Labour and Ukip suffer as Tories make big gains

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Votes are being counted for local elections in parts of England and the whole of Scotland and Wales.

A total of 4,851 seats in 88 councils are up for grabs. Six devolved regions have also been selecting mayors for the first time.

Early results gave Theresa May a major boost, with the Conservatives picking up more than 550 councillors and gaining control of 11 authorities.
Labour forfeited more than 300 council seats but lost control of Glasgow and suffered reverses in Welsh strongholds
Conservative Ben Houchen became the first elected mayor of Tees Valley, a Labour north-east heartland, while Conservative Andy Street became the first West Midlands metropolitan mayor, beating Labour's Sion Simon
Former Labour cabinet minister Andy Burnham won the mayoral contest in Greater Manchester
The Liberal Democrats failed to break through against the Tories in south-west England but have made advances in some General Election target seats like Eastleigh and Wells
Ukip shed 63 seats, picking up a solitary councillor in Lancashire

Link

Fingers crossed that UKIP suffers similarly in the upcoming general election. I doubt that will happen though.

[Dartzap]

UKIP can't suffer similarly at the General -they don't have any MP's to boot!

They, uh, only have one place to be heard now....and that's in Brussels. Oh the irony!

[Crazedwraith]

The results of the general are going to be similarly unpretty.

[Zaune]

I feel absolutely no guilt in admitting I didn't even bother turning out to vote. Partly because I couldn't, having neglected to update my address details with the electoral register, but mostly because local elections in this country are completely and utterly pointless.

Wake me for the general election. That I will bother to turn out for, even if it's just to kick the Conservative candidate in the groin.

[madd0ct0r]

Results had dropped to control of five councils not eleven by time of posting.

But yeah. Ukip voters all folded back to Tories for the negotiations. Some Labour voters muttering they'll do the same. And I missed the local green party meeting last week. Damit.


Zane -you'd better register than.

[Crazedwraith]

Brightside-ish for Labour is that their guy became greater manchester mayor. (With powers and shit, Zaune)

And less bright new is that turnout for that just shy of 30%.

[Darth Tanner]

What they do have is 3.8m votes that will likely go to the Tories... its all set to be a blood bath with the Tories massively expanding their majority. UKIP have no purposes now they have more or less fufilled their objective, Nuttall is trying to find new purposes by going anti Islam but that will make them a fringe BNP like party of no relevance.

I'm wondering if Corbyn will actually make it to the election now, he is conspicuous by his absence at this point.

[streetad]

Brightside-ish for Labour is that their guy became greater manchester mayor. (With powers and shit, Zaune)

And less bright new is that turnout for that just shy of 30%.

Burnham is very much on the moderate centre-left though and would certainly be described by those around Corbyn as a 'Blairite'. That particular result could also be used to demonstrate that Labour would be more electable without Corbyn.

The UKIP vote has predictably collapsed now they have got what they want and no longer have a purpose - this vote has almost all swung to the Tories. What will be worrying for Labour is that a large chunk of those people were 'cultural' Labour voters (working class, not actually particularly left wing but would never traditionally have considered voting conservative). That tribalism seems to have gone and they certainly aren't going back to Labour.

The Tories have had an absolute surge in Scotland, where the vote seems to be crystallising very strongly along Unionist vs Nationalist lines. Given that the last council elections were before the traditional Labour vote migrated en-masse to the SNP, the Nationalists will be alarmed that they didn't do much better than they did.

The other surprise is the lack of traction that the Lib Dems have got. Their anti-brexit message isn't proving to be the vote-winner a lot of people (including myself) thought it would be.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Brightside-ish for Labour is that their guy became greater manchester mayor. (With powers and shit, Zaune)

And less bright new is that turnout for that just shy of 30%.

Burnham is very much on the moderate centre-left though and would certainly be described by those around Corbyn as a 'Blairite'. That particular result could also be used to demonstrate that Labour would be more electable without Corbyn.

The UKIP vote has predictably collapsed now they have got what they want and no longer have a purpose - this vote has almost all swung to the Tories. What will be worrying for Labour is that a large chunk of those people were 'cultural' Labour voters (working class, not actually particularly left wing but would never traditionally have considered voting conservative). That tribalism seems to have gone and they certainly aren't going back to Labour.

The Tories have had an absolute surge in Scotland, where the vote seems to be crystallising very strongly along Unionist vs Nationalist lines. Given that the last council elections were before the traditional Labour vote migrated en-masse to the SNP, the Nationalists will be alarmed that they didn't do much better than they did.

The other surprise is the lack of traction that the Lib Dems have got. Their anti-brexit message isn't proving to be the vote-winner a lot of people (including myself) thought it would be.

The problem the Lib Dems have is that they were completely annihilated at the last election, right now they have a total of 9 MPs. So the best they can hope for this time around is that they'll return to double-digit numbers.

Interestingly, there was no Labour candidate in my constituency- just Tories, Lib Dem and UKIP.

[Simon_Jester]

British politics is not my strong suit. Can someone try to provide a compact explanation addressing the following...?

Okay, so the Tories organized a referendum on Brexit. Then they wobbled around, their prime minister resigned rather than carry out Brexit, they are doing an unimpressive job OF handling Brexit.

Why are they winning seats?

[Tribble]

British politics is not my strong suit. Can someone try to provide a compact explanation addressing the following...?

Okay, so the Tories organized a referendum on Brexit. Then they wobbled around, their prime minister resigned rather than carry out Brexit, they are doing an unimpressive job OF handling Brexit.

Why are they winning seats?

A combo of factors IMO, including but not limited to

The Liberal Democrats are effectively shattered atm, and not really in play.
Labour is more or less still in the midst of an internal war between Blairites and Corybn supporters.
The vast majority of UKIP voters are almost certainly going to vote Conservative to make sure Brexit stays on track.
The SNP will likely win the majority of seats in Scotland, not a good thing for Labour or Liberal Democrats.
51.9% voted for Brexit, and those that did tended to be more motivated to show up and vote than the Remain group. In terms of ridings rather than actual population, IIRC the results were even more in favour of Brexit.
Since Article 50 has been triggered, there is more of a sense that Brexit is inevitable. Some voters may prefer to give Conservatives a majority just to ensure that the other parties don't deliberately sabotage things.
The PM kept her promise to trigger Article 50, despite opposition. For some people, even if they disagree with her position that still matters. Shows "integrity" and whatnot.
Some believe that with a more solid Conservative majority the PM may not have to rely as much on more extreme party members, and soften her position accordingly.
And perhaps most importantly, due to First Past the Post the Conservatives only need ~37-40% of the vote to win a majority of seats. With more or less a split vote on those who oppose the Conservatives, particularly since Corbyn is trying to shift Labour to the left.

Basically, the other parties are facing a large uphill battle and at this point seem unlikely to win. While it is certainly a gamble on May's part, so far it appears to be working.

[streetad]

British politics is not my strong suit. Can someone try to provide a compact explanation addressing the following...?

Okay, so the Tories organized a referendum on Brexit. Then they wobbled around, their prime minister resigned rather than carry out Brexit, they are doing an unimpressive job OF handling Brexit.

Why are they winning seats?

If you were to assume Brexit was the only factor, what's important to know is that the 'Remain' support is disproportionately bunched up in a smaller number of constituencies than the 'Leave' support, which is more evenly spread about the country. If a referendum had been held constituency by constituency using First Past The Post (like a general election) rather than as a nationwide vote, Leave would have won in a landslide.

The hardline, seemingly high-handed rhetoric coming out of Brussels with regards to exit negotiations is also not helpful for UK 'remainers' as it is easy to portray as 'bullying' and is entrenching people in their existing positions.

Of course in the real world Brexit is not the only factor. Others include the uselessness of the opposition, the fact that this is actually a local election influenced by local issues like traffic and getting your bins collected on time, and up here in Scotland, everything being viewed through the lens of the independence question. The SNP are obsessed with obtaining another referendum to the extent of not having passed any actual legislation in over a year for fear of alienating any of their supporters - this of course makes every election about independence np matter what other issues are at stake.

[The Romulan Republic]

Britain is probably the only first world country that makes America's politics look almost rational by comparison, these days.

In a sane world, the conservatives would be utterly obliterated after the Brexit catastrophe. And if their opposition is that worthless... well, there isn't really much to lose by forming some new parties. Even if they don't win, well... you'll just be stuck with a Conservative majority anyway, right?

[K. A. Pital]

Britain is probably the only first world country that makes America's politics look almost rational by comparison, these days.

In a sane world, the conservatives would be utterly obliterated after the Brexit catastrophe. And if their opposition is that worthless... well, there isn't really much to lose by forming some new parties. Even if they don't win, well... you'll just be stuck with a Conservative majority anyway, right?

Brexit is not a catastrophe from a nationalist point of view. British nationalists (and all the Empire-loving revanchists) are drooling over Brexit day and night. It is sovereignity restored. It shows 'em suits from Brussels! It is Britain forging its own future, without listening to others. A nationalist dream come true.

Moreover, a great many politicians have totally discredited internationalism by showing internationalism not as working-class solidarity, but as laissez-faire capitalistic paradise where corporations ignore borders and laws to get cheap slave-like labour both abroad and at home, and capital rules supreme.

Nationalism has been fed for years (if not decades). People had been told that national self-determination is a very important thing when Yugoslavia and the USSR were dismembered - Kosovo, former Republics, etc. What could be more important than a nation?

This is just the idea coming to a full circle. Nationalist ideas are now playing a big role in the colonial metropole nations.

[The Romulan Republic]

Britain is probably the only first world country that makes America's politics look almost rational by comparison, these days.

In a sane world, the conservatives would be utterly obliterated after the Brexit catastrophe. And if their opposition is that worthless... well, there isn't really much to lose by forming some new parties. Even if they don't win, well... you'll just be stuck with a Conservative majority anyway, right?

Brexit is not a catastrophe from a nationalist point of view. British nationalists (and all the Empire-loving revanchists) are drooling over Brexit day and night. It is sovereignity restored. It shows 'em suits from Brussels! It is Britain forging its own future, without listening to others. A nationalist dream come true.

Unless their concept of British nationality extends only to England, it may very well prove to be a disaster when Scotland and Ireland decide to flee the sinking ship.

But of course, ideologues shooting themselves in the foot is nothing new.

Moreover, a great many politicians have totally discredited internationalism by showing internationalism not as working-class solidarity, but as laissez-faire capitalistic paradise where corporations ignore borders and laws to get cheap slave-like labour both abroad and at home, and capital rules supreme.

Yes, I'm aware that you have an unfortunate tendency to equate globalism and capitalism, and that your apparent tunnel vision on opposing capitalism tends to lead you into an ideologically contradictory sympathy with Alt. Rightist Neo-Fascist view points.

Nationalism has been fed for years (if not decades). People had been told that national self-determination is a very important thing when Yugoslavia and the USSR were dismembered - Kosovo, former Republics, etc. What could be more important than a nation?

A nation is an abstract creation which is only as useful insofar as it improves conditions for the people, and the ideology of nationalism serves little purpose but to divide the world into "us" and "them", with "us" on a pedestal and "them" underneath.

It is very important, but only in the sense that a plague is very important.

This is just the idea coming to a full circle. Nationalist ideas are now playing a big role in the colonial metropole nations.

To the serious detriment of our liberties, our security, and our democratic institutions, yes.

[ray245]

Yes, I'm aware that you have an unfortunate tendency to equate globalism and capitalism, and that your apparent tunnel vision on opposing capitalism tends to lead you into an ideologically contradictory sympathy with Alt. Rightist Neo-Fascist view points.

Globalism is pretty much capitalism in which freedom of movement mostly refers to the freedom to move wealth. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, there haven't been an alternative force that could challenge the capitalistic definition of globalism.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yes, I'm aware that you have an unfortunate tendency to equate globalism and capitalism, and that your apparent tunnel vision on opposing capitalism tends to lead you into an ideologically contradictory sympathy with Alt. Rightist Neo-Fascist view points.

Globalism is pretty much capitalism in which freedom of movement mostly refers to the freedom to move wealth. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, there haven't been an alternative force that could challenge the capitalistic definition of globalism.

There are somewhat differing definitions of globalism. That one has in recent times been dominant does not preclude the possibility of other interpretations.

I would think that any system or philosophy which favours greater cooperation/communication across international lines could be considered "globalist".

In any case, it is a cruel irony to reject immigrants, including refugees (who can often be counted among the foremost victims of, and the foremost scapegoats for, capitalism's excesses), in the name of opposing global capitalism- and the unfortunate truth is that this sort of xenophobia is a major impetus behind, and result of, Brexit and similar nationalist movements and policies.

The people pushing Brexit are, by and large, not socialists of any stripe, and are not pursuing a fundamentally anti-capitalist agenda. They are Right-wingers who are scapegoating foreigners for the lack of jobs created by corrupt and greedy corporations.

Policies like Brexit are, in part, a game of divide and conquer by the corrupt rich against the poor.

[Crazedwraith]

Britain is probably the only first world country that makes America's politics look almost rational by comparison, these days.

In a sane world, the conservatives would be utterly obliterated after the Brexit catastrophe. And if their opposition is that worthless... well, there isn't really much to lose by forming some new parties. Even if they don't win, well... you'll just be stuck with a Conservative majority anyway, right?

In a sense the Brexit catastrophe hasn't happened yet. We're not out and the side effects so far is pretty much restricted to rhetoric, and rising prices/job losses for the pound going down. To a brexiteer it's all to easy to wave that away as brussels trying to keep them down and idiot remoaners blaming every little thing of brexit.

Plus Brexit is not the only issue in the election. The Tories have got it built in to a wider set of issues and policies. I have no idea what the Labour agenda is. Only the Lib Dem have remain (or rather another vote on it) as a big plank of their election policy and remainers aren't going to uniformly cote to that.

Plus these were location elections so Brexit shouldn't have been a factor at all. (in theory only of course, nation issues do still play a role to people's thinking)

Also I would like to register a kneejerk reaction that weren't not nearly as bad as Americans and you don't foreigners don't get to say bad things about us That's only for us. But then I remember one of our politicians recently said of course we'd consider preemptive nuclear attack in some circumstance.

[The Romulan Republic]

If the Republicans gain more seats in Congress in 2018, then you can look down on America all you please.

Of course, if that happens, I might just be taking up alcoholism.

[ray245]

There are somewhat differing definitions of globalism. That one has in recent times been dominant does not preclude the possibility of other interpretations.

I would think that any system or philosophy which favours greater cooperation/communication across international lines could be considered "globalist".

In any case, it is a cruel irony to reject immigrants, including refugees (who can often be counted among the foremost victims of, and the foremost scapegoats for, capitalism's excesses), in the name of opposing global capitalism- and the unfortunate truth is that this sort of xenophobia is a major impetus behind, and result of, Brexit and similar nationalist movements and policies.

The people pushing Brexit are, by and large, not socialists of any stripe, and are not pursuing a fundamentally anti-capitalist agenda. They are Right-wingers who are scapegoating foreigners for the lack of jobs created by corrupt and greedy corporations.

Policies like Brexit are, in part, a game of divide and conquer by the corrupt rich against the poor.

But some of the people that did vote for Brexit are people that did suffer from globalism in a sense. Not everyone is capable of gaining the kind of white-collar skillsets heavily valued in the modern globalist economy. The failure of globalism to really resolve the problem for the blue-collar workers in developed countries is going to produce a situation that allows things like Brexit, Trump, and Le Pen to rise to power.

[The Romulan Republic]

There are somewhat differing definitions of globalism. That one has in recent times been dominant does not preclude the possibility of other interpretations.

I would think that any system or philosophy which favours greater cooperation/communication across international lines could be considered "globalist".

In any case, it is a cruel irony to reject immigrants, including refugees (who can often be counted among the foremost victims of, and the foremost scapegoats for, capitalism's excesses), in the name of opposing global capitalism- and the unfortunate truth is that this sort of xenophobia is a major impetus behind, and result of, Brexit and similar nationalist movements and policies.

The people pushing Brexit are, by and large, not socialists of any stripe, and are not pursuing a fundamentally anti-capitalist agenda. They are Right-wingers who are scapegoating foreigners for the lack of jobs created by corrupt and greedy corporations.

Policies like Brexit are, in part, a game of divide and conquer by the corrupt rich against the poor.

But some of the people that did vote for Brexit are people that did suffer from globalism in a sense. Not everyone is capable of gaining the kind of white-collar skillsets heavily valued in the modern globalist economy. The failure of globalism to really resolve the problem for the blue-collar workers in developed countries is going to produce a situation that allows things like Brexit, Trump, and Le Pen to rise to power.

That's all true, but its also somewhat irrelevant to my point, which is that Brexit isn't really about helping those people. Its more about distracting them from what's actually screwing them over with foreign scapegoats- often people even more disadvantaged than they are.

[ray245]

But some of the people that did vote for Brexit are people that did suffer from globalism in a sense. Not everyone is capable of gaining the kind of white-collar skillsets heavily valued in the modern globalist economy. The failure of globalism to really resolve the problem for the blue-collar workers in developed countries is going to produce a situation that allows things like Brexit, Trump, and Le Pen to rise to power.

That's all true, but its also somewhat irrelevant to my point, which is that Brexit isn't really about helping those people. Its more about distracting them from what's actually screwing them over with foreign scapegoats- often people even more disadvantaged than they are.[/quote]

That's because their legit "left-wing" option has also jumped onboard the globalist train a long time ago. They used to embrace parties like Labour, but after years of disappointment, I am not surprised they took a "fuck it" option.

[The Romulan Republic]

A "fuck it" option is a very good way to put it. And in choosing so, they have only further harmed their own interests, along with a great many other peoples'.

Well, what we need is a strong progressive option, one that favours fair trade over free trade but welcomes international cooperation on crises that require a global response, and which welcomes diversity and immigration. Bernie Sanders offered something close to that in the US primary, and his defeat in the primary is one of the biggest missed opportunities, I suspect, in recent times. Hopefully progressives in America will continue to build on that, with or without another Bernie candidacy, rather than giving up and opting for cynical and self-destructive actions.

Unfortunately, if there is a basis for a comparable movement in the UK right now, I am unaware of it.

Edit: I had thought that Corbyn might fill the role of a "British Bernie Sanders" at first, but from what I've seen, he is both more extreme in his views, and less effective a politician.

[ray245]

A "fuck it" option is a very good way to put it. And in choosing so, they have only further harmed their own interests, along with a great many other peoples'.

Well, what we need is a strong progressive option, one that favours fair trade over free trade but welcomes international cooperation on crises that require a global response, and which welcomes diversity and immigration. Bernie Sanders offered something close to that in the US primary, and his defeat in the primary is one of the biggest missed opportunities, I suspect, in recent times. Hopefully progressives in America will continue to build on that, with or without another Bernie candidacy, rather than giving up and opting for cynical and self-destructive actions.

Unfortunately, if there is a basis for a comparable movement in the UK right now, I am unaware of it.

Edit: I had thought that Corbyn might fill the role of a "British Bernie Sanders" at first, but from what I've seen, he is both more extreme in his views, and less effective a politician.

But the point is many progressive have been extremely complacent for a very long time. There is a tendency by parties like New Labour to take their support for granted, and assuming that the blue-collar workers from the northern region will somehow always vote for Labour.

Corbyn belongs to the Bennites of the Labour party, which is something quite tainted in modern British politics. Although Tony Benn himself would probably be favour of Brexit, although for a different reason.

Labour desperately needs to rebuild their image as a party that could represent the many voters that felt alienated by immigration. There are simply way too many people that find it difficult to connect to a foreign culture and do fear diversity. Together with a situation where many of those people also happen to have massive difficulty finding jobs in a global economy, you have a perfect recipe for the destruction of the current pro-globalists left-wing movement.

There needs to be a way which can offer no one gets left behind by a globalist economy, or at the least reduce the number of people being left behind massively in the next few years.

[Crazedwraith]

Ugh. Nigel Farage was just on Any Questions sounding supremely self-satisfied.