My feed

to access all these features


Something to celebrate?

34 replies

minimathsmouse · 04/05/2012 08:32

Labour have won a string of victories in English and Welsh local elections - with shadow ministers claiming Ed Miliband is now on course for No 10. Wine

OP posts:
crazynanna · 04/05/2012 08:33

Smile Nice to wake up to!

minimathsmouse · 04/05/2012 08:40

Tis indeed a good day :)

OP posts:
CogitoErgoSometimes · 04/05/2012 09:02

I think they've done well but that's traditionally what happens mid-term. Labour lost very heavily in the last local elections and I think we're pretty much back to the pre 2008 picture. Lib-Dems have really bombed, though.

minimathsmouse · 04/05/2012 09:46

The latest seems to be 40% to labour

OP posts:
claig · 04/05/2012 09:56

It was a good result for Labour. However, it was a very low turnout and the question is can Labour keep those voters or were some of the votes in part a protest vote to send a message to the Coalition?

Nancy66 · 04/05/2012 10:14

A bit of an ambitious statement. As Claig said - shockingly low turn-out and a government performing badly in local elections mid-term is nothing new.

MrPants · 04/05/2012 11:11

Two things need to be taken into consideration with this result though. Over the course of the 2007 and 2008 local elections, the Labour party lost over 830 councillors. During the same elections, the Tories added over 1160 councillors to their ranks. It was always likely that, after ditching the hapless Brown, being in opposition, starting from such a low base, having the cuts in spending starting to take effect and the 'Omni-shambles', Labour would gain at the Tories expense this time around. Under these circumstances (Labour up around 700, Tories down around 500-600), whether or not this is a spectacular gain remains to be seen.

Secondly, with such a low turnout (32%), it's difficult to draw conclusions about how any general election will pan out. It's a fact of life that turnout will be around double for a GE, there will be more tactical voting, there are the upcoming boundary changes and people will (generally) vote less for the protest parties / independents (including UKIP / BNP etc.).

I wouldn't go expecting a nailed on Miliband victory at the next GE just yet - I've been saying to friends for some time now that if the economy shows any signs of improvement before the GE, he's toast.

buggyRunner · 04/05/2012 11:15

I swear down that I have no clue who I would vote for in the next general election- yet def not lib dem. Do not like milliband though - would vote for a woman either party.

EdithWeston · 04/05/2012 11:18

The Lib Dems seem to have had the biggest losses, and the governing party always seems to take losses in mid-term local elections.

Labour have done well, but not game-changingly so; unless they also see off the SNP in Scotland (when will those results start appearing?)

claig · 04/05/2012 11:20

If Osborne manages to turn the economy round, then by the time of the next election, the mood will have changed and the Coalition will be more popular. Even the LibDems will recover as people will vote for them in order to soften a rightward drift of the Tories. People will forget some of the blunders and errors and look forward to the future, and a united LibDem, Tory Coalition may not seem like a bad choice to the majority of people.

claig · 04/05/2012 11:22

I personally like having a LibDem voice in the government. It gives balance and a different perspective. I hope they remain together.

minimathsmouse · 04/05/2012 12:04

Secondly, with such a low turnout (32%) I am not as certain as you that we will see a significantly higher percentage turn out at GE. Voting is in decline because non of the major parties are seen as credible. I think people are finding other ways to voice their opinion.

Osborne turn the economy round, Iv'e heard he's ace at folding towels, we'll see Smile

OP posts:
claig · 04/05/2012 12:13

'I've heard he's ace at folding towels'

I would expect no less from a Bullingdonian, but it is his expertise on matters financial for which he is rightly respected.

daffodilly2 · 04/05/2012 15:18

Think it says the national mood is not for the coalition at the moment but is that sadly because the economy is in the doldrums or because they don't like their ideology.

I think it is the former unfortunately.

minimathsmouse · 04/05/2012 15:25

I think its a lot of sabre rattling Dilly. You are probably right, people have very short memories and many are fickle.

OP posts:
claig · 04/05/2012 16:49

Very good speech by Ed Miliband in Southampton and to the Sky reporter. He looks genuine and is humble not arrogant. Says he wants to gain the trust of the voters, show them that not all parties are the same, that Britain can change for the better. Very good stuff. If he carries on like this, the Tories could be in trouble - particularly if they are seen as out of touch.

claig · 04/05/2012 16:50

Says he wants to show them that he is on the people's side. Exactly the right stuff to say.

claig · 04/05/2012 17:01

Says he wants to reach out to the 2/3rds of people who didn't vote at all, and show them that ii is worth voting and that all parties are not the same.

Says Labour are beginning to make a comeback in the South of England where they were previously defeated.

It will be interesting to see what Cameron says about the results later.

grimbletart · 04/05/2012 19:09

Obvious it was going to happen. Governments, bankers, families, individuals have been spending money they don't have for years, living in some sort of bubble of unreality. When the party ends and the government (and it would have been whichever party got in) finally confronts reality and says we have to get a handle on unsustainable debt, people run way from reality again...

minimathsmouse · 04/05/2012 19:17

Its just amazing how clever the media and the politicians are, people really believe this

"individuals have been spending money they don't have for years"

Workers lives have been debt financed because of stagnating wages and higher living costs. Banks lent 50 times the money they had in capital, mostly to other banks and capitalists/wealthy individuals so they could invest in financial products rather than invest in the real economy and create jobs and all of sudden, its a the little guy who's to blame.

OP posts:
claig · 04/05/2012 20:02

'and all of sudden, its a the little guy who's to blame'

the big guy always blames it on the little guy. The debt bubble was deliberate, just like many stock market bubbles are, so that the big guy can pull the plug when he feels like.

minimathsmouse · 04/05/2012 20:23

I wonder where all the wealth washes up?

OP posts:
claig · 04/05/2012 20:27

There are some parties who want zero growth and even negative growth.
They say that is teh only way that is "sustainable", the only way that will "save the planet".

They want the little guy to have no growth, they want to stunt the little guy's growth. How are they going to achieve that if the little guy is thriving and prospering and the economy is booming? The only way to achieve that is "austerity". That slows the little guy down. But how can you implement austerity? You can't unless there is a financial crash which makes austerity imperative.

So there is a debt bubble and the little guy thinks he never had it so good. Then the big guy stops the music and some big guys say they are too big to fail. So the little guy has to bail the big guy out and the big guys then impose austerity on the little guy. And the little guy has zero growth and even negative growth and maybe negative equity too, and then the big guy tells the little guy that his pension will be cut and he has to work till he drops too, if there is work to do when the little guy passes 60 in the era of the big guy's negative growth.

claig · 04/05/2012 20:28

'I wonder where all the wealth washes up?'

In the pockets of the big guys. They still get bonuses, they still drink champagne.

claig · 04/05/2012 20:35

They're not short of a bob or too. They're even richer than they were before, and as the little guy gets poorer under zero growth and negative growth, the big guy's money goes even further, his relative wealth increases as the little guy's wealth decreases. And teh big guy tells teh little guy not to worry, because that's the way it's got to be, that he has to cut back and cut growth in order to be "sustainable". The big guy says we've passed the "tipping point", there's no turning back dammit, don't you want to "save the planit"?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.