Council elections 2019

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

I’m not contesting for the win because I know my part won’t win?

You seem to think winning elections is the end and not the means.

—

I do think you can put a fair bit of the Tory losses (lost 1 in 4 seats over last time)not on Brexit but on the cumulative effects of austerity.

I think you misunderstood my point. As I mentioned above, the party with the most number of councillors = the winner (even if the win no margin is reduced) - and you weren't disputing that.

As for means and ends, well clearly one leads to another.

Or not, in the current iteration.

kingstongraham

Someone needs to tell the conservatives how well they did. They all seem to think it was bad news.

Stevo_666

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

Stevo_666

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

Pross

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

So if a party had the most Council seats nationwide but failed to control a single Council would you consider them the winners? Genuine question - how do things stand in terms of numbers of Councils controlled?

I said somewhere earlier that I don't like the party system in local elections. People should be voting in local elections based on the issues those Councils control and not because they dislike / support what is going on at a national level with policies a local council has no control over.

Stevo_666

Pross wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

So if a party had the most Council seats nationwide but failed to control a single Council would you consider them the winners? Genuine question - how do things stand in terms of numbers of Councils controlled?

I said somewhere earlier that I don't like the party system in local elections. People should be voting in local elections based on the issues those Councils control and not because they dislike / support what is going on at a national level with policies a local council has no control over.

Here you go. Still a win for the Tories on that count as well:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections

As mentioned above, there is a correlation between number of seats and number of councils controlled. It also helps to explain why some people are so reluctant to answer my question.

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

So if a party had the most Council seats nationwide but failed to control a single Council would you consider them the winners? Genuine question - how do things stand in terms of numbers of Councils controlled?

I said somewhere earlier that I don't like the party system in local elections. People should be voting in local elections based on the issues those Councils control and not because they dislike / support what is going on at a national level with policies a local council has no control over.

Here you go. Still a win for the Tories on that count as well:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections

As mentioned above, there is a correlation between number of seats and number of councils controlled. It also helps to explain why some people are so reluctant to answer my question.

Why do you reckon the Tories are claiming defeat?

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

So if a party had the most Council seats nationwide but failed to control a single Council would you consider them the winners? Genuine question - how do things stand in terms of numbers of Councils controlled?

I said somewhere earlier that I don't like the party system in local elections. People should be voting in local elections based on the issues those Councils control and not because they dislike / support what is going on at a national level with policies a local council has no control over.

Here you go. Still a win for the Tories on that count as well:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections

As mentioned above, there is a correlation between number of seats and number of councils controlled. It also helps to explain why some people are so reluctant to answer my question.

Why do you reckon the Tories are claiming defeat?

Where are they doing that? Link please.

Any thoughts in which party has the most councillors and the most controlled councils? Go on, someone has to answer...

thegreatdivide

Your posts are getting more and more desperate. Keep up the good work.

rjsterry

I never said they'd lost or were defeated, but the Telegraph is taking a pretty gloomy view.

The Conservatives have suffered their worst local election result since Tony Blair’s humiliation of John Major a quarter of a century ago as they lost 1,269 council seats.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... -loss/amp/

One doesn't normally call for one's party leader to step down after a win. There are plenty of quotes from party members. For example

Sophie Ridge wrote:

'We should be doing better but the Tories got absolutely monstered' - shadow Health secretary @JonAshworth

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

So if a party had the most Council seats nationwide but failed to control a single Council would you consider them the winners? Genuine question - how do things stand in terms of numbers of Councils controlled?

I said somewhere earlier that I don't like the party system in local elections. People should be voting in local elections based on the issues those Councils control and not because they dislike / support what is going on at a national level with policies a local council has no control over.

Here you go. Still a win for the Tories on that count as well:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections

As mentioned above, there is a correlation between number of seats and number of councils controlled. It also helps to explain why some people are so reluctant to answer my question.

Why do you reckon the Tories are claiming defeat?

Where are they doing that? Link please.

Any thoughts in which party has the most councillors and the most controlled councils? Go on, someone has to answer...

So to be clear, you believe that Tories are all over the media proclaiming that they won and you are just echoing their thoughts?

Stevo_666

thegreatdivide wrote:

Your posts are getting more and more desperate. Keep up the good work.

Same question to you then. Will you answer it or carry on with your little delusion? Go on...

Stevo_666

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

So if a party had the most Council seats nationwide but failed to control a single Council would you consider them the winners? Genuine question - how do things stand in terms of numbers of Councils controlled?

I said somewhere earlier that I don't like the party system in local elections. People should be voting in local elections based on the issues those Councils control and not because they dislike / support what is going on at a national level with policies a local council has no control over.

Here you go. Still a win for the Tories on that count as well:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections

As mentioned above, there is a correlation between number of seats and number of councils controlled. It also helps to explain why some people are so reluctant to answer my question.

Why do you reckon the Tories are claiming defeat?

Where are they doing that? Link please.

Any thoughts in which party has the most councillors and the most controlled councils? Go on, someone has to answer...

So to be clear, you believe that Tories are all over the media proclaiming that they won and you are just echoing their thoughts?

I'm simply stating the facts that the tories have the most councillors and the most controlled councils. I call that a win - what would you call it?

Stevo_666

rjsterry wrote:

I never said they'd lost or were defeated, but the Telegraph is taking a pretty gloomy view.

The Conservatives have suffered their worst local election result since Tony Blair’s humiliation of John Major a quarter of a century ago as they lost 1,269 council seats.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/20 ... -loss/amp/

One doesn't normally call for one's party leader to step down after a win. There are plenty of quotes from party members. For example

Sophie Ridge wrote:

'We should be doing better but the Tories got absolutely monstered' - shadow Health secretary @JonAshworth

SC said the Tories are claiming a loss. A newspapers and some individual mps are of course entitled to their own views.

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Pross wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ahahahahaaha that is excellent ^^

Which party has the most council seats?

Same question to you KG...try answering as strangely everyone else has dodged the question - wonder why?

And I'm still wondering...

So if a party had the most Council seats nationwide but failed to control a single Council would you consider them the winners? Genuine question - how do things stand in terms of numbers of Councils controlled?

I said somewhere earlier that I don't like the party system in local elections. People should be voting in local elections based on the issues those Councils control and not because they dislike / support what is going on at a national level with policies a local council has no control over.

Here you go. Still a win for the Tories on that count as well:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_local_elections

As mentioned above, there is a correlation between number of seats and number of councils controlled. It also helps to explain why some people are so reluctant to answer my question.

Why do you reckon the Tories are claiming defeat?

Where are they doing that? Link please.

Any thoughts in which party has the most councillors and the most controlled councils? Go on, someone has to answer...

So to be clear, you believe that Tories are all over the media proclaiming that they won and you are just echoing their thoughts?

I'm simply stating the facts that the tories have the most councillors and the most controlled councils. I call that a win - what would you call it?

I am just surprised that the Tory high command have not adopted the same approach and wondered if you had a theory as to why. As you believe that they have then it answers my question. They just need to work on their messaging as that is not how it has come across to most people.

timothyw

Stevo 666 wrote:

I'm simply stating the facts that the tories have the most councillors and the most controlled councils. I call that a win - what would you call it?

That is true in respect of those councils that held elections last week. What about all the other ones that didn't hold elections last week?

I mean, have you considered that the areas that held elections were largely tory leaning or had that not occurred to you?

The only overall numbers I can find on wikipedia haven't been updated since the latest election but at the very least look close - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political ... om#Summary

In fact, a bit of mental arithmatic would suggest from the above that there are now more Labour councillors in the UK than tory (-1330 tory, -84 labour)

I'm calling these results an absolute disaster for the tories, personally. If you want to call it a win, you only appear to be fooling yourself....

Stevo_666

TimothyW wrote:

The only overall numbers I can find on wikipedia haven't been updated since the latest election

Sounds like a bit of a guess. Got a link to the facts?

And who do you think is the winner?

rjsterry

Stevo 666 wrote:

TimothyW wrote:

The only overall numbers I can find on wikipedia haven't been updated since the latest election

Sounds like a bit of a guess. Got a link to the facts?

And who do you think is the winner?

Maybe there's a reason they don't announce a Winner That link has the Conservatives on 7615 seats and Labour on 6407. Subtract the net total losses for each party and you get 7615-1330=6285 and 6407-84=6323. A lead of 38 seats to Labour. Out of a total of 20687 seats, that's about 30% each which is pretty much where Curtice puts the projected national share. You could just leave it at "won a majority of the seats contested".

timothyw

Stevo 666 wrote:

TimothyW wrote:

The only overall numbers I can find on wikipedia haven't been updated since the latest election

Sounds like a bit of a guess. Got a link to the facts?

Do you?

I mean, I linked some numbers - pre the election, 7615 tory councillors, 6407 labour.

So lets subtract the councillors lost since then shall we?

7615-1330= 6285 Conservative
6407-85= 6322 Labour

Oh, looks like Labour won the election. Go Labour.

Ben6899

This is becoming like the marathon/fat/slow thread.

Weird.

kingstongraham

TimothyW wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

TimothyW wrote:

The only overall numbers I can find on wikipedia haven't been updated since the latest election

Sounds like a bit of a guess. Got a link to the facts?

Do you?

I mean, I linked some numbers - pre the election, 7615 tory councillors, 6407 labour.

So lets subtract the councillors lost since then shall we?

7615-1330= 6285 Conservative
6407-85= 6322 Labour

Oh, looks like Labour won the election. Go Labour.

Those numbers have been updated since the election - was 8942 before.

So it's all good news for the Conservatives, and they don't need to change anything. Keep up the good work. Pip pip. Onwards to greater success in the Euros.

rjsterry

KingstonGraham wrote:

TimothyW wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

TimothyW wrote:

The only overall numbers I can find on wikipedia haven't been updated since the latest election

Sounds like a bit of a guess. Got a link to the facts?

Do you?

I mean, I linked some numbers - pre the election, 7615 tory councillors, 6407 labour.

So lets subtract the councillors lost since then shall we?

7615-1330= 6285 Conservative
6407-85= 6322 Labour

Oh, looks like Labour won the election. Go Labour.

Those numbers have been updated since the election - was 8942 before.

So it's all good news for the Conservatives, and they don't need to change anything. Keep up the good work. Pip pip. Onwards to greater success in the Euros.

You sure? At the head of the table it reads "This table numbers the seats held by each party as of 28 March 2019."

Unless Timothy W is editing Wikipedia :shock:

Pross

I'm still struggling with the whole concept of there being a national winner to local elections. It's irrelevant to someone in Mid Bucks which party won in South Hams.

rolf_f

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

rick_chasey

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Good for you.

You'd get better politics if people voted purely for who they thought would best govern, rather than second guessing what everyone else will vote for.

rjsterry

Pross wrote:

I'm still struggling with the whole concept of there being a national winner to local elections. It's irrelevant to someone in Mid Bucks which party won in South Hams.

This has already been pointed out, but when's that ever stopped a thread?

rolf_f

Rick Chasey wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Good for you.

You'd get better politics if people voted purely for who they thought would best govern, rather than second guessing what everyone else will vote for.

Thanks - it felt quite good! It could be argued to be a tactical voting fail but the bigger picture is what matters here and party politics should be considered as an utter triviality given what is going on in the world. Corbyn has the power to do great good (effectively by forcing another referendum which will hopefully result in the end of Brexit and therefore allow us to concentrate on working with Europe to stop the climate catastrophe rather than focussing the next decades work on worrying how we simultaneously stop all those awful immigrants from coming here whilst at the same time still having enough nurses, hotel cleaners, fruit pickers etc - but he probably won't because he is as weak as May.

john80

Rolf F wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Good for you.

You'd get better politics if people voted purely for who they thought would best govern, rather than second guessing what everyone else will vote for.

Thanks - it felt quite good! It could be argued to be a tactical voting fail but the bigger picture is what matters here and party politics should be considered as an utter triviality given what is going on in the world. Corbyn has the power to do great good (effectively by forcing another referendum which will hopefully result in the end of Brexit and therefore allow us to concentrate on working with Europe to stop the climate catastrophe rather than focussing the next decades work on worrying how we simultaneously stop all those awful immigrants from coming here whilst at the same time still having enough nurses, hotel cleaners, fruit pickers etc - but he probably won't because he is as weak as May.

Good luck with the EU sorting out climate change. For an organisation that can't stop moving between offices due to self interest I am not entirely sure how you see them sorting out climate change.

surrey_commuter

john80 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Good for you.

You'd get better politics if people voted purely for who they thought would best govern, rather than second guessing what everyone else will vote for.

Thanks - it felt quite good! It could be argued to be a tactical voting fail but the bigger picture is what matters here and party politics should be considered as an utter triviality given what is going on in the world. Corbyn has the power to do great good (effectively by forcing another referendum which will hopefully result in the end of Brexit and therefore allow us to concentrate on working with Europe to stop the climate catastrophe rather than focussing the next decades work on worrying how we simultaneously stop all those awful immigrants from coming here whilst at the same time still having enough nurses, hotel cleaners, fruit pickers etc - but he probably won't because he is as weak as May.

Good luck with the EU sorting out climate change. For an organisation that can't stop moving between offices due to self interest I am not entirely sure how you see them sorting out climate change.

FFS - go back and read what you just posted. Now tell yourself "I am better than this"

rjsterry

Surrey Commuter wrote:

john80 wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo will love me; I voted Green (for the first time) in a Labour marginal. Tories won by 240 odd votes (vs a loss by 75 votes last time). Corbyn has only himself to blame (though Stevo would no doubt say it was all down to the strong and stable leadership of TM).

If Corbyn sorts himself out in time for the European elections I might revert to Labour but I can't really see that happening. It would require him to make an actual clear decision.

Good for you.

You'd get better politics if people voted purely for who they thought would best govern, rather than second guessing what everyone else will vote for.

Thanks - it felt quite good! It could be argued to be a tactical voting fail but the bigger picture is what matters here and party politics should be considered as an utter triviality given what is going on in the world. Corbyn has the power to do great good (effectively by forcing another referendum which will hopefully result in the end of Brexit and therefore allow us to concentrate on working with Europe to stop the climate catastrophe rather than focussing the next decades work on worrying how we simultaneously stop all those awful immigrants from coming here whilst at the same time still having enough nurses, hotel cleaners, fruit pickers etc - but he probably won't because he is as weak as May.

Good luck with the EU sorting out climate change. For an organisation that can't stop moving between offices due to self interest I am not entirely sure how you see them sorting out climate change.

FFS - go back and read what you just posted. Now tell yourself "I am better than this"

Down to the drafting of the very earliest bits of the EU. Strasbourg was the symbolic middle ground between France and Germany so became the first home of the European Parliament. As it's written into a treaty, it can only be changed by unanimous vote and France don't want to lose out to Belgium. Silly, but then our government has subverted its own pollution legislation and had to be taken to court by its own citizens.