Bradford West by-election

MaxwellBygraves

In all the political drama of recent days, it may have been easy to miss that there was today a by-election in Bradford West after the incumbent Labour MP stepped down due to ill-health. Provisional results indicate George Galloway (yes him) has won the seat by a landslide.

Should note at this point that although most votes have been counted, there has been no formal declaration as yet so things are subject to change - I will deal with them as they currently stand.

I think the result is really interesting for a number of reasons. Bradford West has been a safe Labour seat for a long time, yet has never 'behaved itself'. When Blair won his landlside in 1997, the constituency delivered a Labour MP yet actually swung to the Tories defying the national trend. In 2010, they again delivered a Labour MP, with a big swing to Labour which again defied national swing to Tories. The people of Bradford West have done it again!

For the two main parties, it has been a disaster. Invariably, government and press spin will make out that it has only been a disaster for Labour. Whilst true, the Tories will also be cursing their performance tonight.

For Labour this should be a safe seat - anything other than a Labour victory is a disaster. A huge chunk of the Labour vote has been lost to Galloway. Something has gone wrong big time for the Labour party here. Labour strategists and campaign managers will be kicking themselves.

Yet also, it's been a disastrous Tory campaign. The incumbent Tory government has not won a by-election (I think there's been 7) since 2010. The Tory vote in Bradford flatlined tonight - and if the Tories are to have any hope of a general election majority in 2015, they need to be taking seats off of Labour like this one. Yet many Tories had already conceded defeat before polling had really begun and unverified figures have been flying around that the Tories have been scrapping it out with UKIP for 3rd or 4th place with as little as 13% of the total vote. For the party of government, that really is poor by anyones standards.

So Galloway has pulled off the seemingly impossible. For me, more than anything else, this highlights the disillusion and apathy amongst voters who want a genuine alternative to fill the 'political vacuum.' It shows that people really are fed up with the idea that posh guys in suits (from any party) can solve their problems. Plenty for all to take away.

An extremely interesting few weeks in politics and I expect more to come.

MaxwellBygraves

I've also heard that the turnout for this by-election was unusually high, so no party can accuse Galloway of winning because no-one bothered to vote.

alihisgreat

You talk about the tory vote flatlining tonight.. there is not point in wasting money on constituencies which are 'safe seats'

Imagine an industrial town, full of people who have voted labour for their entire life -> because of their policies in the past... and because of loyalty when Blair and Brown took over. (i.e. Bradford)

You're not going to change the minds of these life long labourites to vote for the Tories who they perceive as a load of wealthy toffs who swann about in London, quaffing champagne and dreaming up ways to use Goverment to make the upper classes better off, and the poor worse off. (you may however persuade them to vote for one of the other parties outside the big 3)

An election campaign is all about being realistic and targeting constituencies that you can win -> the marginal ones.

David Cameron isn't going to waste time and money going and getting egged and booed in safe labour seats.. he isn't even going to waste time being cheered in safe conservative constituencies.. he's going to go and target the marginals.

MaxwellBygraves

ALIHISGREAT - I am well aware of this thanks. The point I was trying to make was two fold. Firstly, that the Tories had targeted this seat as a potential gain - one of the seats the Tories will need to win in order to form a majority. It's all well and good having heartlands but as I'm sure you're aware elections are won and lost on swing seats and potential swing seats, of which this one was a possibility.

Secondly, it's been confirmed that the Tory vote was around 13% which is absolutely dire. Put it into context - the ultra-conservative safe seat that I live in always delivers a Tory MP and the Tory candidate regularly gets over half of total votes cast. Even in this seat in 2010, on the back of Brown and all the rest of it, Labour clocked 16% of total vote. Highlights just how low that Conservative vote is. So the Tories are polling at, or less, the level that Brown was in 2010. Which is awful news for them.

Again, to shed some more perspective: in Cameron's home constituency of Witney in Oxfordshire, Labour polled 13% of the vote in 2010...

OffTheBackAdam

Conservatives never have a chance in these areas, it's the complete & utter destruction of a safe Labour seat - held by them since 1974 - by a joke politician, that's the big story.
The knives will be out for Millibrain after this.
With the large, hard working, ethnic Indian & Pakistani population in Bradford, there's no love for Labour's policies of state hand-outs for the idle, workshy classes. Labour field an Asian candidate & still go for an epic fail.
Spin it any way you like Max, it's a complete & utter disaster for Labour, it shows that they are unelectable, something the thinking voter have realised for decades, it's only been the "Teflon Tony" effect, that got them elected & kept them in power.

George Galloway (Respect) 18,341 (55.89%, +52.83%)

Imran Hussain (Lab) 8,201 (24.99%, -20.36%)

Jackie Whiteley (C) 2,746 (8.37%, -22.78%)

Jeanette Sunderland (LD) 1,505 (4.59%, -7.08%)

Sonja McNally (UKIP) 1,085 (3.31%, +1.31%)

Dawud Islam (Green) 481 (1.47%, -0.85%)

Neil Craig (D Nats) 344 (1.05%)

Howling Laud Hope (Loony) 111 (0.34%)

CambsNewbie

This bad news.. Possibly the only person I hate more than Ed Balls is Gorgeous George! I was hoping he'd slunk away with his tail between his legs after the last election. But no, the f**ker just won't go!

willhub

I did not even realise it was in Bradford until I read the news, thought he moved abroad.

beverick

I'm not sure where the earlier comment about the Conservatives targeting this seat if they were going to claim an overall majority, it's something like Labour's 20th safest seat (by % share with Labour getting 45% of the total vote in 2010) - Cameron would have something like a 450 seat majority in the commons if this seat went "blue".

Anyway, Galloway won this seat in a mainly immigrant and Muslim ward predominantly on a 'stop the war (in Afghanistan)' protest vote platform. He gambled on the electorate giving Labour a "black eye" for Tony Blair's willingness to do battle in NE Asia and one to the Conservatives for Cameron's decision to stay engaged - and it worked.

His rhetoric on local TV last weekend in particular was absolutley disgraceful and was clearly aimed at stirring up support from the Asian/Muslim vote - and it worked.

Of course, the result is, as with any by-election which doesn't materially affect the government's majority, almost wholly irrelevant and especially in particular in this case, I think unrepresentative of the view of the general population. Basically, other than the issue of returning George Galloway to the house of commons, it's almost totally irrelevant.

I think the more telling figure is that the Tory vote only fell by 2% points more than the Labour vote. If I were David, sorry Ed Milliband, I'd be more concerned about that especially in an already very poor news week for David Cameron. Labour may not ever have been going to retain the seat in the face of what was effectively a protest vote, but I think most people would have predicted that they wouldn't have faired quite so badly.

I feel wholly confident in stating that the seat will return to Larbour in 2015 - if not sooner. I could see circumstances where GG will "cause" another by-election. Possibly as soon as Autumn 2013.

Bob

Tom Butcher

In terms of their vote it's a disaster for both Cons and Labour - yes it was a safe Labour seat but the Cons have polled between 30-40% of the vote at every election since they lost the seat in the 70s so they were very much the second party in that constituency.

Agree the seat will probably go back to Labour at the next election but traditionally Labour have been very strong amongst voters of Pakistani background - does this signal that they can no longer take that for granted - and will that impact on Labour policy more in future ?

Jez mon

Meh, it's hardly the big disaster for either party which the press are trying to make out. Galloway might say he's providing an alternative to labour for working people, but come the general election, and labour scaremongering of a Tory majority, we probably will have a different result.

What does the result tell us:
Labour have trouble connecting with what should be their core voters (well duh, already knew that)
In a week which should have been utterly disastrous for the Tory Party, people will still turn out and vote for them


I'd love to say that is showed that there is room for another serious political party, who could try and actually represent the younger generations of working people (as in everyone with jobs, not just working class) who are looking at their future and realising it's been sold down the river, by successive politicians on both sides. But realistically, come a general election, it's going to be red v blue all over again with a chance that the lib dems will get a look in, if neither party gets a majority.

MaxwellBygraves

I'm not 'spinning' for anyone fellas - as I repeteadly have to remind everyone, yes I am a leftist but I am not affiliated to any party.

The Lib Dem candidate lost their deposit. Ha.

I stand by my summary - the voting figures and facts confirm that this was a disaster for all 3 of the biggest parties. The Conservatives are hemorrhaging their core vote. No-one is voting for them. Labour is losing a lot of it's core vote too, and are not picking up those lost Tory votes at a rate anywhere near what they would like. And the Lib Dems lost their deposit.

Optimistically, I hope that this makes people realise that politics can be done differently and send a message to all 3 parties. However, my biggest fear is that this vacuum be exploited by a party of the far-right e.g BNP. Unfortunately something simiar appears to be happening in French politics at the moment.

alihisgreat

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

I'm not 'spinning' for anyone fellas - as I repeteadly have to remind everyone, yes I am a leftist but I am not affiliated to any party.

The Lib Dem candidate lost their deposit. Ha.

I stand by my summary - the voting figures and facts confirm that this was a disaster for all 3 of the biggest parties. The Conservatives are hemorrhaging their core vote. No-one is voting for them. Labour is losing a lot of it's core vote too, and are not picking up those lost Tory votes at a rate anywhere near what they would like. And the Lib Dems lost their deposit.

Optimistically, I hope that this makes people realise that politics can be done differently and send a message to all 3 parties. However, my biggest fear is that this vacuum be exploited by a party of the far-right e.g BNP. Unfortunately something simiar appears to be happening in French politics at the moment.

Of course there isn't anyone voting for the Tories.. its BRADFORD ffs

they only need to start worrying when they start loosing their rural constituencies in the south.

I did try and explain this in my previous post...

CambsNewbie

I think there is sometimes a sense of a protest vote in by-elections. The people know that they won't change the government so will perhaps vote for someone different thinking 'well it doesn't really matter and in a few years we will vote properly again'. It's almost like the electorate is having fun with the politicians.

As for the Tory vote crumbling like some have said, did anyone really think they might win Bradford?? When the Tories start loosing the 'Shires' then it's all over for them!

MaxwellBygraves

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Of course there isn't anyone voting for the Tories.. its BRADFORD ffs

Yes, and the point that I am trying to make is as follows. Yes a Labour 'safe-ish' seat based on previous election results. However, there is a strong Tory vote in Bradford West. So a potential target seat for the Tories if they were riding higher in the polls atm.

Over the last two elections the Conservatives in Bradford West have polled over 30% of the vote. Labour have polled between 40 and 45%. The reason I'm saying it's bad for both parties is because Labour polled about 25% of the vote and the Conservatives just 8%. Clearly both massive losses there.

My other point is, as I tried to explain, that if the Conservatives are to form a majority government in 2015, this is exactly the kind of seat they need to be taking from Labour. They failed miserably. If Labour want to win the next election, this is exactly the kind of seat they need to be holding onto. They failed miserably. OK?

Tom Butcher

I agree with you Maxwell to the extent each of the main parties lost equivalent share of the vote - though there is the issue of the Muslim vote.

Apparently at at least one previous election (think early 2000s) the Tory vote amongst Muslims was very high in Bradford West because they fielded a Muslim candidate and Labour did not. In this latest vote there is the Respect Party emphasis on opposing wars which no doubt tapped into the Muslim vote. The Tories are less reliant on the Muslim vote in Britain than Labour - which is why the collapse of the Labour vote here is perhaps more relevant than the equally dramatic collapse of the Tory vote.

MaxwellBygraves

Tom Butcher wrote:

I agree with you Maxwell to the extent each of the main parties lost equivalent share of the vote - though there is the issue of the Muslim vote.

Apparently at at least one previous election (think early 2000s) the Tory vote amongst Muslims was very high in Bradford West because they fielded a Muslim candidate and Labour did not. In this latest vote there is the Respect Party emphasis on opposing wars which no doubt tapped into the Muslim vote. The Tories are less reliant on the Muslim vote in Britain than Labour - which is why the collapse of the Labour vote here is perhaps more relevant than the equally dramatic collapse of the Tory vote.

Indeed. Galloway was expelled from Labour for opposing Iraq War. He's won against Labour twice since.

beverick

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Of course there isn't anyone voting for the Tories.. its BRADFORD ffs

.............
My other point is, as I tried to explain, that if the Conservatives are to form a majority government in 2015, this is exactly the kind of seat they need to be taking from Labour. They failed miserably. If Labour want to win the next election, this is exactly the kind of seat they need to be holding onto. They failed miserably. OK?

I really don't understand how you can say "that this is the kind of seat they [the Conservatives] need to be taking from Labour."

According to the electoral reform society (and despite both boundary changes and the electorate's habit of bucking national trends in that seat) Bradford West had a 95.5% chance of being won by Labour at the last election with the conservatives taking the other 4.5%.

By comparison, Braintree in Essex, the Conservatives were "only" given a 87.5% chance of winning the seat even though they won 53% of the vote in 2005.

As I noted earlier, if they won Bradford West the Conservatives would redefine the term landslide. The government benches wouldn't be big enough to accommodate the elected MPs and Labour would have to rely heavily on peers to fill opposition ministerial posts.

Both major parties did badly but, basically, Labour finished second in a one horse race.

Bob

Pross

Well they've made their bed up there. Voting for someone campaigning on a single issue (and a single issue that is now out-of-date as troops have pulled out of Iraq and will be starting to disengage from Afghanistan soon) and leaving themselves with a Member who will have less opportunity to influence the decisions that affect them on a day-to-day basis. A bit like Martin Bell a few years back, you get left with an MP who has no sway.

MaxwellBygraves

beverick wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Of course there isn't anyone voting for the Tories.. its BRADFORD ffs

.............
My other point is, as I tried to explain, that if the Conservatives are to form a majority government in 2015, this is exactly the kind of seat they need to be taking from Labour. They failed miserably. If Labour want to win the next election, this is exactly the kind of seat they need to be holding onto. They failed miserably. OK?

I really don't understand how you can say "that this is the kind of seat they [the Conservatives] need to be taking from Labour."

Look I've tried to explain and you're not having any of it. Telegraph blogger sums up consensus nicely:

It should not be forgotten that Bradford West was on the list of Tory target-seats at the last general election. Conservative strategists say that winning over ethnic voters must be a big part of the party's push between now and the next general election. It is said that the invisible Tory co-chairman, Baroness Warsi, has been beetling away on this work behind the scenes. On the evidence of Bradford West she has some way to go. The Conservatives slumped to under 3,000 votes last night.

Whole article here: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainm ... d-cameron/

Pross

Surely every seat was on the target list but they were ranked in accordance to priority / likelihood of winning. Where exactly did it fall on their list?

bagpusscp

Kermit has today been arrested by the Police.....following a search of his lilly pads ...which were found to contain a large amount of frog sprawn.

ilm_zero7

the say never trust a polititian... George Galloway say he has'nt ad a drink - he is a Scot for christ sake! how can that be? was a a sound bite, clipped short "I havent had a drink" (yet today) ?

MichaelW

Bradford is hardly a typical constituency and a lot of people are avoiding the M word.
45% of the constituency are Muslim , mostly originating from Pakistan and still with close links to the old country; not just Pakistan in general but the city of Mirpur in Kashmir and clan politics link what happens in Mirpur to what happens in Bradford. We saw in Birmingham how clan leaders and heads of households deliver block votes.
Galloway was very smart in appealing to this audience; he played the game and won.

verylonglegs

MichaelW wrote:

Bradford is hardly a typical constituency and a lot of people are avoiding the M word.
45% of the constituency are Muslim , mostly originating from Pakistan and still with close links to the old country; not just Pakistan in general but the city of Mirpur in Kashmir and clan politics link what happens in Mirpur to what happens in Bradford. We saw in Birmingham how clan leaders and heads of households deliver block votes.
Galloway was very smart in appealing to this audience; he played the game and won.

That is why I'm surprised it's being discussed as a pointer for the next general election that could be up to 3yrs away. It was also won by a man who is more personality/celebrity than a politician and to my mind it's about as relevant to the results of the next general election as my choice of evening meal tonight. (Cottage pie btw if you think you can make anything out of it )

ilm_zero7

verylonglegs: is that a hot cottage pie and VAT-able, or will you be allowing it to cool, so it is not?

verylonglegs

ILM Zero7 wrote:

verylonglegs: is that a hot cottage pie and VAT-able, or will you be allowing it to cool, so it is not?

It's a tricky one. It's the second half of one I made wednesday night so it's gone from hot to cold and kept in fridge and then back to hot again. What are the rules for things like chilli con carne portions that are cooked, cooled, frozen, thawed and re-heated? Has osbourne ever eaten Chilli con carne? Does he even know what it is?

finchy

MichaelW wrote:

Bradford is hardly a typical constituency and a lot of people are avoiding the M word.
45% of the constituency are Muslim , mostly originating from Pakistan and still with close links to the old country; not just Pakistan in general but the city of Mirpur in Kashmir and clan politics link what happens in Mirpur to what happens in Bradford. We saw in Birmingham how clan leaders and heads of households deliver block votes.
Galloway was very smart in appealing to this audience; he played the game and won.

So that leaves 55% of the population as non-Muslim, which means Tory and Labour collapsing in those areas as well. It probably was, though, a protest vote, but I doubt the Conservatives are happy about losing such large numbers within 2 years of a GE victory (when was the last time that an incumbent government saw such a slump in a by-election?), and Labour must be worried about not being seen as a credible alternative.

focus123

This man has a regular slot on Press TV which is an Iranian gov sponsored channel. He spouts off on anti US/UK policies, fair enough. But completely ignores the Iranian abuse of human rights. There are women stoned to death for adultery in this country, and he is working for the regime that allows it! The man is a drink sodden popinjay.

Frank the tank

Galloway quoted as saying this vote is an indicator that ordinary people are feeling alienated by the main three parties.

He has a point.

OffTheBackAdam

Since there's jack-all difference between them & their policies or their front benches, he's pretty right!
We need a genuine alternative.

Frank the tank

OffTheBackAdam wrote:

Since there's jack-all difference between them & their policies or their front benches, he's pretty right!
We need a genuine alternative.

Given your views differ (or seem to) from mine yet we agree on this point, where does that leave situation?