Why do you keep asking this question? Success is clearly a subjective perception on a sliding scale, why are you so keen to get a binary response?

I don't think anyone really "won", it's a fairly inconsequential election and the results are pretty tough to draw conclusions from, but i must say i find the "UKIP sends an earthquake" headlines rather predictable. They were always going to make gains, just as Labour were, it very much has the feel of headlines that have already been written.

Someone said a few posts back that all of the main parties trying to claim a win and parroting their usual lines is a total turn off, but Farage is doing much the same with his whole "we were only expecting 80 new councillors" and "this sends a message to the political establishment" stuff. I saw an interview earlier where he mentioned the "commentariat". That word has 12 letters, man of the people my arse.

Loads of councils reelected everyone across London and although several (including Croydon) are now Labour, nobody seems interested, because it doesn't illustrate the shockwave headlines that were probably inevitable regardless of the result.

I'm no political animal, but can anyone take ed milliband seriously as a future prime minister? Jeez.

It's fascinating to read the "haha ukip lost" flood on the internet. It might be complete lack of understanding of the political system (for sure, there are some angry 14 year twitterers...).

Question: Did UK gain or lose seats overall in this local election? At the expense of whom? What are the policies of those parties that lost seats, in regard to for example the EU and immigration? (I'll point to Lib Dems as an example here)

Question: Given that 30% of seats were only ever up for selection, should we be surprised that (given how long UKIP has been in the mainstream public conciousness) they did not win control of any councils?

Question: Do you know something I don't? Do you already have the EU MEP election results? Why is everyone declaring UKIP's campaign dead and ineffective? (Did you get the memo on Thursday, by the way, the new immigration figures?)

Question: when you flood a region with immigrants, are you surprised when a party seeking moderation in immigration badly performs? (Hint: you can modify this question to return the answer to Labour's success in may districts)

This "haha, UKIP only have 17% of the vote" crap. "Where are the UKIP-run councils?!?!?!". It DOESN'T work like that. Councils do not empty out each election. For continuity, you do not replace the entire council on it's own. So, why are we surprised

The facts: overwhelmingly, the number of councils that have lost majority rule have done so due to the UKIP swing. Taken from Labour, taken from Conservatives, and taken from Lib Dem. Some they have taken more than from others, but they have DEMONSTRATED that they can eat into Labour and Conservative votes (Lib Dems are now an irrelevance).

Does that make the whole country racist? Jesus, how much has racist been used in the past few weeks... it's a very clever way to redefine a meaning but retain the genuinely (and rightfully) negative associations from the past. Congratulations left-wing mouth-foamers. No one flinches with "racist" or "fascist" any more, because you've screamed it until blue in the face (perhaps more "red" in the face) and it has now lost it's gravity.

Correct Labour "won" if you're only looking at how many councils it controls and how many seats it has. Look now at the swing. Look at the number of seats. Perhaps you can see why it isn't a surprise that it will take time to undo the Labour and Conservative rot. But make no mistake, the next media campaign will cover the stench of fear in these parties as best it can, but it is still there. I look forward to Sunday.