Britons Punish Blair at Polling Booth Over Iraq.

[efhmc]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=586&e=1&u=/nm/20040611/wl_nm/britain_elections_dc

[Nlighten1]

1. Don't forget to vote...

[efhmc]

2. When is the voting finished?

[UpInArms]

3. related article: Blair punished at polling booths

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID...

LONDON (Reuters) - The public has dealt Prime Minister Tony Blair an electoral slap in the face with results from local elections showing his Labour Party losing support across the country.

Ministers said his support for war in Iraq, and its violent aftermath, had taken a toll, though early returns left unclear whether it would be just a set-back or a drubbing.

Thursday's polls for local government, the European Parliament and London's mayor are the biggest public test for the government outside a general election.

<snip>

Some 6,000 seats on 166 councils in England and Wales were up for grabs -- about a quarter of the total. Analysts said a net loss of 400 seats or more would amount to a serious reverse for Blair.

With 45 councils having reported, Labour had lost a net 97 seats compared with similar local polls last year.

...more...

[steely]

4. Staggered elections over 4 years? How's that work?

And he could still win the "general election" in 2005?

me no unnerstan, but then I didin't go to electoral college either <chortle>

[Teaser]

5. Oour Senate elections are staggered...

so maybe something like that?

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. Yes, that's roughly it

I assume the article descrbied the local council elections as 'staggered' (it's changed recently).

Typically, each council is divided into wards, which have 3 people representing them. Their term is 4 years, and the years in which each of the 3 comes up for reelection are different. So, unless there are boundary changes, you normally only see part of a town council elected each year. What I can't remember is how, after boundary changes (which have to happen due to towns gorwing in size, etc.) they manage to 'restagger' the election years - maybe they agree that when they elect 3 new councillors, the one with the most votes serves longest, or something.

[muriel_volestrangler]

8. Several things mean Blair could win a general election

First, the party votes in local elections don't have to be the same at national level - local concerns like town planning decisions may drive these votes more than national health policies, for instance.
The Tories got more votes in local elections than Labour in 2000, but Labour got more in the general election of 2001.

Secondly, the 'first past the post' system of constituencies favours Labour at the moment. Each constituency elects one MP, and currently, the pattern between Labour and Conservative is for Labour to win more seats by smaller margins, and the Tories to win fewer, but by larger margins. So even if the same total number of people voted for each party, Labour would get more seats. Very like your electoral college in 2000 - but probably more extreme.

Lastly, the turnout in local elections is always lower than national ones. Those who don't vote locally but do nationally are probably apathetic government supporters - they find Labour acceptable, but nothing special, and can't be bothered to take 15 minutes to go and vote unless it affects the national government (which has nearly all the powers in England - roughly those of the US president, congress, state governors and congresses combined). This is why Labour was keen to get their 'heartland' districts in the north of England using an all-postal ballot - they thought it would increase voting, mainly among their lukewarm supporters.

[AP]

17. Another: these results don't include anything from Scoltand,

which probably has 12-15% of the population (???) and 1 (???) Tory minister.

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. True

(assuming you meant MP). The Scottish population is actually 8.6% of the UK; they will have 9.1% of the seats in the next parliament.

[LibLabUK]

7. Gah, people are muppets.

It seems that a fair few people voted Conservative instead of Labour this time.... How exactly do they think the Conservatives will look after their interests better than Labour?

And besides, weren't the Conservatives (with the exception of Ken Clark) all in support of the war?

The London Mayoral election is going to be interesting. If the Iraq debacle costs Ken the mayorship, then it will confirm that people are stupid.

[Spentastic]

9. Yes. This is insane

I'm protesting against Labour's behaviour regarding Iraq by moving my vote to a party that were all for invading Iraq and were in fact criticising the government for not getting stuck in hard enough.

The British people who voted in this elections are idiots.

Oops... I voted.

Actually I think there's a load of shit being talked about a protest vote. The turnout was still low and it's probably the biddy brigade actually bothering to vote. For some reason as people go senile they start voting tory.

[Mr Creosote]

10. Not sure that's true

Lib Dems are doing at least as well as the Tories and they were quite clearly anti-war. Noticeable that they are about to pull off a huge win in Newcastle (near Bliar's constituency).

[Spentastic]

11. No they are not

The Tories are polling 38% the Libs are on 30%

If it was a "protest" you'd see that reversed

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. But with a lower turnout that general elections

the numbers can still mean a 'protest' vote - former Labour supporters staying at home, maybe a few going to the Lib Dems, the Tory voters happy with their party's support of the invasion, and so turning out.

[Spentastic]

13. Bugger off

Vote implies just that an active choice. A protest non vote is something different.

[Mr Creosote]

14. Change in share of vote from 2001

Labour -16%
Tory +5%
Liberal +11%
which is not inconsistent with at least some of it being a protest vote.

[AP]

18. That press has been all Iraq. Naturally people are going to put that at

the top of their list and vote accordingly.

They think the Tories are better on national security and foreign policy.

The crazy thing is they aren't, and that people should be voting for jobs and wages if they want a strong democracy, and they're getting that from every party other than the Tories.

[Capt_Nemo]

19. Not that having a war criminal as Labour leader has anything to do with it

:eyes:

on edit: Michael Howard maybe a fascist bastard but he has not yet
the blood of thousands of innocent civillians on his hands, so
maybe, just maybe, british voters find him just a bit less repulsive
than the Prime Warmonger... :puke:

[T_i_B]

20. These are local election results

and one influence that I would mention at this point is the parties records in local government.

Personally I had my local elections last year and my council went from Lib Dem to tory, not because of Iraq but because of council tax and other local issues.

But we have yet to see the European election results, and again the issues that the election actually covers may well play a large part. I had an argument with a member of the RESPECT coalition about this very point a couple of weeks ago.

From what I have seen I suspect the UKIP are about to do well in the EU elections, due in no small part to theirs being very much an EU obsessed party who debate the EU issues people are actually voting on more than the others tend to.

[LivingInTheBubble]

21. They believed the propaganda.

There was a lot of propaganda around that the libdems would only poll very low and people being the sheep they are may have voted for the tories thinking a vote for libdems would be a "wasted" vote.

Hopefully with the good libdem showing people will get the idea that its OK to vote for them (like I did!).

On the subject of propaganda, its spin from labour that the result was due only to Iraq, really labour have made a mess of a load of issues and although I am normally a labour voter I can't think of anything they have done to make me want to vote for them.

The NHS, Education, the constant terror lies and Blunketts removal of our rights - there are lots of reasons to not vote labour.

Hopefully Ken will survive the mayor contest, he is a stand up bloke.

[T_i_B]

23. From what I have seen

the local election results were not so much for the tories or the Lib Dems but against Labour. Make of that theory what you will.

[UpInArms]

15. Related Article: Blair's party loses support in local elections (-211 seat

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-06/11/content_1521690.htm

LONDON, June 11 (Xinhuanet) -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair suffered a big loss in local council elections, as preliminary results showed Friday that his Labor Party came third behind the major opposition parties.

With 82 of 166 councils up for grabs having reported by early Friday, Labor had lost 211 seats, which analysts believed would be a serious blow to Blair.

The BBC projected Labor's vote share at just 26 percent, 12 percentage points behind the Conservatives and below Britain's third party, the Liberal Democrats on 30 percent.

Blair acknowledged Iraq was a key factor in the public's voting decision.

"Iraq and the worries over Iraq have been a shadow over our support," he was quoted by a Sky News report as saying at the end of the G8 summit in the United States.

...more...

[LivingInTheBubble]

22. Its currently at 398 councillors lost... heheh.

[dArKeR]

16. Voters Slap Blair's Labor Party - CBS

(I love this title so much more! "Voters Slap Bush - 2004")

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/12/world/main616975.shtml

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. Livingstone wins mayoral contest

Labour's Ken Livingstone has won a second term as London's mayor, beating Tory Steve Norris after second preference votes were counted.
Mr Livingstone got 685,541 first preference votes to Mr Norris's 542,423 votes.

with 2nd preference votes (from another site):

Ken Livingstone (Lab) 828,380

Steve Norris (C) 667,178

[Spazito]

25. That's good news! Thanks!

*

[fedsron2us]

27. Blair does n't give a damn about local Labour councillors

They are expendable. His aim is to keep the 'New Labour' (Blairite/neconservative) agenda on track. If a few old time socialists get wiped out in the provinces so much the better. Labour MP's should really toss this Tory cuckoo out of their nest but sadly they lack the courage to carry out this task. I am afraid that years of power has bred a fatal level of complacency amongst many in the party. They appear to be happy to acquiese to Blair's agenda so long as he brings them victory and a seat in Parliament at the General Election. Unfortunately, for them the Conservatives appear to have fully regained their grip on their heartland in the south of England and now seem poised to challenge for government. I do not think anything will change until the Labour party gets ousted from government. By then it will be too late for most of their MP's who will be out of a job. One person that will not have to worry is Mr Blair. I am sure his corporate friends have got some nice little earner lined up for him in thanks for all the work that he has done in subverting the interests of the common people over the last 8 years.

[dArKeR]

28. Humbled Blair Faces Party Anguish Over Poll Defeat

By Peter Graff

LONDON (Reuters) - A humbled Tony Blair returns to Britain on Saturday to answer critics in his own party after voter backlash against his support for war in Iraq brought an unprecedented trouncing in local elections.

Blair's aides tried to put the best possible spin on the election defeat while the prime minister attended the funeral of former U.S. President Ronald Reagan in Washington.

But more than 460 Labor officials were voted out of local government, and Blair will have to convince party members with seats in national parliament that they will not suffer the same fate in a general election likely next year.

"I'd like to say I'm sorry to the (local) councillors who've lost their seats," Blair told reporters in Washington before heading home. "I think Iraq has been a shadow over our support."

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=C11EWT3AJKMIMCRBAEOCFEY?type=worldNews&storyID=5404914

[dArKeR]

29. Blair gets drubbing from war-weary Britons

REUTERS , LONDON
Saturday, Jun 12, 2004,Page 1

Britons angry over Iraq have given Prime Minister Tony Blair a drubbing in local elections, relegating his ruling Labour Party to an unprecedented third place.

"It's a bad night for us, but it's not meltdown," Blair's Home Secretary David Blunkett said yesterday. "On Iraq, we are very clear about that -- it has damaged us."

Thursday's local council poll outcome -- likely to be echoed in European Parliament results tomorrow -- will inevitably renew speculation about Blair's leadership.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2004/06/12/2003174720

[struggle4progress]

30. kick

:kick: