Last two by elections the Tories have received a proper kicking from the Lib Dems.
But yet it seems that Labour losing a deposit in a seat they contested in name only is a big deal.
Are the sensible Tories sending a message to the PM to think carefully before being pulled over the cliff by the lunatic fringe in her party?

No worries, there have been 300 "no you are" posts since then anyway, it's hardly wprth trawling the entire thread.

He still was popular, he only lost a couple of thousand votes compared to last time he stood.

He only lost because the other parties ganged up on him.

I voted leave and to be honest I don't care if we have a soft or hard Brexit so long as we trigger article 50 soon and leave the EU.

Yes, it's a shame really.

He had a 20k majority. He is a lot less popular now than before the referendum and Mayority race, even without the games.

Also, UKIP didn't stand and neither did the Tories, so both sides were ganging up on the other to make it a 2 horse race. Zac lost, get over it!

I think "sensible" Tories are starting to wake up and realise that there is a battle for the future of the country which needs winning. With Labour seemingly out to lunch, someone has to stand up to the Tory Nutters and the Kippers.

I was talking to a colleague at work today who said that he had been a Tory party member since he was a student but had decided to join the Lib Dems. The result in Richmond is going to make a lot of Tory Leavers in supposedly safe seats feel nervous. I don't think we'll be seeing any of them resigning "on principle" any time soon.

Why is Andrew Lloyd Webber now MP for Richmond Park?

His vote stayed roughly the same as he had last election. The majority was irrelevant as the other parties joined forces.

He did not lose much of his vote so he was still popular.

Er, yes. I thought that at the off.

Genius.

Because the Lib Dem apparently looks like him.

How did he have a 20k majority last time if his vote this time was 18k? He is less popular, and I don't even understand why you are arguing this point.

Post-fact world?

I think people confuse being popular as a person with voting. I admired Tony Benn but I never would have voted for him.

For whatever reason the people of that seat wanted to send a message to the government and Zac Goldsmith wasn't seen as the way to deliver that.

Liking a politician and voting for them aren't always the same thing. People vote for a party or to make a point - it's rarely cos they think the particular person is nicer.

I don't really think Zac was quite cut out for politics anyway.

Yes, there's a battle to make sure we leave the EU which is the best outcome for the country. And lots of Labour voters want to leave as well, although they may not be Labour voters much longer.

His vote stayed roughly the same, that is a fact. (minus 2000 odd votes)

The Lib Dems gain a massive amount of votes from the other parties.

The Majority is over the 2nd place party. NOT all the other parties put together..

His vote count went from 34.5k down to 18.5k. His vote share went down from 58.2% to 45.1%. In no world are either of those things "roughly the same".

She's not.

Policy is being dictated by the reality - that a majority of the population want some sort oF control over immigration. And no party can win an election, without meeting that demand, somehow.

That may be meaningless added visas, and verbal fudges, but it may not be acceptable to Europe. If its not, there will not be easy access to the single market . its entirely up to Europe to decide if they want to take the economic hit, to preserve the EU ,and keep FoM. May will ask , its not her fault if she doesn't get.

The Liberal, and Corbyn , position is untenable, democratically, and politically. You can't, now, tell over half the electorate to shut up, and not mention immigration , as its good for them.

The Liberal position is also logical nonsense. Andrew Neil, and Cleverly, the Conservative, last night skewered the Liberal spokesman, by repeatedly asking what on earth referendum question could be asked, and how FOM was compatible with immigration control . Their woman has no answer.

Can't you do basis maths?

He got 4,500 less votes in total than his majority at the last election. There was a 21% swing for Pete's sake. His vote collapsed.

As for "parties ganging up" - rubbish. UKIP ganged up. They didn't stand and supported Zac, the Greens didn't stand and supported Olney. Labour fought it and lost their deposit. And as I have said, way back I found the Labour vote to be impossible to squeeze there, even though it was only 12% ish. A small tactical vote back then would have ousted the Tory long before the LD's finally managed it.

That Labour couldn't even get all its constituency members to vote for them, it means they either voted tactically for Soft Brexit, or were so fed up with Corbyn they stayed at home. Zac is still very popular down there. I canvassed for a day. This was Brexit - and not only from the Remainers, but a very significant chunk of Leave Tories who are aghast at the direction it is taking.

You can spin it all you like. It wouldn't be repeated in many constituencies, but in some it certainly would. Why did they do so well in Witney? The LD's need to get organising around here. The sitting lefty MP is a Brexiter, and who's constituency straddles two boroughs. One was 59/41 Remain, and the other 55/45. And the bit in his would have been higher, no question. He has a majority almost exactly the same as Zac's was. It could be taken, but the LD's simply do not have the resources to fight strongly everywhere at a GE.

Why this by election is so important is that it emboldens Remainers everywhere. Since the 23rd, it's been non-stop Brexiters everywhere, still backed by much of the Press. Labour is AWOL on the subject, and it's only the LibDems who have trying to be heard with a solid policy. Tessie needed a sharp reminder that there is no doubt the majority in this country do NOT want a hard Brexit.

His vote halved. Her vote went up by as much as the Green vote and Labour vote went down.

Its not clear who switched, and who stayed at home in protest, or boredom, or to stay warm.

Just as well UKIP and the Conservatives abstained from the by-election. Otherwise Mr Goldsmith's defeat would have been even worse.

Thanks for the correct results, I thought it was 20,000 last time.

15k is a significant loss but I'd still say that doesn't mean he was unpopular.

From the poster who called Diane Abbott and Lisa Nandy dim and was very rude about a Cabinet minister on here in a recent thread.

It's just all a bit Rich mond!

The new MP is inexperienced - Richmond park living doesn't really prepare you for the rough and tumble of politics - but she needs to get her arguments in gear to explain the Lib Dems position now on Brexit. This seems to be to get the Lords using the 104 Lib Dems there to override the almost certain will of the Commons and the public in a referendum. For a party that wants to abolish the Lords and replace it with an elected Chamber it's beyond hypocritical.

I can respect people who back remain although I disagree with them - but using the Lords to derail the democratic will of the Commons and the people is a step too far.

Nor will we be seeing a snap Brexit single issue general election.

Which reminds me, Theresa May's government is in court again on Monday. Trying to persuade the judges that a parliamentary vote won't be needed. (see above 'early general election' comment)

I think 20,000 was his majority last time. I agree that someone who polls 45% is hardly unpopular.