UK Parliamentary by-elections, 2015 onwards (also devolved legislatures)

[jaichind]

I highly doubt Corbyn leaves even if they also lose Stoke

Yeah.  And I really doubt LAB loses Stoke anyway so he is sticking around for a while.

[jaichind]

Of course if LAB loses Copeland then perhaps they might want to reconsider their strategy of talking about NHS as the basis of any election campaign.

[jaichind]

I saw this on a tweet



Looks like a good sign for LAB in Stoke

[jaichind]

Stokeby

LAB 37.1 (-2.2)
UKIP 24.7 (+2.0)
CON 24.3 (+1.8   )
LD 9.8 (+5.6)
GRN 1.4 (-2.2)
OTH 2.6

LAB-UKIP swing 2.1%
TO 38.1

[jaichind]

I think CON wins Copeland

[jaichind]

Copeland

CON 44.3 (+8.5)
LAB 37.3 (-4.9)
LD 7.3 (+3.8  )
UKIP 6.5 (-9.0)
GRN 1.7 (-1.3)

CON wins on UKIP tactical voting plus LAB bleeding support to LD.

[jaichind]

I do no think I recall in situation like this in UK where the ruling party captures an opposition seat in a straight-up by-election fight (which means not counting by-elections where CON might have won a LAB seat because SDP split he LAB vote).  I have to take a look.  Certainly if that did take place the margin would have been small, unlike a decisive win here like Copeland.

[jaichind]

Copeland

CON 44.3 (+8.5)
LAB 37.3 (-4.9)
LD 7.3 (+3.8  )
UKIP 6.5 (-9.0)
GRN 1.7 (-1.3)

CON wins on UKIP tactical voting plus LAB bleeding support to LD.

Labour bled more support to 'abstain' than to the Lib Dems, I think.

Best result for a governing party in a post-war by-election, surely.

Sure,  but turnout was actually quite high for a by-election and in absolute votes LD actually beat their 2015 result.

[jaichind]

Factoring in national polling this wasn't a terrible night for labour

True, but the national polling in itself is terrible for labour.

And even if national polling is bad usually in a by-election it is the opposition voting bloc voters that tends to turn out and the the ruling party voting bloc voters that stay home so in this case LAB should have beaten their national polling by a significant margin.  Somehow that did not happen.  That said, Corbyn will stay on of course.    

[jaichind]

That Labor loss in Copeland wasn't expected?

I read a lot of rumors on-line that LAB was going to lose but there have been so many cases in the past where such rumors turned out not to be true.

[jaichind]

It seems illogical to me from the LAB PLP point of view to try to oust Corybn.  These by-elections for sure demonstrate that Corybn will lead LAB into certain defeat in 2020.  But they also represent a floor for LAB support under Corybn.  Any attempt to oust Corybn will most likely fail and will only move down that floor.  Only real way out is to accept defeat in 2020, hope it is not  total wipe out, and start afresh once Corybn goes after 2020.  More leadership challenges will only make the level of 2020 defeat even worse and a bigger mountain to claim in the 2025 election.  In case it actually succeeds the new LAB leader would face either a passive pro-Corybn bloc that will turn out in low numbers in 2020 or even worse a pro-Corybn Left splinter party that would take down LAB everywhere. 

[jaichind]

Is there any reason to believe Corbyn would actually step down after a general election wipe-out?

Convention? But it's also convention to leave after a no-confidence vote (Margaret Thatcher left after winning one) so shrugging shoulders emoji

Did not Neil Kinnock stay on after 1987?  So I guess convention would imply that LAB performance was above expectations, however tiny, then the Corybn can stay on.  I guess for Corybn that would be to do slightly better than the 2015 LAB performance.  In which case he can make the argument that he could and should stay.    Of course if if LAB gets wiped out I do not thing he would have leg to stand on to stay.  Maybe I am wrong and underestimate how thick skinned Corybn can be.

[jaichind]

Is there any reason to believe Corbyn would actually step down after a general election wipe-out?

Convention? But it's also convention to leave after a no-confidence vote (Margaret Thatcher left after winning one) so shrugging shoulders emoji

Off-topic, but no she didn't.  The Tories' rules at the time required a 15% lead for a victory on the first ballot, and she fell short.  She could have continued into the second round, but realised that MPs were going to switch their votes and that she was going to lose (at least it seems that's what happened) and pulled out.

As for Corbyn, who knows what disasters have to hit the party for him to actually leave of his own accord.  However, the membership's patience must have some limits.

That was my understanding too with respect to Thatcher.   I think what took place was she did a lot worse than expected and lost all confidence to win on the second round which I think was still quite winnable.   It seems she won a similar vote a year earlier by a wide margin and lulled her into a false sense of security.

[jaichind]

But it was still a byelection, where it is easier for parties outside the "big two" to gain support.

Especially given their absolutely gushing write-up in the Graun, it was an underwhelming vote for Renew actually.

Yeah.  I was expecting a greater vote share for both UKIP and Renew.