My Election Campaign

First topic message reminder :

Earlier I mentioned on here that I was standing as a candidate for the Labour Party in the upcoming local elections happening on May 7th. I have been part of the Labour Party since I was 17 and this is my first time standing as a candidate. It has been an interesting experience so far. Being a disabled(I have Cerebral Palsy) candidate adds an extra challenge for me to overcome in terms of getting to some places which are not wheelchair friendly.

Some of you on here mentioned that you would like me to start a thread about my experiences and the situation as I have found it while campaigning. In my Area we have a Tory MP(elected in 2010) and a Tory controlled City and County Council. So far the issues which have come up most while canvassing the electorate are:

1. Immigration(UKIP links to this heavily)
2. economy(Labour's perceived weakness)
3. NHS
4. Lots of Ex Tory voters have said to me they will not vote for the current Tory Party as they have gone too far left with things such as gay marriage and letting too many foreigners in.
5. people in the area can never get hold of their City Councillor as he spends most of his time in the USA.


I am out canvassing again this Saturday and will continue to update you on how things are progressing!!

Praying for Burnham, be good to see Labour make the same mistake twice.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Praying for Burnham, be good to see Labour make the same mistake twice.

Midlife Crisis?

Except Burnham will not accept any money from the unions and has different views from milliband so yeah exactly the same...

"Will not accept any money" is utter BS. Almost all Labour's funding comes from Trade Unions therefore he cannot just turn off that tap, and he's a pro-TU union-patsy.

Labour and the vocal minority left can't seem to accept that the country REJECTED that already.

He is not accepting any money from the unions for his leadership bid that's a fact

"FOR HIS LEADERSHIP"

More left wing head in the sand.

Who gives a f*ck?!?! Labour's issue, and what supporters seem to be refusing to accept, is that the electorate rejected an overly left-wing TU puppet. And that's what Burnham is. Regardless of whether he doesn't use them to actually fund his leadership bid. They'll still be Labour's biggest financial supporter by a mile once he's in and he'll still be pro-TU sympathiser, alienating the people that TU's go out there and screw all the time.

Rejecting their funding wasn't half as smart as Labour saying it'll be 1 man 1 vote. Red Ed only got in last time because the Unions got to vote a second time and pushed him past his actually more popular brother.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Red Ed only got in last time because the Unions got to vote a second time and pushed him past his actually more popular brother.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/07/how-labour-leadership-result-changes-under-one-member-one-vote-system

While the result does not change significantly (all the candidates finish in the same position, except Diane Abbott, who leapfrogs Andy Burnham and Ed Balls in the first round), it is notable that Ed Miliband's margin of victory increases dramatically from just 1.3 per cent to 8.8 per cent. Since David Miliband won the MPs' section by 140 votes to 122, his share is heavily reduced under a OMOV vote. He also won the party members' section by 66,814 to 55,992, but Ed's huge lead among affiliated members (119,405 to 80,266) means he pulls ahead.

TopHat24/7 wrote:"FOR HIS LEADERSHIP"

More left wing head in the sand.

Who gives a f*ck?!?! Labour's issue, and what supporters seem to be refusing to accept, is that the electorate rejected an overly left-wing TU puppet.  And that's what Burnham is. Regardless of whether he doesn't use them to actually fund his leadership bid.  They'll still be Labour's biggest financial supporter by a mile once he's in and he'll still be pro-TU sympathiser, alienating the people that TU's go out there and screw all the time.

The Tories = 36%.....Hardly an endorsement...

Think the line the SNP will be running England was the big game changer......

People got cold feet...................Think also Miliband was labelled succesfully as weak................

I'd prefer Kendall..................But Nothing to suggest Burnham can't win...............We have a government with a wafer thin majority........Sooner or later there will be trouble..

The Conservatives may have a wafer-thin majority, but the Labour party are in terminal decline.

So long as the Greens get themselves a decent leader, they will be the future of left-wing politics in this country.

Lowlandbrit wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Red Ed only got in last time because the Unions got to vote a second time and pushed him past his actually more popular brother.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/07/how-labour-leadership-result-changes-under-one-member-one-vote-system

While the result does not change significantly (all the candidates finish in the same position, except Diane Abbott, who leapfrogs Andy Burnham and Ed Balls in the first round), it is notable that Ed Miliband's margin of victory increases dramatically from just 1.3 per cent to 8.8 per cent. Since David Miliband won the MPs' section by 140 votes to 122, his share is heavily reduced under a OMOV vote. He also won the party members' section by 66,814 to 55,992, but Ed's huge lead among affiliated members (119,405 to 80,266) means he pulls ahead.

'Affiliated members'

Party members & MP's voted in DM by a significant margin.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:"FOR HIS LEADERSHIP"

More left wing head in the sand.

Who gives a f*ck?!?! Labour's issue, and what supporters seem to be refusing to accept, is that the electorate rejected an overly left-wing TU puppet.  And that's what Burnham is. Regardless of whether he doesn't use them to actually fund his leadership bid.  They'll still be Labour's biggest financial supporter by a mile once he's in and he'll still be pro-TU sympathiser, alienating the people that TU's go out there and screw all the time.

The Tories = 36%.....Hardly an endorsement...

Think the line the SNP will be running England was the big game changer......

People got cold feet...................Think also Miliband was labelled succesfully as weak................

I'd prefer Kendall..................But Nothing to suggest Burnham can't win...............We have a government with a wafer thin majority........Sooner or later there will be trouble..

It was the night of the shy Tory. The minority were shown to have been falsely portrayed as a majority, actuality was more people felt better off under Tories than was being made out. Leftist policies of over-tax, over-spend, throw other people's hard earned money at those considered often undeserving and a leader in the pocket of thoseaiming at or already causing misery to millions simply wasn't what the electorate wanted.

Considering the SNP, Green plus Labour equals 5 % more then the Tories....

It's a bit rich saying the electorate rejected left wing politics..

You are coming to a conclusion that suits you and not the facts...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Considering the SNP, Green plus Labour equals 5 % more then the Tories....

It's a bit rich saying the electorate rejected left wing politics..

You are coming to a conclusion that suits you and not the facts...

And add UKIP to the Tories...

You may get your wish with Kendell truss she has got momentum in her campaign at the moment, the prson i really wanted to stand was Dan Jarvis, a friend of mine who works at Tory HQ said they were all delighted when Jarvis declined to stand

Duty281 wrote:So long as the Greens get themselves a decent leader, they will be the future of left-wing politics in this country.

The problem with Green parties tends to be that they're made up of exactly the sort of people that many on the (traditional) left feel are the problem with the big (centre-)left wing parties; the highly educated, middle class 'we know what's best for people' types.

Duty281 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Considering the SNP, Green plus Labour equals 5 % more then the Tories....

It's a bit rich saying the electorate rejected left wing politics..

You are coming to a conclusion that suits you and not the facts...

And add UKIP to the Tories...

Don't be silly..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Considering the SNP, Green plus Labour equals 5 % more then the Tories....

It's a bit rich saying the electorate rejected left wing politics..

You are coming to a conclusion that suits you and not the facts...

And add UKIP to the Tories...

Don't be silly..

Cause UKIP + Tory is greater, as a voter percentage, than the lefties, I'm guessing?

Looking at how well UKIP did in Labour areas..........and the fact that many went home to the Tories at the last minute to stop Miliband...

.Not sure the Tories lost that much more to UKIP than Labour..

Have to remember that the usual protest vote that went to the Lib dems every election probably went to UKIP too as the Lib dems were a party of government..

Well done Duty on seemlessly under-mining Truss' point in one simple swoop.

Great argument Duty.................feeling well undermined !!

If you're not it's simply because you're too stupid to realise.

Now go find a forum you've can post with the back-up of a little boy-toy cheerleader to make you feel better about the crud you spout.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Great argument Duty.................feeling well undermined !!

Liberal Democrats (centre) - 7.9%
Conservatives (centre-right) - 36.9%
UKIP (right) - 12.6%

Total - 57.4%

The majority of the electorate were sensible enough to reject left-wing politics. Even when you do add in SNP and the Greens to Labour.

A conclusion related to statistical data..

I'm too stupid to realise that UKIP took votes from just the Tories...

Yep Heywood and Middleton didn't happen..

Tophat147 twitter......." I'm going on 606 to wind Truss up !!"

It ain't working Son !!

Duty281 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Great argument Duty.................feeling well undermined !!

Liberal Democrats (centre) - 7.9%
Conservatives (centre-right) - 36.9%
UKIP (right) - 12.6%

Total - 57.4%

The majority of the electorate were sensible enough to reject left-wing politics. Even when you do add in SNP and the Greens to Labour.

A conclusion related to statistical data..

If you go on Yougov it will give you a breakdown of the UKIP vote..............

Only two complete idiots would think that Labour wasn't hurt big time by UKIP..........

If ignorance is bliss you and Toppy must be very happy...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Great argument Duty.................feeling well undermined !!

Liberal Democrats (centre) - 7.9%
Conservatives (centre-right) - 36.9%
UKIP (right) - 12.6%

Total - 57.4%

The majority of the electorate were sensible enough to reject left-wing politics. Even when you do add in SNP and the Greens to Labour.

A conclusion related to statistical data..

If you go on Yougov it will give you a breakdown of the UKIP vote..............

Only two complete idiots would think that Labour wasn't hurt big time by UKIP..........

If ignorance is bliss you and Toppy must be very happy...

What are you blithering about, my daring? I spent many a year telling you how UKIP were taking votes off all the parties, not just the Conservatives - and you maintained this was not the case.

Have you changed your mind now?

The majority of the electorate were educated enough to reject failed left-wing politics - it is not rich to say so!

UKIP finished second in Sunderland to Labour and other places like it FFS...

UKIP did well in deprived areas with people who blame immigrants for their problems and think Labour has deserted them.........

Farage himself said after the election that a lot of right wing support went back to the Tories because of SNP running the Country scaremongering....

You might want to stick it to me on here..............But please formulate a better argument !!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm too stupid to realise that UKIP took votes from just the Tories...

Yep Heywood and Middleton didn't happen..

Tophat147 twitter......." I'm going on 606 to wind Truss up !!"

It ain't working Son !!

Awwwwwww that reminds me of your last little boyfriend on here, Champage_Socialist, whatever happened to him btw....??

Let's leave it..........

I can't be bothered educating you guys.............More than proved my argument !!!

Oh dear. If you genuinely believe that then it's just embarrassing.

This is no fun if you're actually that stupid, takes away all the fun.

Well done Duty, like the proverbial kipper.

I see you all have still been falling out with each other, I will be voting for Andy Burnham in the leadership election

Good to hear, thanks Wheels.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Good to hear, thanks Wheels.

still not sure on deputy, toppy as your political views seem to be Tory do you think Cameron will actually go before 2020 or now he has an Overall Majority do you think he will stay?

Depends how power crazed he gets. Bit like Blair, felt he was just desperate to beat Thatcher's record. We followed the Yanks with the Fixed Term Parliaments Act and I think we should do the same with 2-term restrictions.

Think the EU will be a big determinant for DC. A half-decent reneg plus a winnig good 'IN' campaign will be seen as successful (may incline him to try stay on). Losing the campaign on the other hand would be a disaster and I wouldn't be surprised if DC didn't even make it to 2020......

I think he will want to stay but the tories will kick him out and go for a new leader, after all they are more ruthless with their leaders then Labour

wheelchair1991 wrote:I see you all have still been falling out with each other, I will be voting for Andy Burnham in the leadership election

Think Labour need a break with the past Mate..............Kendall is a bit to the right but she hasn't got Burnham and Cooper's baggage.....

Besides Burnham is a blairite one minute and a lefty the next.............Seems to be anything that suits his purpose at any one time..

Pragmatism has worked well for DC......

Truss nI watched Kendall in several interviews and went to a husting with all the candidates she did not impress me at all, I agree Labour do need a break from the past but she does not offer it

They should get down on their knees and beg Jarvey to take it

#BringBackBlair

wheelchair1991 wrote:Truss nI watched Kendall in several interviews and went to a husting with all the candidates she did not impress me at all, I agree Labour do need a break from the past but she does not offer it

New leader has a problem.................They can go right and pick up more votes from middle England............Or drift to the left and try to get Scotland back...........

I think they have to go more to the right and hope the SNP screw up !!

If I was a Labour member I'd go for ........Kendall/Creasy.......................Creasy is hugely impressive and sexy too !!

Don't say that Tophat. That son of a bitch would probably win the f*cking thing and the election.

I and lots of others would have voted for Jarvis, and I agree partly Truss Creasy will probably get my vote for the deputy leadership but as I say I will be voting for Burnham for the leadership

Be 2025 before you get a Labour govt Wheelie........Doesn't matter who you choose....

Starting from a low base.......

Still think the EU situation swings it, could be a disaster for the Tories.....

I wouldn't be so sure Truss you never know what will happen in the upcoming 5 years this Euro referendum could destroy the tories, on the other hand you may be right we will just have to wait and see. I think Labour stand a better chance now Balls is not there in Parliament and I was glad to see Ed Milliband there the other day. I believe he could come back in some shape or form in the future like Hague did in the mid 2000's

Cameron is a huge plus for the Tories............A Conservative that is likeable.....Problem is he's made the Blair mistake of telling people he's going by the next election....

If they pick a dud ...Your luck might be in..

I don't think he will want to go