|
Post by justin124 on May 30, 2019 21:04:45 GMT
Turnout was slightly up on 2014 - but 37% hardly suggests that voters are straining at the leash desperate to express an opinion on the matter. Parliamentary by elections in the past have seen turnout well above 70% when voters felt really stirred - eg Darlington 1983 - Orpington 1962
It's a fair point.
But you do also have to factor in that since 2004 until 2014 Euros were held on the same day as local elections. In 1999 when they weren't turnout was 22%. I do note for those getting excited by this year's results that the Tories "won" those Euro elections and it didn't do them much good in the medium term. Although prior to that turnout at Euros was mainly above 30% but below 37% and you have to factor in a long term trend of falling turnouts even if that has been slightly reversed at recent general elections - certainly since the 60s. 2019 was the highest ever for Euros not held on the same day as local elections and the second highest ever after 2004 (and elections on the same day that year included the London Assembly and London Mayor).
No doubt someone will be along with a list of by-election turnouts and I do note that even Orpington was (slightly) below the two general elections there either side of the by-election - even if it was above 80%!!! I think with the long term decline in turnouts (and I suspect greater mobility - people tend to vote more where they have greater roots) depending on the type of seat and how close it's perceived to be 50% would be considered pretty "healthy" at a by-election these days.
The turnout in 1999 was 24% - but before that the stand alone elections held in 1989 and 1994 both saw turnout at 36.4% - very little different to last week's 36.9%.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 16,878
|
Post by right on May 30, 2019 22:49:15 GMT
Let's be honest. Anything could happen. I see just two possibilities, in both of which the Tories come third. Lib Dems are pushing as pro-EU party. It will get them nowhere, but may get them third.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2019 23:13:18 GMT
LAB 32% BXP 28% CON 25% LD 10%
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 30, 2019 23:43:46 GMT
LAB 32% BXP 28% CON 25% LD 10% Conservatives far too high and BP too low. This will be the first BP gain. Only the majority is at stake.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on May 30, 2019 23:50:57 GMT
LAB 32% BXP 28% CON 25% LD 10% Conservatives far too high and BP too low. This will be the first BP gain. Only the majority is at stake. I can't decide whether it's going to be an easy win for the Brexit Party or a close 3-way battle between the Brexit Party, Con and Lab.
|
|
|
Post by robert1 on May 31, 2019 7:10:20 GMT
Was there on Tuesday. 2 large Labour posters, referred to above, well situated on route to Tory HQ, as are several Labour posters on stakes right by the Tory office. Saw one other window poster (Brexit) while out canvassing.
Only leaflets on doorsteps/inside doors were addressed mailshot from Brexit. Parties are clearly fighting via the web etc.
Labour's candidate's absence from local hustings last night will probably not go down well. Gordon Brown preferred to locals.
|
|
|
Post by samdwebber on May 31, 2019 9:32:51 GMT
LAB 32% BXP 28% CON 25% LD 10% If you believe this and I still dont rule out a Labour hold, the betting odds speak for themselves, so you could pocket a tidy sum this time next week: 1/4 Brexit party 4/1 Labour 25/1 Lib Dems 33/1 Conservative
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,167
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris from Brum on May 31, 2019 9:43:10 GMT
LAB 32% BXP 28% CON 25% LD 10% If you believe this and I still dont rule out a Labour hold, the betting odds speak for themselves, so you could pocket a tidy sum this time next week: 1/4 Brexit party 4/1 Labour 25/1 Lib Dems 33/1 Conservative Ha! I backed us when we were 50/1, so we've come in a bit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2019 10:14:00 GMT
I've put £50 on Labour winning.
This reminds me of Eastleigh in 2013. The insurgent party will do well but won't win.
|
|
|
Post by matureleft on May 31, 2019 10:22:37 GMT
LAB 32% BXP 28% CON 25% LD 10% If you believe this and I still dont rule out a Labour hold, the betting odds speak for themselves, so you could pocket a tidy sum this time next week: 1/4 Brexit party 4/1 Labour 25/1 Lib Dems 33/1 Conservative I was always taught that gambling was a mug's game! However those look quite good value odds on Labour and poor value on the Brexit party. If it's a low turnout I'd expect the better Labour organisation, particularly in the large minority communities in the city, to count. But Labour organisational morale may well be low. I'd accept that BP are favourites, but not 4-1 on.
Some of the Lib Dems' strongest areas in Peterborough lie outside the parliamentary seat, but they certainly have a core of activists close by. I'm therefore slightly puzzled at reports that they are putting little effort in.
The Tories have a solid local government base in the city and constituency and, until recently, held the parliamentary seat. I'd have thought, strategically, they'd also not want BP to get a parliamentary foothold. However their organisation on the ground must be pretty shellshocked and divided.
|
|
|
Post by edgbaston on May 31, 2019 10:23:18 GMT
I've put £50 on Labour winning. This reminds me of Eastleigh in 2013. The insurgent party will do well but won't win. It would seem to me that the Lim Dems won Eastleigh as they had a complete stranglehold on the area. They had a high base to fall from. In Peterborough no party has that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2019 10:26:10 GMT
I've put £50 on Labour winning. This reminds me of Eastleigh in 2013. The insurgent party will do well but won't win. It would seem to me that the Lim Dems won Eastleigh as they had a complete stranglehold on the area. They had a high base to fall from. In Peterborough no party has that. The Brexit Party has no base whatsoever here. Where UKIP won seats in the 2010-15 parliament, they had the sitting MP as the candidate. Labour's candidate got a strong result in the 2015 election all things considered.
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on May 31, 2019 10:30:36 GMT
It would seem to me that the Lim Dems won Eastleigh as they had a complete stranglehold on the area. They had a high base to fall from. In Peterborough no party has that. The Brexit Party has no base whatsoever here. Where UKIP won seats in the 2010-15 parliament, they had the sitting MP as the candidate. Labour's candidate got a strong result in the 2015 election all things considered. Odd as parties that are weeks old are of course usually known to have strong bases.
|
|
|
Post by edgbaston on May 31, 2019 10:30:46 GMT
It would seem to me that the Lim Dems won Eastleigh as they had a complete stranglehold on the area. They had a high base to fall from. In Peterborough no party has that. The Brexit Party has no base whatsoever here. Where UKIP won seats in the 2010-15 parliament, they had the sitting MP as the candidate. Labour's candidate got a strong result in the 2015 election all things considered. The Eastleigh comparison is problematic for a few reasons. But if we must UKIP got 27% from barely any base at all. And the BXP is much less toxic than UKIP - can attract many more Tory switchers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2019 10:31:43 GMT
The Brexit Party has no base whatsoever here. Where UKIP won seats in the 2010-15 parliament, they had the sitting MP as the candidate. Labour's candidate got a strong result in the 2015 election all things considered. Odd as parties that are weeks old are of course usually known to have strong bases. The SDP had a base in 1981.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on May 31, 2019 10:46:07 GMT
Odd as parties that are weeks old are of course usually known to have strong bases. The SDP had a base in 1981. Not a particularly geographical one or even a demographical one. Although they came from parliament whereas the BXP have no MPs, the parallels are closer than they might first appear. imho.
The interwangle has allowed BXP to attract donations and "expressions of interest" much faster than anyone could have done in 1981.
|
|
|
Post by michael2019 on May 31, 2019 12:26:34 GMT
The SDP had a base in 1981. Not a particularly geographical one or even a demographical one. Although they came from parliament whereas the BXP have no MPs, the parallels are closer than they might first appear. imho.
The interwangle has allowed BXP to attract donations and "expressions of interest" much faster than anyone could have done in 1981.
Actually one of the interesting things was the SDP was in the forefront of these things for the time. I believe you could join by credit card which was considered innovative. And the SDP had a national membership database - whereas I believe you could only join the Liberals locally. My guess is (for the time) the SDP did replicate some of the success of the BXP in individual donations and membership - although I can't see immediately see any stats online. Of course the internet makes this vastly easier and cheaper. And to their credit, the BXP have very successfully melded the online and offline and UKIP has given them a party and activist base which I guess they have effectively done a "reverse takeover" of and will give them a local base and organisation - rather like the Liberals did for the Alliance. Of course CHUK didn't manage what Farage did (I believe 15k supporters to Farage's 100k) and don't have a local base.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on May 31, 2019 12:34:28 GMT
Not a particularly geographical one or even a demographical one. Although they came from parliament whereas the BXP have no MPs, the parallels are closer than they might first appear. imho.
The interwangle has allowed BXP to attract donations and "expressions of interest" much faster than anyone could have done in 1981.
Actually one of the interesting things was the SDP was in the forefront of these things for the time. I believe you could join by credit card which was considered innovative. And the SDP had a national membership database - whereas I believe you could only join the Liberals locally. My guess is (for the time) the SDP did replicate some of the success of the BXP in individual donations and membership - although I can't see immediately see any stats online. Of course the internet makes this vastly easier and cheaper. And to their credit, the BXP have very successfully melded the online and offline and UKIP has given them a party and activist base which I guess they have effectively done a "reverse takeover" of and will give them a local base and organisation - rather like the Liberals did for the Alliance. Of course CHUK didn't manage what Farage did (I believe 15k supporters to Farage's 100k) and don't have a local base.
They were, although not quite as revolutionary as is sometimes made out. And they weren't prepared for the response which made things a bit chaotic. Labour had national membership of course, but there was a lot of argy bargy at local level that was effectively stopped with better central organisation in the 80s and 90s.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,531
|
Post by The Bishop on May 31, 2019 12:35:30 GMT
Gordon Brown preferred to locals Sorry, this is a bit too cryptic for me.
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on May 31, 2019 12:40:20 GMT
Not a particularly geographical one or even a demographical one. Although they came from parliament whereas the BXP have no MPs, the parallels are closer than they might first appear. imho.
The interwangle has allowed BXP to attract donations and "expressions of interest" much faster than anyone could have done in 1981.
Actually one of the interesting things was the SDP was in the forefront of these things for the time. I believe you could join by credit card which was considered innovative. And the SDP had a national membership database - whereas I believe you could only join the Liberals locally. My guess is (for the time) the SDP did replicate some of the success of the BXP in individual donations and membership - although I can't see immediately see any stats online. Of course the internet makes this vastly easier and cheaper. And to their credit, the BXP have very successfully melded the online and offline and UKIP has given them a party and activist base which I guess they have effectively done a "reverse takeover" of and will give them a local base and organisation - rather like the Liberals did for the Alliance. Of course CHUK didn't manage what Farage did (I believe 15k supporters to Farage's 100k) and don't have a local base.
Widely ridiculed at the time as I recall.
|
|