the two - is that the case? In this election it is not possible to ascertain the exact percentage of postal votes for each ward as this information has not been released if ever it will be as I have doubts on that I am merely going on the previous election where the person in question was charged and convicted in a court of law As you seem intent on defending the indefensible what is your opinion on a individual convicted of voter fraud being allowed to remain a member of the Labour Party What is your opinion on the for said Labour Party member and activist sharing a platform and being allowed to campaign publicly and maybe not so publicly The Labour Party morality lower than a snakes foreskin What is 'the indefensible' I am defending here? As for this guy still campaigning for Labour, it's not a good look but they took the risk in having him back into the party. As far as I know they haven't broke any rules in allowing him back in, even if I wouldn't want him around if I was Labour member in Peterborough. For what it's worth, I think there should be a rule stating people with criminal convictions based around elections (electoral fraud, voter intimidation etc) should be barred from being involved in elections.
|
|