Stoke-on-Trent Central: Preview

I shall blog in more detail about the upcoming by-election at Stoke-on-Trent Central when the runners and riders are fixed. This is merely an advance viewing of the contest based on the background.

Tristram Hunt, the Labour Party MP, was never very popular in his own constituency, though London TV studios loved him. He made no bones about despising the leader of his own party, tried and failed to formulate policy of his own and was surprisingly bad (for someone of his background and education) at arguing his points when (as so often) being interviewed on TV.

Hunt stepped down as MP in order to take a job as Director of the Victoria and Albert Museum. MP pay is £74,000 (plus generous expenses); the V&A Director presently gets a package worth £230,000. Hunt may be getting more. No wonder he said that “the V&A offer was too good to refuse.” So much for political conviction, vocation and, indeed, loyalty (whether to party or constituents). Stoke Central is well rid of him.

The Stoke Central constituency has existed since 1950 and the Labour Party has won every election since then. Until Hunt appeared in 2010, the Labour vote varied between 48% and 68%. Hunt’s votes have been 38.8% (2010) and 39.3% (2015). Stoke Central has moved from being a Labour safe seat to one which can be regarded as marginal:

The Labour vote in 2015 was about 12,000, that of both UKIP and Conservatives about 7,000. The LibDems, until 2015 the second party, crashed to fifth place (behind an Independent) with 1,296 votes. In fact, the LibDem vote in 2010 was 7,000, the same as the UKIP 2015 vote, perhaps a sign that the “protest vote” bloc at Stoke Central is around 7,000 or so. Arguende.

The Conservatives have not even been the second party at Stoke Central since 2001. This by-election is one which will be decided between Labour and UKIP. The recent Theresa May Brexit speech may well have shot UKIP’s fox overall, but at Stoke Central no-one is expecting a Conservative win or even a Conservative second.

Can UKIP win? The answer, even at this stage, must be a qualified “yes”. Much will depend on its candidate and that of Labour. If Paul Nuttall, a Northerner, stands, he must have a chance despite his partly-“libertarian” views. UKIP has a steep climb but it is possible. This is a by-election. The result will not affect who governs. People can protest with their votes. Labour is now seen as the pro-mass immigration party, the pro-EU party (to an extent). Stoke Central voted about 65% for Leave in the EU Referendum.

If turnout is low, if the 2015 Labour vote halves to about 6,000, if the 2015 UKIP vote mostly holds up at 7,000 or not much less, then UKIP can win. If.

It is not credible to imagine a win for the Conservatives or LibDems and they will vie for most votes not going to Labour or UKIP, but this is a Labour/UKIP contest. If enough people vote tactically for UKIP, UKIP has a good chance. On the other hand, 2015 LibDem or Green voters may also vote tactically for Labour.

Unemployment is high, immigration is high and having had Labour MPs for 66 years has not prevented either.

Labour must still be odds-on to win Stoke Central at this point, but UKIP has a serious chance.

Update, 27 November 2020

Looking at this post nearly 4 years on, I have to say that my prediction was accurate. The Labour Party won convincingly at the 2017 by-election, with 37.1% of votes cast. UKIP came in second with 24.7%, narrowly ahead of the Conservative Party on 24.3%. LibDems 4th-placed, with 9.8% of the vote.

The less-serious candidates all captured less than 2% of the vote; indeed, all except the Green Party got less than 1%: two Independent candidates, BNP, Christian People’s Alliance and the Monster Raving Loony (who actually beat the BNP, CPA and one of the Independents).

The Conservative Party candidate, Jack Brereton, did not stand again at Stoke Central but was adopted by the Conservatives at Stoke South, where he was elected at the 2017 General Election and re-elected in 2019.

The 2017 General Election saw the Labour Party MP, Gareth Snell, a seemingly rather unpleasant individual, re-elected with a greatly-increased vote-share (51.5%). However, the 2019 General Election saw Snell lose to Jo Gideon of the Conservative Party in a close result (45.4% to 43.3%).

As for the one-time MP, Tristram Hunt, he is at time of writing still Director of the V&A, still getting that hugely-generous salary and expenses, and has, no doubt, long ago forgotten the people of “his” once-Labour constituency at Stoke-on-Trent…

5 thoughts on “Stoke-on-Trent Central: Preview”

  1. This by election is a non event really because there is no viable party left to vote for. All parties are now tainted and any that wishes to participate in the Westminster charade is suspect.

    Anyway Westmnster seems scheduled for closing down and the those people who do the bidding of our alien occupiers seem set on a move to Manchester, where they will become even more irrelevant.

    Something about £3billion needed to be spent on the antiquated sewage system according to UKColumn News! Just another scam to rip us all off. So Westminster is no longer viable. Can’t imagine the House of Lords will be too happy having to travel to Msnchester every day to claim their £350 daily allowance!!!

    So with no Social-Nationalist party to stand in Stoke the people are going to suffer the usual democratic deficit. Maybe a good time to take that week’s holiday in the Bahamas you have always been dreaming of?

    Social-Nationalism was developed the Gregor Strasser during the First World War while he was a lieutenant in the Austrian artillery, and by the time the first elements of the SA were forming to protect party speakers as they toured Austria and then southern Germany, it was Strasser’s ideas that were the backbone of the party rather than National-Socialism, which was purely for public consumption.

    Hitler was not permitted to speak in northern Germany so it was left up to the Strasser brothers to speak on his behalf. This was an up hill battle as all of northern Germany was firmly in the hands of the Communists.

    Social-Nationalism had many influences which could be traced to various sources such as Distributism (favoured by Catholic Rome), some Marxist ideas without the internationalism bit, patriotic Conservativism minus usury, share dealing and currency speculation, traditional folk culture and an emphasis on the importance of both the farm worker and the industrial labourer.

    The Strasser brothers were able to convert the entire Communist northern Germany to Social-Nationalism with items such as land redistribution where all land was to be taken control of by the State and then shared out equally to every family to work in the way they saw fit. But it had to be worked, not left fallow, and it could not be sold for speculation.

    Localism was a very strong aspect of Social-Nationalism where a local community could decide what was best for itself with regard to local public services, both recreational and industrially.

    Essentially almost everything that is considered normal in British society today is the opposite of Social-Nationalism. Consequently to adopt it as a possible option would require the exclusion of our alien masters and their shills and useful idiots.


  2. Melanie Shaw…could you ask Longshanks what he is doing about the State abuse of Melanie Shaw being put in solitary confinement for 9 months and having her medication withheld?

    Perhaps you might write on her too. She was abused by Westminster paedophiles and is a whistleblower who has reported this abuse. She has been sentenced in a secret trial to two year’s detention.

    Her MP, for whom she once worked, has done nothing to help her. You can get more details on this from UKColumn News.

    With your legal training you should be able to do a brilliant job on this.

    Thank you.



  3. If you compare Operation Barbarosa with today’s US/NATO attack on Russia there is actually no comparison.

    A few hundred obsolete tanks and a few thousand poorly trained soldiers (by German WW2 standards) and zero back up do not constitute a viable threat to Russia in reality.

    The logistics required from the US to support even one week of operations in Russia would never arrive since Russian submarines control the entire Atlantic and would destroy every US ship that dared to set sail.

    The only threat are the missile facilities in Poland and Romania, both of which would be nuked by relatively clean Iskander missiles and neutralised by S400 and S500 defense systems as they become available.

    Either the US will dismantle these sites or Russia will nuke them. What then? Russia can destroy any conventional NATO weapon that exists! Me thinks the US will then abandon Southern Europe and a true European Union including Russia will take its place.

    Europe without US/Zionist meddling would make for a much pleasanter environment stretching from the Urals to Andalusia. And part of a trading block encompassing Shanghai, Tehran and Berlin.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s