Tories are saying running away from Stoke Central by-election is ‘strong’. It really isn’t
Paul Nuttall of UKIP: A Tory by any other name [Image: Christopher Furlong via Getty Images].
According to the Huffington Post, they’re trying to claim that crying off the Stoke-on-Trent Central by-election is a sign of strength. It’s true that, with a majority in the House of Commons, they can choose their own battlefields – but that doesn’t equate with being strong.
Look at the claims in the article (below). If the Tories are less well-off than Labour “in pure resource terms”, that’s an admission of weakness, not strength.
If they want UKIP to win Stoke, it’s an admission that Labour are stronger than the Tories. That’s not appearing “strong at all times”. It’s being weak in Stoke.
And how did this strategy work last time it was tried, when the Tories – wanting to appear strong – ran away from the Richmond by-election in the belief that Zac Goldsmith, a former Tory MP standing as an independent, would win. What happened there?
The seat went back to the Liberal Democrats.
In that election, the Tories proved themselves weak. Clearly they intend to do so again in Stoke Central.
And they will lose outright in Copeland, where they are fielding a candidate (gosh, how strong of them).
Labour has to contest these elections because it needs the seats. But it also has the advantage “in pure resource terms”, including numbers of members on the ground.
UKIP has parachuted its leader, Paul Nuttall, into Stoke – a man who has no connection with the place and whose main policy position – apart from Brexit, which Labour has accepted as the will of the people, so it is no advantage – is that he wants to privatise the National Health Service.
He’s an out-of-touch, over-privileged, right-wing Tory from a party of the same and he is heading for his fifth consecutive failure in a Parliamentary election.
And when Labour wins, who’ll be the strong party then?
The Tory party is set to give UKIP a clear run in the Stoke-on-Trent Central by-election in a bid to maximise Labour’s chances of defeat in its heartlands.
Party sources say that they are instead pouring resources into the Copeland by-election in Cumbria, which will be held on the same day next month.
A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.
“Ukip will win Stoke. If we are seen to put in too much effort it will be awkward. The new message is to appear strong at all times”, a Tory insider told HuffPost UK.
Another party insider told HuffPost UK the real reason was “the embarrassment factor” if the Tories were seen to try and fail.
“Labour is so weak – we want to appear strong. It’s similar to not putting up a candidate against Zac”, they said.
Copeland MP Jamie Reed and Stoke-on-Trent Central MP Tristram Hunt formally resigned their seats on Monday. Both by-elections are now expected to take place on February 23.
Source: Tories Write Off Stoke-on-Trent Central By-Election, Party Sources Say
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
“A senior Tory MP told HuffPost UK the party was not as well off as Labour “in pure resource terms”, so had to ration its cash.”
That’s odd, because a little hystrionic bird told me that the Tories were busy splurging whatever they want in Copeland whilst Labour were barely off the starting block (due to the pesky need to democratically select a candidate). Honestly, I think that was mostly a liberal centrists tendency to hyperventilate whenever there isn’t total alignment with their views within the Labour party, but that conversation did bring something to light for me. Namely the complete lack of regulation, spending limits, etc outside of official campaigning time frames. Not really on is it? A party with deep pockets (or with donors with deep pockets) could win a constituency with years of relentless propaganda before the date of a bye-election were even announced!
However it looks as if the Conservatives are going to win Copeland. Which is very worrying considering how badly the Tories are doing as far as the NHS, Brexit, and most other things are concerned.
No it doesn’t.
There’s a lot of blather about it but hardly any campaigning has happened yet.
How can on Earth can you make such a claim? Aside from the fact that the campaign hasn’t begun in earnest yet, what evidence is there for a Tory victory? A poll? A report by some embittered and delusional Blairites? Don’t count out Copeland CLP out yet.
Stoke is a staunch labour area, they even elected Tristram Hunt because he stood for labour after all, the only thing that labour has against it is its stance on the NHS, because it supported the attacks on Stafford Hospital, and said nothing about the lies and variations of facts that were being thrown out by the mass media every day, now the people of Stafford and stoke have a sub standard PFI Hospital in Stoke which is almost permanently on code black status and breaches the 12 hour a/e waiting time limit on a regular basis, Hunt was all for that happening to pay off the PFI debts created under a labour government.
Does anybody wish to provide an alternative view?