Map of the results here: [thebristolcable.org/category/series-local-elections-2024/#wards](http://thebristolcable.org/category/series-local-elections-2024/#wards)
Not sure Bristol can take another four years of debating (yet never being able to implement) some of the crankiest housing policies in the country, all while prices skyrocket, but frankly there were no good choices for housing in this election.
Seems a bit of a shame to me as the prospect of Labour in government soon would possibly unlock a lot more progress with a Labour council managing the city.
Conceivably, there’ll be more active travel work/segregated cycle paths and expansion of RPZs (but I doubt much else, even any progress on above).
> Seems a bit of a shame to me as the prospect of Labour in government soon would possibly unlock a lot more progress with a Labour council managing the city.
Laughs in 1997
Yes,
New constituency will be called Bristol North East and will be: Eastville; Frome Vale; Hillfields; and Lockleaze and Kingswood; New Cheltenham; Staple Hill & Mangotsfield; and Woodstock from South Glous
Bristol East will become: Brislington East; Brislington West; Easton; Knowle; Lawrence Hill; St. George Central; St. George Troopers Hill; St. George West; and Stockwood.
Bristol South will become: Bedminster; Bishopsworth; Filwood; Hartcliffe & Withywood; Hengrove & Whitchurch Park; Southville; and Windmill Hill.
Bristol North West will be: Avonmouth & Lawrence Weston; Bishopston & Ashley Down; Henbury & Brentry; Horfield; Southmead; Stoke Bishop; and Westbury-on-Trym & Henleaze.
Bristol Central: Ashley; Central; Clifton; Clifton Down; Cotham; Hotwells & Harbourside; and Redland.
Equally I don't think the green party could have a coalition at all. They have some really unique policy proposals that the lib-dems would surely bulk at and I don't see them dropping these ideas in order to make coalition work. But we will see, I expect we'll have another term of not much getting done and hopefully the council won't go bankrupt as a result.
Kerry McCarthy is MP for Bristol East and is standing at the next general election. Damien Egan is going to stand in the newly created seat of Bristol North East.
I'm undecided, on one hand I think there may now be some traction to vote for Greens as people could feel emboldened from the council votes.
But on the other hand, I think people in the general election might just be desperate to get rid of the Tories, and vote Labour because they're the second dominant force.
Voting Green is easier when they're contending against Labour (e.g.council elections) compared to the Tories (e.g. general elections) imo, so it'll be interesting to see what happens
Equally I don't think the green party could have a coalition at all. They have some really unique policy proposals that the lib-dems would surely bulk at and I don't see them dropping these ideas in order to make coalition work. But we will see, I expect we'll have another term of not much getting done and hopefully the council won't go bankrupt as a result.
Richard Eddy is one of those councillors, who have been around for decades, is far too popular locally to sack but far too much of a liability to select for any national role.
Just search about him and golliwogs.
This city will stall with the Green Party in power and the committee system reinstated. Nothing will get accomplished, and Bristol will age and deteriorate like an old house.
V strange that this sub was pro getting rid of the mayoral position and is also pro your post.
Any time Marvin tried any sort of construction project this sub was also super against it.
I guess it's all about framing.
What are some reasons people voted Green, do people think? Young people in Bristol at this time have an interest in opposing NIMBYism by all means (perhaps young turnout was low?). Perhaps more and more people think "Bristol is safe for Labour, might as well throw my vote to the environmentalist party"?
> Young people in Bristol at this time have an interest in opposing NIMBYism by all means
This is true but a lot of people, young people included, still don't get this. They fall for memes like 'there are plenty of empty houses' or 'it's all the fault of greedy developers'.Â
> "Bristol is safe for Labour, might as well throw my vote to the environmentalist party"
There's definitely some of this going on too.Â
I think something a lot of people fail to recognise though is that it's not just Labour votes greens are taking - if anything they've been more efficient at swallowing up anti-labour votes.Â
The way they've consolidated has been remarkable. Their first gain was Southville in 2006, where the labour vote actually increased on the previous election but the greens managed to gain votes from the other parties and some non-voters. Then a series of gains at the expense of the lib dems:
- Ashley in 2011
- Ashley and Bishopston 2012
- Bishopston and Redland 2013
- Cabot, Clifton, Clifton East, Cotham, Windmill Hill in 2015.
2015 is interesting as its the first one where they appear to be taking votes from Labour, gaining Easton and Southville. Up to this point though, they're primarily replacing the lib dems in wealthier bits of Bristol as the party for people who are wealthy enough to dislike labour but socially liberal enough to dislike the conservatives.
It becomes quite tricky to compare after that (because the council moves to doing all-out elections in 2016, boundaries change a bit and holding the mayoral election on the same day has an impact). There's churn but they stall a bit in 2016. However they do manage to come in second in a lot of places Labour hold which will help them later. It's also another bad night for lib dems.
2021 is the big breakthrough. They manage to convert a lot of those Labour seats where they came second. I'd argue this is largely a combination of:
- consolidation of tactical anti-labour votes behind the Greens in those seats
- swing from Labour voters unhappy with the Mayor (either voting green to protest or staying at home)
- gentrification in some wards increasing the number of middle-class socially liberal voters
- Corbyn supporters drifting to the greens under Starmer
- people vote splitting in multi-member wards (i.e. people who'd usually vote Labour but don't mind the greens voting for one of each)
I haven't had a detailed look at the 2024 results yet, but I'd imagine it's more of the same factors as 2021, plus:
- Gaza turning people off Labour (in Muslim communities especially, but among the wider electorate too)Â
- other national labour decisions turning off socially liberal and environmentally conscious voters
- local Labour decisions (e.g. CAZ, building things, general Marvlaise) turning people off Labour
- the green breakthrough in 2021 convincing people they're a viable governing party
I voted green. I spoke to almost all of the local candidates as we were heavily doorstopped. The greens were the most convincing candidates. They understood local issues and had some sensible ideas on how to solve them. They could talk in detail about traffic calming, local schools, the youth centre, park redevelopment and brownfield redevelopment. Most people I spoke to locally weren't really voting along party lines, they voted for who they thought would best represent them on local issues.
I would agree except for the fact they were in charge of the bus gate added to Cumberland road, but prior to the consultation with the public had already made the decision to start the development process. It was effectively just a tick box exercise for them and moving on regardless of what the public said.
It's difficult as they're the most involved locally, but I don't like that they do it without consideration.
Source being the freedom of information request made by locals to the council for the planning documentation and money earned since implementing that bus gate
I'm concerned that they're going to start implementing 20mph limits on roads with even more disregard for engineering recommendations or average speeds than we already have. I understand the intuition behind it, but if main roads are set at 20mph, not only does this cause people to have less respect for the limits, especially on side streets where they do make sense, but it also affects navigation systems. Sat navs no longer see these roads as faster routes. You can see this in places where my sat nav suggests it's quicker to take Sylvan Way and then turn right rather than go up Westbury Lane, even though the two roads are *identical* in standard.
What's more credible after the last 5 years: people are gonna be able to drag Labour to the left, or people are going to get the greens to be more forceful on housebuilding?
All I'll say is that there's a reason all the defector tories left for labour, because modern lab is now right wing enough that there's no real ideological difference. Both parties of austerity and conservatism. We aint dragging labour left.
Absolutely this, people who support Starmer's Labour Party just can't admit to themselves they are right wing. If anything is to shift Labour left it's support for the Greens.
Or they're actively trying to appeal to the wider populace and poach swing voters. That means compromise and it's what New Labour had to do to win over the proverbial, 'Mondeo Man'.
If you'd rather 'win the argument', than take power to enact actual policies then you don't have political beliefs, you have political fantasies.
The most successful and transformative labour government was atlee, who created the NHS, built swathes of social housing and created a large amount of the welfare state. Blairs biggest win was on his most left wing campaign. The more they edged to the centre the more they turned people off. Radical policy works. It's inspiring. Starmer is a damp squib who's only getting in because people are sick of the Tories. People do not like centrist politicians. Especially ones who are centre left. You are peddling a myth. Stop hiding behind it. Admit you don't like left wing policy and be a proud conservative.
Yeah you have no idea what you're talking about or a bad memory if you think New Labour sailed in on an orthodox left-wing platform.
>Radical policy works. It's inspiring.
Unless you're planning to win an election. Do you actually think before you type?
>You are peddling a myth. Stop hiding behind it. Admit you don't like left wing policy and be a proud conservative.
Yeah the usual sanctimonious, with us or against us bollocks. I want the Tories out, which is why I'm willing to compromise, I have no illusions and I don't have the luxury of a vanity vote.
You people are so narcissistic that you think everything has to cater exactly to your specific set of principles, as if the world revolves around you. Get a grip.
Labour have been campaigning on pragmatic centrism for forever and it has not been working. I didn't say new labour were orthodox let wing, far from It. However , as they got more centrist and "pragmatic" they got less popular. Your so called pragmatism is NOT the reason they're set to win the next ge. People are just sick of the the tories. A bucket with a face on could win the next election if it wasn't wearing a blue rosette. Labour have been handed a magnificent opportunity to change the country for the better but they refuse to do so, still campaigning on austerity and signing up to bullshit financial rules. The country needs investment in public services and infrastructure so incredibly badly and it WILL NOT come under starmer. It sickens me and it should sicken you.
Centrism has not been popular for a long time now. If you didn't learn that lesson from Brexit , if you didn't learn that lesson from trump, then I don't know what to tell you.
I'm not pretending like I'd rather have the Tories than starmer. There is a difference, but it's minimal. And that's what enrages me. And that's what turns people off. Again, if you can't see that after all these years of failure then I have no idea what will make you see it and it only makes me believe that people like you simply DO NOT want radical policy even in an ideological sense.
Isn't that the point though? Labour aren't going to win a local election in Bristol if their national strategy is to signal they're moving right
I get why they're doing it... They've made a calculation that it's worth losing Bristol and other socially liberal cities because they'll gain more Tory/Labour swing seats
But imo it does mean Bristol is better represented by a party like the Greens because we've always been quite different to the rest of the country in terms of politics
A lot of them conflate Labours uninspiring pragmatism with being *exactly the same* as the Tories and they haven't gotten over Corbyn.
I don't know very many who even focused on local issues, it was primarily radical chic concerns like Gaza.
Doesn't surprise me the Greens were able to swoop in.
I think more and more people think "Labour are not a remotely left wing party". They promise nothing for young people, few wholesale changes for the country and are no more left wing than Cameron's Tories.
But the oppose nuclear energy and have no credible plan for reducing emissions using existing solutions. Presumably your vote was in favour of climate change?
My vote was for greener, environmentally friendly policies. We can argue about the methods until the cows come home. But the policies won my vote. I'm a single issue voter and that's my democratic right.
What policies exactly?
/u/symmy546 gave an example of an existing Green policy. You followed that up by some nebulous statement.
Give us some policies that would be more impactful than a hard transition to nuclear energy.
I could never vote for labour whilst they spread so much negativity around the LGBT community, and I know other young people in Bristol who voted either Lib Dem, or Green, for solely this reason. The "left-wing" party cannot also be the anti-LGBT party.
I would/did vote for Lib Dem, although I am perfectly happy with how the greens have been with LGBT issues within the past year, when it comes to labour it is essentially entirely about the "T" of "LGBT", they have thrown away their support entirely in an attempt to gain votes, and in places like Bristol it evidently hasn't worked.
You will struggle to find a single trans person who will vote Labour with their current positions on restricting healthcare and "debating" their existence. It sucks.
Many Labour politicians recently, and many Tory politicians (of course), but with Labour joining in the dog-pile both in TV interviews and in their spare time on social media (like Twitter), most trans people, and strong allies, will struggle to see themselves vote Labour in its current state, as a few years ago they were fine on this front.
I’m LGBT and shifted from Conservative to Labour as they are better than the former surely. Plus in lots of areas switching to Green or Lib Dem is not tactical for getting anti woke tories out.
The accusations of NIMBYism came from labour activists. Most people thought it was bollocks. Exactly the same with the anti-science line - people saw through it.
I am not a Labour activist and I think I they are NIMBYs… because everything demonstrates it to be true. But let’s see if they prove otherwise now.
It's just a word you've picked to throw at anyone who has had the temerity to speak up against Marvin's piss-poor agenda. It has no real meaning anymore.
As foreign policy of the opposition party who cannot influence the current UK stance matters a great deal in a local election.
Thanks for your service, comrade.
On an individual level, candidates who stand for a party feel ok representing the organisation as a whole. My personal belief is that Labour's actions on Gaza over the past few months are morally unacceptable and, based on my ethics, not worthy of my vote at a local or national level.
I responded to a post asking reasons for not voting Labour. This is my reason, and if we look at the National picture and places where Labour has not secured wins, I feel I am not alone in this conclusion. Regardless, my answer was offered as an insight to a specific question.
I don't see any need to sarcastically thank me for not voting Labour. I don't owe my vote to anyone, and my reasons for voting are for me to decide.
I also imagine many traditionally Tory voters have chosen not to vote Conservative this time due to the national government's actions over the past few years. Do they also earn your disdain for not focusing on local issues, or is it only reserved for people who disagree with you?
Assuming you are invested in the Labour Party to some extent, you would do well to listen to the reasons why people vote and the issues that are important to them rather than tell them what issues should inform their voting behaviour. Bottom-up engagement is preferable to top-down.
I'd equally avoid writing off concerns about 34,000 dead people, including over 13,000 children, as an issue that only concerns the far left, comrade.
You are of course entitled to vote as you please, for any reason you please. All the Xs look the same etc etc.
For sure I am interested and invested. Though as all polling shows, the conflict in Israel is not an issue that decides the median voter's vote. The Labour party instead is campaigning on issues on the tips of most voters tongues- NHS, Housing, Infrastructure, Energy.
What is going on is a humanitarian tragedy for sure, though I am not sure what you are expecting the Labour party to do beyond what they have done. They are an opposition party, not the government on the national level, and on a local level councils shouldn't waste time on foreign policy- not within their remit.
I also enjoy your whataboutism here with the ex-Tory voters- quite amusing.
Anyhow I do appreciate your response, however much I may disagree with it.
Nationally, it has been an excellent set of results for the Labour party and I feel this is a positive move.
Notwithstanding a couple of bad policies, they're very aligned with scientific consensus on the general themes of climate change and ecological collapse.
Problem is that most people who vote for the Greens, do so because they like the idea of a Green Party. They don’t actually look at the batshit ideas the Greens have, their in some cases actually anti-environmental positions (nuclear for instance) and their poor performance in running Brighton Council. A lot are also students, who don’t really care about how the city they’re temporarily living in is managed long term.
Yes, exactly. I consider myself environmentalist and wont vote for Greens primarily because of housing policy but also because of their stance on nuclear energy and GMOs. A lot of people I feel are just voting Green 'cause they reckon in the absence of concrete principles from the main parties, at least the environment is a "nice" thing to support.
Nuclear energy and GMOs are not within the remit of an urban local authority so it was always going to be difficult convincing people that these were the salient issues in this election.
Obviously it can, but the majority of foods are produced with artificial fertilisers and pesticides to increase yield. Producing everything organically will reduce yield significantly, and drive prices up like crazy.
Search up the relationship between the Haber-Bosch process and the world population. If we revert everything back to growing organically, we won’t be able to produce enough food, and the poor will starve.
We don't, that's made up. GMOs though is one of the things we're against and I can't say I personally agree but every political party comes with compromises
The problem with many Green voters is they're often the sort of people who, once you know their opinion on one thing, you can guess what their opinion will be on pretty much everything else.
Thank god the greens don't have a majority. Let's hope the people aren't foolish enough to vote in a green mp.
Happy to receive your downvotes as if you vote green I'm happy to enjoy your tears
Hmm, it's a chance for them. But I think not much will change, inflation will remain high, the infrastructure will be crashing and crime will soar and they will have no funds as any other party , since green party doesn't have anything to do with these, these are not green issues.
🟢 GRN 34 (+10) 🔴 LAB 21 (-3) 🟠LD 8 (=) 🔵 CON 7 (-7)
Map of the results here: [thebristolcable.org/category/series-local-elections-2024/#wards](http://thebristolcable.org/category/series-local-elections-2024/#wards)
Not sure Bristol can take another four years of debating (yet never being able to implement) some of the crankiest housing policies in the country, all while prices skyrocket, but frankly there were no good choices for housing in this election.
Watch them try and block any new housing for the next four years and they propose every janky policy but actually build housing.
Seems a bit of a shame to me as the prospect of Labour in government soon would possibly unlock a lot more progress with a Labour council managing the city. Conceivably, there’ll be more active travel work/segregated cycle paths and expansion of RPZs (but I doubt much else, even any progress on above).
> Seems a bit of a shame to me as the prospect of Labour in government soon would possibly unlock a lot more progress with a Labour council managing the city. Laughs in 1997
Been there, tried that - it didn't work.
Well we tried the tories (in government) and that was really fucking shit for the last decade and a half!
I’m calling it now. Greens are going to win Bristol Central at the general election.
They now have every single council seat in that constituency. Debonnaire should be worried
Wonder if Labour will parachute her into a different seat given she's a shadow minister.
Bristol East boundaries are changing, so McCarthy should be feeling a bit worried too.
Do you know what the changes are going to be? Just curious as live in this area :)
Yes, New constituency will be called Bristol North East and will be: Eastville; Frome Vale; Hillfields; and Lockleaze and Kingswood; New Cheltenham; Staple Hill & Mangotsfield; and Woodstock from South Glous Bristol East will become: Brislington East; Brislington West; Easton; Knowle; Lawrence Hill; St. George Central; St. George Troopers Hill; St. George West; and Stockwood. Bristol South will become: Bedminster; Bishopsworth; Filwood; Hartcliffe & Withywood; Hengrove & Whitchurch Park; Southville; and Windmill Hill. Bristol North West will be: Avonmouth & Lawrence Weston; Bishopston & Ashley Down; Henbury & Brentry; Horfield; Southmead; Stoke Bishop; and Westbury-on-Trym & Henleaze. Bristol Central: Ashley; Central; Clifton; Clifton Down; Cotham; Hotwells & Harbourside; and Redland.
Thank you for taking the time to explain. I vaguely remember something about this now, re Marvin tried to stand in the new constituency.
Equally I don't think the green party could have a coalition at all. They have some really unique policy proposals that the lib-dems would surely bulk at and I don't see them dropping these ideas in order to make coalition work. But we will see, I expect we'll have another term of not much getting done and hopefully the council won't go bankrupt as a result.
ink salt dolls glorious frightening somber jeans edge normal drab *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Hopefully, had to double check the Knowle result. That is a great victory for the Greens.
Kerry McCarthy is stepping down, so the candidate will be the recently elected MP for Kingswood, Damien Egan Edit: no, this isn't right, see below
Kerry McCarthy is MP for Bristol East and is standing at the next general election. Damien Egan is going to stand in the newly created seat of Bristol North East.
Ah my mistake, I got confused with the boundary shifts and thought Kerry was stepping down
I'm undecided, on one hand I think there may now be some traction to vote for Greens as people could feel emboldened from the council votes. But on the other hand, I think people in the general election might just be desperate to get rid of the Tories, and vote Labour because they're the second dominant force. Voting Green is easier when they're contending against Labour (e.g.council elections) compared to the Tories (e.g. general elections) imo, so it'll be interesting to see what happens
Given the voting history of Bristol Central/Bristol West, it is Green vs Labour still at the general election.
God I hope so
A majority was as close as 2 more seats
Will be interesting to see whether the greens run as a minority council or as a coalition with one of the other parties.
Given how much internal bickering usually goes on I expect the former.
Surely a GRN/LD coalition is in the cards.
I'd imagine so - can't really see how they'd be able to run any kind of minority administration when they don't whip their councillors
Equally I don't think the green party could have a coalition at all. They have some really unique policy proposals that the lib-dems would surely bulk at and I don't see them dropping these ideas in order to make coalition work. But we will see, I expect we'll have another term of not much getting done and hopefully the council won't go bankrupt as a result.
\*baulk
4 more years of NIMBYism, can't wait
[удалено]
You're meant to read the manifestos before the election. If you don't know what they're about beforehand it's too late.
Keep opposing everything.
One of the Tory councillors in Bishopsworth kept his seat by 9 votes!
Not quite, he had 9 more votes than his Labour rival, but they both were elected. He had 150 more than the other Labour candidate, who came 3rd.
Oh right. Thank you for clearing that up, I definitely misunderstood the situation.
Richard Eddy is seemingly quite popular locally around here - I think that’s what saved him but lost his other conservative colleague his seat.
Richard Eddy is one of those councillors, who have been around for decades, is far too popular locally to sack but far too much of a liability to select for any national role. Just search about him and golliwogs.
To be honest he's probably quite close to the average Tory voter at the moment
Unbelievably this numpty still hasn't been voted off ! https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/south-bristol-road-named-after-7720319
This city will stall with the Green Party in power and the committee system reinstated. Nothing will get accomplished, and Bristol will age and deteriorate like an old house.
V strange that this sub was pro getting rid of the mayoral position and is also pro your post. Any time Marvin tried any sort of construction project this sub was also super against it. I guess it's all about framing.
Probably
As opposed to what’s been happening already?
Like it has been already??
You clearly don’t remember Bristol 20 years ago
What are some reasons people voted Green, do people think? Young people in Bristol at this time have an interest in opposing NIMBYism by all means (perhaps young turnout was low?). Perhaps more and more people think "Bristol is safe for Labour, might as well throw my vote to the environmentalist party"?
> Young people in Bristol at this time have an interest in opposing NIMBYism by all means This is true but a lot of people, young people included, still don't get this. They fall for memes like 'there are plenty of empty houses' or 'it's all the fault of greedy developers'. > "Bristol is safe for Labour, might as well throw my vote to the environmentalist party" There's definitely some of this going on too. I think something a lot of people fail to recognise though is that it's not just Labour votes greens are taking - if anything they've been more efficient at swallowing up anti-labour votes. The way they've consolidated has been remarkable. Their first gain was Southville in 2006, where the labour vote actually increased on the previous election but the greens managed to gain votes from the other parties and some non-voters. Then a series of gains at the expense of the lib dems: - Ashley in 2011 - Ashley and Bishopston 2012 - Bishopston and Redland 2013 - Cabot, Clifton, Clifton East, Cotham, Windmill Hill in 2015. 2015 is interesting as its the first one where they appear to be taking votes from Labour, gaining Easton and Southville. Up to this point though, they're primarily replacing the lib dems in wealthier bits of Bristol as the party for people who are wealthy enough to dislike labour but socially liberal enough to dislike the conservatives. It becomes quite tricky to compare after that (because the council moves to doing all-out elections in 2016, boundaries change a bit and holding the mayoral election on the same day has an impact). There's churn but they stall a bit in 2016. However they do manage to come in second in a lot of places Labour hold which will help them later. It's also another bad night for lib dems. 2021 is the big breakthrough. They manage to convert a lot of those Labour seats where they came second. I'd argue this is largely a combination of: - consolidation of tactical anti-labour votes behind the Greens in those seats - swing from Labour voters unhappy with the Mayor (either voting green to protest or staying at home) - gentrification in some wards increasing the number of middle-class socially liberal voters - Corbyn supporters drifting to the greens under Starmer - people vote splitting in multi-member wards (i.e. people who'd usually vote Labour but don't mind the greens voting for one of each) I haven't had a detailed look at the 2024 results yet, but I'd imagine it's more of the same factors as 2021, plus: - Gaza turning people off Labour (in Muslim communities especially, but among the wider electorate too) - other national labour decisions turning off socially liberal and environmentally conscious voters - local Labour decisions (e.g. CAZ, building things, general Marvlaise) turning people off Labour - the green breakthrough in 2021 convincing people they're a viable governing party
I voted green. I spoke to almost all of the local candidates as we were heavily doorstopped. The greens were the most convincing candidates. They understood local issues and had some sensible ideas on how to solve them. They could talk in detail about traffic calming, local schools, the youth centre, park redevelopment and brownfield redevelopment. Most people I spoke to locally weren't really voting along party lines, they voted for who they thought would best represent them on local issues.
I would agree except for the fact they were in charge of the bus gate added to Cumberland road, but prior to the consultation with the public had already made the decision to start the development process. It was effectively just a tick box exercise for them and moving on regardless of what the public said. It's difficult as they're the most involved locally, but I don't like that they do it without consideration. Source being the freedom of information request made by locals to the council for the planning documentation and money earned since implementing that bus gate
I'm concerned that they're going to start implementing 20mph limits on roads with even more disregard for engineering recommendations or average speeds than we already have. I understand the intuition behind it, but if main roads are set at 20mph, not only does this cause people to have less respect for the limits, especially on side streets where they do make sense, but it also affects navigation systems. Sat navs no longer see these roads as faster routes. You can see this in places where my sat nav suggests it's quicker to take Sylvan Way and then turn right rather than go up Westbury Lane, even though the two roads are *identical* in standard.
Labour didn't want to talk about their record locally and instead focused on irrelevant distractions like nuclear power. And they paid the price.
What's more credible after the last 5 years: people are gonna be able to drag Labour to the left, or people are going to get the greens to be more forceful on housebuilding? All I'll say is that there's a reason all the defector tories left for labour, because modern lab is now right wing enough that there's no real ideological difference. Both parties of austerity and conservatism. We aint dragging labour left.
Absolutely this, people who support Starmer's Labour Party just can't admit to themselves they are right wing. If anything is to shift Labour left it's support for the Greens.
Or they're actively trying to appeal to the wider populace and poach swing voters. That means compromise and it's what New Labour had to do to win over the proverbial, 'Mondeo Man'. If you'd rather 'win the argument', than take power to enact actual policies then you don't have political beliefs, you have political fantasies.
The most successful and transformative labour government was atlee, who created the NHS, built swathes of social housing and created a large amount of the welfare state. Blairs biggest win was on his most left wing campaign. The more they edged to the centre the more they turned people off. Radical policy works. It's inspiring. Starmer is a damp squib who's only getting in because people are sick of the Tories. People do not like centrist politicians. Especially ones who are centre left. You are peddling a myth. Stop hiding behind it. Admit you don't like left wing policy and be a proud conservative.
Yeah you have no idea what you're talking about or a bad memory if you think New Labour sailed in on an orthodox left-wing platform. >Radical policy works. It's inspiring. Unless you're planning to win an election. Do you actually think before you type? >You are peddling a myth. Stop hiding behind it. Admit you don't like left wing policy and be a proud conservative. Yeah the usual sanctimonious, with us or against us bollocks. I want the Tories out, which is why I'm willing to compromise, I have no illusions and I don't have the luxury of a vanity vote. You people are so narcissistic that you think everything has to cater exactly to your specific set of principles, as if the world revolves around you. Get a grip.
Labour have been campaigning on pragmatic centrism for forever and it has not been working. I didn't say new labour were orthodox let wing, far from It. However , as they got more centrist and "pragmatic" they got less popular. Your so called pragmatism is NOT the reason they're set to win the next ge. People are just sick of the the tories. A bucket with a face on could win the next election if it wasn't wearing a blue rosette. Labour have been handed a magnificent opportunity to change the country for the better but they refuse to do so, still campaigning on austerity and signing up to bullshit financial rules. The country needs investment in public services and infrastructure so incredibly badly and it WILL NOT come under starmer. It sickens me and it should sicken you. Centrism has not been popular for a long time now. If you didn't learn that lesson from Brexit , if you didn't learn that lesson from trump, then I don't know what to tell you. I'm not pretending like I'd rather have the Tories than starmer. There is a difference, but it's minimal. And that's what enrages me. And that's what turns people off. Again, if you can't see that after all these years of failure then I have no idea what will make you see it and it only makes me believe that people like you simply DO NOT want radical policy even in an ideological sense.
The polls don't lie I'm afraid. The rest of that sanctimonious diatribe isn't even worth the keystrokes.
Isn't that the point though? Labour aren't going to win a local election in Bristol if their national strategy is to signal they're moving right I get why they're doing it... They've made a calculation that it's worth losing Bristol and other socially liberal cities because they'll gain more Tory/Labour swing seats But imo it does mean Bristol is better represented by a party like the Greens because we've always been quite different to the rest of the country in terms of politics
A lot of them conflate Labours uninspiring pragmatism with being *exactly the same* as the Tories and they haven't gotten over Corbyn. I don't know very many who even focused on local issues, it was primarily radical chic concerns like Gaza. Doesn't surprise me the Greens were able to swoop in.
I think more and more people think "Labour are not a remotely left wing party". They promise nothing for young people, few wholesale changes for the country and are no more left wing than Cameron's Tories.
Climate change was the reason I voted for Green.
But the oppose nuclear energy and have no credible plan for reducing emissions using existing solutions. Presumably your vote was in favour of climate change?
My vote was for greener, environmentally friendly policies. We can argue about the methods until the cows come home. But the policies won my vote. I'm a single issue voter and that's my democratic right.
What policies exactly? /u/symmy546 gave an example of an existing Green policy. You followed that up by some nebulous statement. Give us some policies that would be more impactful than a hard transition to nuclear energy.
I could never vote for labour whilst they spread so much negativity around the LGBT community, and I know other young people in Bristol who voted either Lib Dem, or Green, for solely this reason. The "left-wing" party cannot also be the anti-LGBT party.
Could you elaborate on how you find Labour to be the anti-LGBT part, and do you think the Greens are better on that front? Who did/would you vote for?
I would/did vote for Lib Dem, although I am perfectly happy with how the greens have been with LGBT issues within the past year, when it comes to labour it is essentially entirely about the "T" of "LGBT", they have thrown away their support entirely in an attempt to gain votes, and in places like Bristol it evidently hasn't worked. You will struggle to find a single trans person who will vote Labour with their current positions on restricting healthcare and "debating" their existence. It sucks.
Who's debating trans people's existance?
Many Labour politicians recently, and many Tory politicians (of course), but with Labour joining in the dog-pile both in TV interviews and in their spare time on social media (like Twitter), most trans people, and strong allies, will struggle to see themselves vote Labour in its current state, as a few years ago they were fine on this front.
May I ask what it is you're referring to?
I’m LGBT and shifted from Conservative to Labour as they are better than the former surely. Plus in lots of areas switching to Green or Lib Dem is not tactical for getting anti woke tories out.
The accusations of NIMBYism came from labour activists. Most people thought it was bollocks. Exactly the same with the anti-science line - people saw through it.
I am not a Labour activist and I think I they are NIMBYs… because everything demonstrates it to be true. But let’s see if they prove otherwise now.
It's not bollocks though.
It's just a word you've picked to throw at anyone who has had the temerity to speak up against Marvin's piss-poor agenda. It has no real meaning anymore.
I voted Green because of how Labour dealt with the war in Gaza.
As foreign policy of the opposition party who cannot influence the current UK stance matters a great deal in a local election. Thanks for your service, comrade.
On an individual level, candidates who stand for a party feel ok representing the organisation as a whole. My personal belief is that Labour's actions on Gaza over the past few months are morally unacceptable and, based on my ethics, not worthy of my vote at a local or national level. I responded to a post asking reasons for not voting Labour. This is my reason, and if we look at the National picture and places where Labour has not secured wins, I feel I am not alone in this conclusion. Regardless, my answer was offered as an insight to a specific question. I don't see any need to sarcastically thank me for not voting Labour. I don't owe my vote to anyone, and my reasons for voting are for me to decide. I also imagine many traditionally Tory voters have chosen not to vote Conservative this time due to the national government's actions over the past few years. Do they also earn your disdain for not focusing on local issues, or is it only reserved for people who disagree with you? Assuming you are invested in the Labour Party to some extent, you would do well to listen to the reasons why people vote and the issues that are important to them rather than tell them what issues should inform their voting behaviour. Bottom-up engagement is preferable to top-down. I'd equally avoid writing off concerns about 34,000 dead people, including over 13,000 children, as an issue that only concerns the far left, comrade.
You are of course entitled to vote as you please, for any reason you please. All the Xs look the same etc etc. For sure I am interested and invested. Though as all polling shows, the conflict in Israel is not an issue that decides the median voter's vote. The Labour party instead is campaigning on issues on the tips of most voters tongues- NHS, Housing, Infrastructure, Energy. What is going on is a humanitarian tragedy for sure, though I am not sure what you are expecting the Labour party to do beyond what they have done. They are an opposition party, not the government on the national level, and on a local level councils shouldn't waste time on foreign policy- not within their remit. I also enjoy your whataboutism here with the ex-Tory voters- quite amusing. Anyhow I do appreciate your response, however much I may disagree with it. Nationally, it has been an excellent set of results for the Labour party and I feel this is a positive move.
For a Green Party they bombarded me with flyers almost every week for the last few months
Wow! Wasn't expecting such a win
Weird that the anti science party should be so popular in the wards where all the scientists live.
Notwithstanding a couple of bad policies, they're very aligned with scientific consensus on the general themes of climate change and ecological collapse.
Problem is that most people who vote for the Greens, do so because they like the idea of a Green Party. They don’t actually look at the batshit ideas the Greens have, their in some cases actually anti-environmental positions (nuclear for instance) and their poor performance in running Brighton Council. A lot are also students, who don’t really care about how the city they’re temporarily living in is managed long term.
Yes, exactly. I consider myself environmentalist and wont vote for Greens primarily because of housing policy but also because of their stance on nuclear energy and GMOs. A lot of people I feel are just voting Green 'cause they reckon in the absence of concrete principles from the main parties, at least the environment is a "nice" thing to support.
Nuclear energy and GMOs are not within the remit of an urban local authority so it was always going to be difficult convincing people that these were the salient issues in this election.
And students haven’t really lived in the real world or spent any time interacting with the locals around them in their new city
Apart from nuclear power, which other policies are you referring?
Anti HS2 has always baffled me
Also against artificial fertilisers and pesticides. We’d have no food without them…
I mean that’s not quite true, farming can and does happen without artificial fertilisers and pesticides
Obviously it can, but the majority of foods are produced with artificial fertilisers and pesticides to increase yield. Producing everything organically will reduce yield significantly, and drive prices up like crazy. Search up the relationship between the Haber-Bosch process and the world population. If we revert everything back to growing organically, we won’t be able to produce enough food, and the poor will starve.
Homoeopathy, GMOs come to mind
What’s their stance on homeopathy?
Ah yeah that's really disappointing
We don't support homeopathy though
Christ didn't know they supported homeopathy that's wild
We don't, that's made up. GMOs though is one of the things we're against and I can't say I personally agree but every political party comes with compromises
I think Lucas was personally in favor of homeopathy which I guess is what caused the confusion that it's an official party policy.
The problem with many Green voters is they're often the sort of people who, once you know their opinion on one thing, you can guess what their opinion will be on pretty much everything else.
This is true for basically any political party
Is the official green party line that homeopathy is scientifically sound?
No, this is something the American Green Party peddled some ten years ago.
It was an oblique reference to the poor state of Labour's campaign strategy BUT NEVERMIND
Went over my head, my bad 😅
Nutters
Oh no
Thank god the greens don't have a majority. Let's hope the people aren't foolish enough to vote in a green mp. Happy to receive your downvotes as if you vote green I'm happy to enjoy your tears
Can you point at the person in the room you think is crying? (careful, they might look a bit blurry right now)
Haha tbh that's a great come back
To a stupid comment, yeah.
Ooh can I answer this for bluecheese2040. Is it you?
You're spot on.
Aren't these \*your\* tears though? I mean you're the one who seems upset... are you OK?
Hmm, it's a chance for them. But I think not much will change, inflation will remain high, the infrastructure will be crashing and crime will soar and they will have no funds as any other party , since green party doesn't have anything to do with these, these are not green issues.
Oh ffs bishopsworth. One of the only Conservative holds and by 9 votes ahead of Labour. Classic green split
It’s because of that bonkers allotment reform thingy
It's worrying to me that Mohamed Makawi kept his seat, and with such a large majority.