Skip to comments.Labour group leader ousted by UKIP in Solihull
Posted on 05/23/2014 3:46:23 AM PDT by Perdogg
With seven results in at Solihull, Ukip has taken the Kingshurst & Fordbridge ward from Labour, unseating the party's group leader, David Jamieson - a former MP who once served as parliamentary under-secretary for transport in Tony Blair's government.
(Excerpt) Read more at itv.com ...
In this election UKIP is expanding its base into Labour Party areas after getting a slice in the Conservative Party areas.
They are drawing the supporters of Margaret Thatcher, who was ousted in 1990 by the CINO lovers of the EU.
The leader of a small Christian party acknowledged in a
BBC interview that most Christians are voting UKIP too.
Why shouldn’t they send a message to the PM Cameron and his “Lavatories” who provided the final blessing to gay marriage in the UK which fuels what will be an ever increasing persecution of Christians?
The UKIP has actually helped Labour, allowing Labour to win dozens of seats held by the Tories due to the center-right vote getting split. The Tories and the Liberal Democrats have been the hardest hit.
It will be interesting to see how this translates to next year’s parliamentary elections. Labour is even more pro-EU than the Tories, so the UKIP needs to be smart as to what Tory ridings to challenge.
That’s the Tories’ fault, not UKIP.
Actually, UKIP has not hurt Labour as much as the Tories and the LDs, but make no mistake about it, UKIP has hurt Labour as well.
Does it matter whose fault it is if a militantly pro-EU Labour government takes over?
I'm sure that UKIP has taken many votes from Labour, but it appears that UKIP's rise has been a huge net boon to Labour (although Labour apparently had expected to gain even more seats, presumably because it thought that UKIP would take more votes from the Tories and fewer from Labour):
"At 2pm on Friday, with around half of the results declared, Nigel Farages party had gained more than 100 seats.
The Conservatives had lost 133 council seats and lost control of nine councils. The losses included Basildon and Castle Point in Essex, where Ukip made gains.
The Tories also lost Hammersmith & Fulham and Croydon in London, and Amber Valley in Derbyshire to Labour.
Labour had gained almost 170 seats and control of five councils, a performance that fell short of the partys hopes. Ed Balls, the Shadow Chancellor, said the results were not good enough.
The Liberal Democrats have also suffered heavily losses across the country, despite winning in Eastleigh in Hampshire.
Nick Clegg's party lost control of Kingston in London to the Conservatives. The council was seen as a key target for the Lib Dems and its loss will put Mr Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, under severe pressure."
They’ve also taken a good number of Labor seats in the North.
Miliband may be under more pressure than Cameron.
I keep abreast of developments in the UK daily through the internet and televised Sky news. UKIP has made a major breakthrough and the three major parties are scared sh*tless.
Ed Miliband has pledged to win back voters from UKIP in time for next year's general election.
Despite Nigel Farage's party eating into Labour's vote, the Labour leader pointed to successes in Croydon, Hastings and Cambridge.
"There's no doubt about it, UKIP are biting into parts of Labour's working-class vote," David Lammy said.
Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander, Labour's election strategist, said the results reflected an "anger and alienation" among the electorate, saying "politics as usual is not an adequate response".
He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "Labour can win the general election if we take the right steps between now and a year's time."
"The results have also confirmed, if confirmation was needed, that Ukip can damage Labour as much as the Conservatives, meaning both main parties need to throw out the old methods to project swings and to forecast the marginal seats it will gain.
For instance, in the West Midlands a strong Ukip performance has meant Labour has not made the gains it had hoped in Birmingham, Dudley and Walsall. "Worcester man" has also not gone Labour.
In traditional Labour heartlands, such as Rotherham, Ukip came first in 10, and 2nd in 11 of the 21 seats it fought. Equally, Ukip's performance in the east of England suggests some of the gains the Tories need to secure an overall Commons majority will be elusive. Thatcher's "(South) Essex man" is morphing into Ukip man. Thurrock, Basildon and Castle Point are all in play for the UK Independence party.
A temporary necessary evil.
“A temporary necessary evil.”
And do you think that if UKIP caused a bunch of Tory ridings to elect the Labour candidate that the Tories would just fold prior to the next elections?
UKIP would be wise to pick its battles and contest the ridings that make sense so that the UK ends up with a “Eurosceptic” Parliament, not with a Labour government pushing greater integration with the EU.
You can’t fight two parties forever, you must eliminate one of them as soon as possible to be able to devote all your energies to the real monster.
And its’ the Tories that are the easiest pickings as of now.
And yes, I believe the same strategy is needed here, as well. Eventually if you want to achieve power, it’s the only way.
In America, the only sound strategy is for conservatives to take over the GOP, not to create some third party that only helps getting Democrats elected. Allowing Al Franken to defeat Norm Coleman, etc. hasn’t exactly spawned a conservative renaissance.
They can be very appealing to working-class people who want jobs instead of the dole, and whose daughters have been harassed by Muslim immigrants. Labour is not going to do anything about immigration, crime, and getting more private-sector jobs.
Not gonna happen.
The probability of conservatives taking over the GOP is exponentially higher than the probability of the Constitution Party or something like that causing the GOP to disband.
I just think trying to do it within the Republican Party effective ties one hand behind your back.
As I have since I became a Republican in the “80”s, I agree with your view. However, agreement with the theory has been getting weaker and weaker as the Republican party moves farther and farther to the middle.
Year in and year out, the Republican party has failed to control the liberal wing of the party which continues supporting Democrats like they did during GW’s two terms.
Under GW, we ended up with a government that has almost completely wiped out our constitutional rights. There comes a time when we need a party that will even say no to their own president when he/she wants to do something as stupid as the prescription-drug benefit under Medicare, or the recklessness of following any idea that a new government agency will secure our safety by taking away our rights. I’ll save the space by allowing you to consider all the federal national security agencies that GW pushed through since 9/11 like NSA, etc. etc. etc.
If after this election the Republicans move even farther to the left by supporting Obama’s idea as they have eluded to, I will stop supporting them and either stop voting, or join every anti political group that exists to bring down this monstrosity that exists only to enslave our progeny.
I believe the “Republican” brand name is just too damaged now.
If it was a real brand, they would have changed the name by now.
You could be right, but then again look how quickly they began destroying the Tea Party brand.
I’m not sure it’s the brand name that matters so much as it does those who represent it.
We need to stand by the ones we believe in, and maybe convince them to begin a new brand from within.
After all, if Cruz, Lee, etc. etc. keep getting the business from the Rino’s, maybe they should begin referring themselves as Tea party members instead of republicans.
Walla! Instead of trying get a new party member elected, we would all ready have US Senators and House members representing the new party.
It would be easier to convince others to leave the party if some of the good guys from the Republican party who are in office left the party first while they are in Office.
Lunch time. Hmmm, I think I will stew on that and maybe there is a good article in the idea.
But look at Nigel Farage and UKIP.
People may agree or disagree with what UKIP stands for....But having a leader like Farage means that they control their message, and they don’t have others define them, although they do try.
Once you allow your enemy to define you, it’s over.
“Once you allow your enemy to define you, its over.”
That’s a lesson the national GOP, the congressional GOP and many state GOP organizations should have learned a long time ago.
But UKIP also is able to compete in Labour areas the Tories can’t.
UKIP needs to be ruthless and play the long term game to crush the fake Conservative Party.
It is far from the Thatcher led Party you remember. It worked in Canada and it can work here.