Rochester and Strood by-election – 20th November, 2014
- This topic has 47 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
A by-election for the parliamentary constituency of Rochester and Strood, has been set for 20 November 2014, following the announcement by Tory MP Mark Reckless on 27 September 2014 that he was defecting to UKIP and would resign his seat in order to seek re-election.
Medway Council, who will administer the by-election, published the statement of persons nominated on 24 October, confirming 13 candidates will contest the by-election. They are:
Independent Mike Barker Independent Christopher Challis Monster Raving Loony Hairy Knorm Davidson Britain First Jayda Fransen Independent Stephen Goldsborough Green Clive Gregory Liberal Democrat Geoff Juby Labour Naushabah Khan People Before Profit Nick Long Patriotic Socialist Party Dave Osborn UKIP Mark Reckless Independent Charlotte Rose Conservative Kelly Tolhurst A Conference ruling prohibits the Party from contesting by-elections and, in this instance, for very sound reasons.
Nevertheless, Kent and Sussex Branch will be putting in a token appearance on the Saturday preceding the by-election with a literature stall in Rochester High Street.
http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/event/literature-stall-rochester-12-noon
As a matter of interest and subject to approval by the Executive Committee, the neighbouring constituency of Chatham & Aylesford is one of those Kent & Sussex Branch hopes to contest in the General Election next year.
I see that Ian Bone and Class War were bluffing when they announced they were going to contest this by-election. Perhaps this is the shape of things to come, i.e. most of the candidates they have announced for the next year's general election won't materialise either.TUSC too are not standing, no doubt not wanting to repeat their humiliation in the Eastleigh by-election last year where they finished 13th out of 14 with a mere 62 votes being beaten by various joke candidates. We learned that lesson years ago when we got beaten by Mr Blobby in the Little and Sad by-election and why we have adopted a policy of not contesting parliamentary by-elections.Left Unity are nowhere to be seen either. Also the shape of things to come?That leaves the only "left of Labour" candidate (apart from the Greens) as Nick Long of "People Before Profit" from Lewisham. It appears they are running a serious campaign, printing 55,000 leaflets for free distribution by the post office:http://peoplebeforeprofit.org.uk/rochester-strood/people-profit-stand-rochester-and-stroodThey are also holding a public meeting on Tuesday 18 November at 7.30pm at Strood Methodist Church, Cliffe Rd.Be interesting to see how they do, even though we want "People Not Profit" rather than "People Before Profit". With the large number of candidates I don't think they will do very well.
Someone should tell Dave Osborn that the epithet Patriotic Socialist Party, is a contradiction in terms
More on this oxymoronic party here:http://www.patriotic-socialist.org.uk/I think they chose the word "Patriotic" as "National" would have made it immediately obvious what they are.
Here's the lowdown (or should that be the highup) on one of the Independent candidates standing. Charlotte Rose, who also stood in the recent Clacton by-election, is a sex worker "campaigning for sexual freedom" and describes herself as a "high-class courtesan" (no connection with the Ashbourne variety) who charges £180 an hour for her services. With that kind of income she's in a marvellous position to shed a few deposits!http://www.clactonandfrintongazette.co.uk/news/11478019.Sex_worker_named_as_candidate_in_Clacton_by_election/
Perhaps, Gnome, she'll be organising one in this by-election too for you to leaflet unless it clashes with the meeting organised by People before Profit:https://twitter.com/rosiekinchen/status/517254179937853440
ALB wrote:Perhaps, Gnome, she'll be organising one in this by-election too for you to leaflet unless it clashes with the meeting organised by People before Profit:https://twitter.com/rosiekinchen/status/517254179937853440Should that be case I'll consider going, providing it's free. Never had to pay for sex up to now; at least not directly.
The (expected) difficulties of one of the other candidates:http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-f378-Royal-Mail-refuses-to-deliver-fascist-BF-election-leaflet#.VFYUNGd6GhoI think it means that Royal Mail have refused the draft they submitted. I wouldn't have thought that they would have printed 50,000 without having first got Royal Mail. But you never know. After all, they are boneheads.
It's probably a very good idea that The Socialist Party of Great Britain never contest an election against the Patriotic Socialist Party. At first glance it would be difficult to tell who were the national socialists.Before anyone says anything, read my words "At first glance" again.Imagine how a voting slip would look with the following line up, Patriotic Socialist Party, The British National Party and The Socialist Party of Great Britain.
Isn't that a bit like saying that German voters in the 1920s and 1930s would have been unable to tell the difference between "The German National Socialist Workers Party" and the "Social Democratic Party of Germany"?Anyway, we are on the ballot paper at elections as "The Socialist Party (GB)" and on our leaflets as "The Socialist Party".
I don't really know ALB, I wasn't in Germany during the 1920s and 1930s.I was having a bit of a laugh with my post in case you couldn't tell. I really must start to put warnings in brackets.By the way both the Patriotic Socialist Party and The Socialist Party of Great Britain, both contain the word socialist in their title, whereas The Social Democratic Party of Germany and The German National Socialist Workers Party do not share the word socialist.
SocialistPunk wrote:It's probably a very good idea that The Socialist Party of Great Britain never contest an election against the Patriotic Socialist Party. At first glance it would be difficult to tell who were the national socialists.Before anyone says anything, read my words "At first glance" again.Imagine how a voting slip would look with the following line up, Patriotic Socialist Party, The British National Party and The Socialist Party of Great Britain.The first part is simply comparing the "At first glance" nationalistic conotations of the names, that has been mentioned by a few SPgb members in recent weeks.The second bit is tongue in cheek, again playing on the patriotic symbolism of the words, Great Britain.
ALB wrote:Anyway, we are on the ballot paper at elections as "The Socialist Party (GB)" and on our leaflets as "The Socialist Party".Using different names during an election strategy is surely quite a unique approach. Actually in practice it's three, as the poster for the meeting of the Kent and Sussex branch states.Oops, there I go on my hobby horse again.
ALB wrote:Actually it's their hobby horse too !Call it a hobby horse if you will but left to me the Party would use its full name (or the acronym) all the time. As you yourself have said on more than one occasion, the Party is much better known by either of those descriptions. In any event, workers seriously interested in political ideas will presumably have the nouse to examine the contents of any bottle rather than rely solely on the label affixed to it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.