On top of the APP's stunning result in Oxford they romp home in Vauxhall as well.
The APP opposed the notorious hunt supporter Kate Hoey in Vauxhall and won again with the APP candidate James Kapetanos gaining 96 votes and 0.2% to Hoeys 21,498 and 49.8%!
The Tory in huntingdon got a smaller percentage of the vote in Huntingdon since before the 1983 election! Smallest in well over 30 years. this is despite the fact that across most of the rest of the country the tory vote went up this time. APP have certainly had an effect. Animal Abuse Supporting MP take note.
Kate Hoey (hunt scum) got 49.8% of the vote compared to 52.9% last time. That looks like a move in the right direction to me. This always was a safe Labour seat - I think the APP only stood here because Kate Hoey is such an outspoken supporter of bloodsports.
If the trolls thought the APP wasn't effective they wouldn't bother commenting on it. The fact they try to take every opportunity to criticize it shows they see it as a valid threat.
Who cares whether her percentage went down? She still has her seat at the end of the day, thus she is still in parliament supporting anti-animal legislation. Indymedia isn't a place for wanabe Alistair Cambell's and other spin doctors, just tell the news like it is. You failed to stop her getting re-elected.
But APP succeeded in kicking out Evan Harris. Harris has said to the media that the leaflets put out by APP is what lost him the election. That to me is a huge success. Evan Harris was a personal friend of Tipu Aziz, would ignore his constituents who disagreed with vivisection and basically was a puppet of vivisectors. he is now gone. Success. try to spin your way out of that one.
the truth is out! the twisted little creep using various names and trying to undermine good activists with gibberish about aliens and failed campaigns and lies is the one they know as small paul. what a sad little man you are. your campaigns have not been so successful eh paulie. we all remember mclibel and what is it you do these days? go get help before you consume yourself in your jealousy.
Contrary to what Carla says, I had nothing to do with this piece. She seems to assume that I am the only critic the APP has. Having said that I would never submit an article like this one - too short on analysis!
Just one pont though. There is no conclusive evidence that the APP was responsible for Evan Harris losing his seat. The Lib Dems had a bad night and 4 others were defeated as well, including Lembit Opik whose majority was bigger than Harris'.
Of course they may have had a hand in it but there is no way of knowing with certainty either way, so this is very much a case of 'not proven'.
Before the election the APP were saying they had uncovered a blueprint for unseating MPs who were 'pro-animal abuse' (in reality all of them are - except the one who's vegan!) but in practice their tactic produced three failures and one 'maybe'.
That's hardly a great leap forward in terms of strategic thinking, is it?
Comments
Hide the following 13 comments
Amusing
11.05.2010 14:21
Thunder goose
Evan isn't
11.05.2010 15:55
Laughing
Additional
11.05.2010 16:16
Fact
Kate Hoey's percentage of the vote went down
12.05.2010 09:23
If the trolls thought the APP wasn't effective they wouldn't bother commenting on it. The fact they try to take every opportunity to criticize it shows they see it as a valid threat.
anon
More on Kate Hoey
12.05.2010 09:41
Looks like someone is rattled.Keep up the fight APP.
Statso
LOL
12.05.2010 11:27
ROFLcopter
A lot of wanabe spin doctors here
12.05.2010 19:25
General indy reader
What about Evan?
12.05.2010 22:43
Facts Not Spin
small paul
13.05.2010 17:31
carla
Actions speak louder than words!
13.05.2010 23:11
ela
WAHT?!
14.05.2010 11:30
Mandy
WAHT?!
14.05.2010 11:30
Mandy
Mistaken Identity
16.05.2010 19:17
Just one pont though. There is no conclusive evidence that the APP was responsible for Evan Harris losing his seat. The Lib Dems had a bad night and 4 others were defeated as well, including Lembit Opik whose majority was bigger than Harris'.
Of course they may have had a hand in it but there is no way of knowing with certainty either way, so this is very much a case of 'not proven'.
Before the election the APP were saying they had uncovered a blueprint for unseating MPs who were 'pro-animal abuse' (in reality all of them are - except the one who's vegan!) but in practice their tactic produced three failures and one 'maybe'.
That's hardly a great leap forward in terms of strategic thinking, is it?
Paul Vegan Anarchist
Paul Vegan Anarchist