Corby – a conundrum

Much will no doubt be made of the findings from Lord Ashcroft’s poll of 1,500 electors in the Corby constituency – plus, what the author will consider to be his words of wisdom, this comment piece

Mid-period of any parliamentary term any by-election will produce a protest vote, especially when the government of the day is taking unpopular measures, whether by a change of party representative or, in a ‘safe’ seat, a drop in the percentage voting for the new candidate of the government party. But, if we set aside the foregoing, one has to ask for what are the electorate voting, should the final result mirror the findings of Ashcroft?

What are Labour’s detailed policies on whatever aspect one chooses to name? Where is the choice twixt the Lib/Lab/Con on matters EU, immigration, equality and diversity, or the majority of any other area of policy – and it should be remembered all of them are wedded to central control so while they talk of devolution of power, that will never happen. Tim Montgomerie maintains that as Corby is an area where Ukip have great support, that if that party does not achieve at least 10% share of the vote, then they will have failed – to which I would say that if, under the conditions presently prevailing, Ukip, with what is truly a local candidate, fail to garner at least 20% of the vote then they really will have failed.

The question has to be asked just how short are people’s memories when Ashcroft’s findings show that 43% of those polled believe Labour are competent and capable. Another question which can also be asked is that if, again according to Ashcroft’s polling, a clear majority thought the Conservatives were “willing to take tough decisions for the long term” and that by two to one, people preferred the government’s argument on the debt and the deficit to the proposition that we should cut less fast and borrow more for longer, then just from where does a lead of 15% come?

What will be of interest will be the percentage of the electorate that turn out to vote and who will therefore appear content to continue their life of servitude under what is a democratized dictatorship.

Just some more thoughts………….

 

 

 

 


Share
facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailfacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow
twitterrsstwitterrss

7 Responses

  1. Sue says:

    Corby: you only have to look at the demographics on Wiki to find out why they will vote Labour. You can’t blame people who are out of work or disabled for voting for the party that will ensure their benefits are at their highest and safest. Free money is a difficult thing to compete with.

    This is the policy area in which Labour will always have the upper hand, especially in areas of de-industrialisation like Corby.

    I like Margot Parker, she’s a down to earth lady who is obviously very intelligent. However, she will have to appeal to the people who are actively employed to get anywhere. I hope she wins.

    • david says:

      Accept your first point, but did not the majority vote for a Tory in 2010?

      I have to come back to the point that 43% now consider a party the held as not competent now is, yet are those in the Labour Party not the same people?

      Margot Parker may be a good candidate -doubt that the party for which she stands will run an acceptable campaign.

      • Ian E says:

        If we take for granted the idiocy and short memory of most of the electorate, there has still been a significant change of labour personnel – no longer present are the toxic duo of Brown and Blair. When combined with the appalling behaviour/policy idiocies of Ole Cast-Iron and his cohorts, the reversion to type in voting intentions is surely not that surprising!?

        • cosmic says:

          Yes, being fed up with the lot that can’t sort out the problems does not make it a good idea to vote for the lot which created them to begin with. People have short memories and think only in terms of voting for the Blue Team or the Red Team.

          Cameron isn’t an impressive figure who gives the impression that he has thought things through and is showing leadership and that makes a difference. He looks out of control.

          I bet the voters of Corby are pretty fed up with Louise Mensch who gives the impression that she never took being their MP very seriously. These things make a difference.

        • david says:

          Brown and Blair may be missing but we still have both Milibands, Balls, Cooper, Harman…….- need I go on?

          In other words Corby will be a protest vote – with what aim in mind and what good will it do whereby ‘change’ can happen? More disappointingly is the lack of a candidate to proffer the chance of change’.

  2. Herod says:

    Corby offers it’s voters a whole variety of options. The best has to be the option of ignoring the whole charade. That option reduces effort to the minimum saving much ado about nothing.
    Second up, it offers a chance for a well aimed raspberry to the main political parties, a pleasure not to be sneezed at, of voting UKIP. A minor price of having to go to the polling booth may be worth it.
    The third option of going to the booth and writing something rude on the voting paper, though pleasurable, is probably not worth the effort.
    The option of just waiting for democratic reform of the entire system is in fact similar to option 1.

    • david says:

      Fair comment – but regret can’t see either of the three options you mentioning being used by the electorate.

Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012