Oldham West and Royston by-election. Corbyn's big test.

[lottiecass]

A Labour party led by Fred West and a candidate of Jack the Ripper with a manifesto of "murder everyone" would clean up in Oldham West.

 

No sleight intended on Corbyn btw. Just telling it how it is. Some people just really don't understand just how set in its ways the electorate is in certain places.

 

Too true jonny.

[ez8004]

So Labour winning a seat they held since 1997 is an achivement how? Also, what does it prove? If Labour won, say Runnymede and Weybridge, now that would be something.

 

It is the same as saying, well done Corbyn, you managed to hold on to one of the safest Labour seats in the country. *slow clap*

[A.B.Yaffle]

Using the new left wing logic to elections, Labour's Jim McMahon has no mandate to represent Oldham West and Royton because he only got 25% of the votes (62% of a 40% turnout). That means 75% are anti-Labour.

 

Left wing logic? I thought it was the Tories who are using that logic to get rid of the right to go on strike?

[Anna B]

This is from today's DM newspaper...

 

'CORBYN EFFECT COSTS LABOUR THOUSANDS OF ELECTION VOTES.'

 

"Labour was on course to lose thousands of votes in one of its safest seats last night in a backlash against Jeremy Corbyn.

The party was expected to hang on to the traditional Labour heartland of Oldham West and Royston following a by-election, but with its majority slashed by 15,000. But it is a blow for Left winger Mr Corbyn in his first test with voters since he became Labour leader.

Even Labour MPs and campaigners canvassing in the constituency have conceded many traditional Labour voters see him as a problem. UKIP candidate John Bickley also attacked him as a 'security risk'...."

 

And so it goes on, besmirching Jeremy, and yet some people on SF still say the press isn't biased against him?

Also goes to show that biased journalists shouldn't write copy before the results are in....

[unbeliever]

This is from today's DM newspaper...

 

'CORBYN EFFECT COSTS LABOUR THOUSANDS OF ELECTION VOTES.'

 

"Labour was on course to lose thousands of votes in one of its safest seats last night in a backlash against Jeremy Corbyn.

The party was expected to hang on to the traditional Labour heartland of Oldham West and Royston following a by-election, but with its majority slashed by 15,000. But it is a blow for Left winger Mr Corbyn in his first test with voters since he became Labour leader.

Even Labour MPs and campaigners canvassing in the constituency have conceded many traditional Labour voters see him as a problem. UKIP candidate John Bickley also attacked him as a 'security risk'...."

 

And so it goes on, besmirching Jeremy, and yet some people on SF still say the press isn't biased against him?

Also goes to show that biased journalists shouldn't write copy before the results are in....

 

 

The Daily Mail is biased against Labour. I would not question that. They're a private business and it's up to them. The Guardian takes the reverse position. That's not a problem either.

The BBC is chronically biased against the Conservatives. That's unacceptable, funded as they are by a state mandated poll tax.

[blake]

Turnouts in by-elections are ALWAYS lower than in general elections even when they are highly dramatic contests and/or in marginals.

 

What happened here is UKIP's vote totally collapsed despite a lot of Tories voting for them tactically this time.

[chalga]

So Labour winning a seat they held since 1997 is an achivement how? Also, what does it prove? If Labour won, say Runnymede and Weybridge, now that would be something.

 

It is the same as saying, well done Corbyn, you managed to hold on to one of the safest Labour seats in the country. *slow clap*

 

Goalposts need to be moved now that the Righties press were proved hopelessly wrong.

[unbeliever]

I think those of who dislike Corbyn need to acknowledge that this is a decent result for him. Not great, but decent.

[Eric Arthur]

I think we were all expecting so much more after the crowing about the huge numbers of new supporters which are looking increasingly like Scotch mist.

[unbeliever]

I think we were all expecting so much more after the crowing about the huge numbers of new supporters which are looking increasingly like Scotch mist.

 

It's a very strong Labour seat. Bit hard to infer anything from the result.

Corbyn has neither created a huge resurgence of Labour support, nor destroyed the party.