Are Labour Sinking Without Trace?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39064149
First mid term Tory gain since 1982, Labour out after 80 years.

[AB Editor]

Seem to be.

[Baldric]

Who?

[dannyk13]

It looks very much like it.

[Zacs-Master]

Surely 'sinking without trace' is a defined situation. It either 'is' or 'isn't'. The ship is either visible (which Labour definitely is) or, it's vanished beneath the waves and there is no trace. Poor analogy.

[ToraToraTora]

getting desperate ZM? Go ahead, play semantics if you have no substance.

[ichkeria]

Like 'forward planning' :-)
Labour are doomed unless and until Corbyn goes. That was obvious from the moment he was elected leader.

[andy-hughes]

The media reckon that those who say that Corbyn is the reason for the loss will be blamed as agitators, which will, ironically, strengthen his position.

I think it's a given that Labour are unelectable in a General Election with Corbyn at the top.

I would not have thought it possible for them to find a replacement for Milliband who was measurably worse, but they managed it effortlessly.

[mikey4444]

TTT...the Copeland seat has only been in existence since 1983.

Also, I seem to have a dim memory that you promised something or other, if UKIP lost the Stoke by-election....or was it won ?

Or perhaps if Labour won !

Damned if I can remember which TTT......(tic)

[gulliver1]

Amazing that UKIP pushed the CON party into third place at Stoke.
Do the Bookies pay out on THIRD PLACE ?

[ichkeria]

Ed Miliband was worse than Corbyn? I think not.
Corbyn is probably a nice man, it the last thing Labour needed was an ageing obsessive whose politics is rooted in the past and who what is more is easily manipulated by others.
Miliband's real sin was to change the voting system to allow any Tom Dick or Harriet in to elect him. Now Tom's the deputy leader, Harriet's gone and I'd rather not say who Dick is ...

[Zacs-Master]

I'm pretty sure there will be traces for quite a few years, even if they do sink....which they appear to be doing.

[-Talbot-]

Can I ask who you side with, mikey?

Corbyn or all the other lot who are anti Corbyn?

[ichkeria]

In fact the Tories came third in Stoke Central last time also. Actually after all the hoo ha there Irving much really changed from the General election. The 4 main parties finished in the same positions with roughly the same share of the vote. Disappointing for the Lib Dems but I suspect many will have voted to keep Nuttall out.
Copeland was a bit of a surprise as David Dimbleby claimed on QT there was word Labour had won!

[ichkeria]

*nothing much really changed! Holocaust denial still alive and well :-)

[Sqad]

Bad day for Labour........it could have been worse, they could have lost the Stoke seat.
It happens......particularly in bye-elections.
Labour chose Corbyn and they cannot win an election with Corbyn as their leader.

[cassa333]

Labour will not sink just yet. There are a lot more miles of laugh to go yet.

Eventually they will ditch their unelectable leader, regroup, sort them selves out and come back.

That is the way of things. Even with only a few MPs Libdums are still going and they haven't been in existence for as long a Labour have.

[jno]

they were unlucky in Copeland not that Corbyn is generally hopeless but that he specifically doesn't like nuclear power. They were lucky in Stoke that the Ukip leader is a chancer you wouldn't trust as far as you could spit him.

[-Talbot-]

Copeland was a bit of a surprise as David Dimbleby claimed on QT there was word Labour had won!



Did he??

[ichkeria]

He did Talbot. It seemed odd as the night was yet young :-) I suspect whoever made that deduction will be in for a telling off

[-Talbot-]

I thought he was talking about Stoke.