Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2013 14:57:14 GMT
I don't think I will use lat night alone as a GE predictor. God knows what FPTP would make of it. Whacked it through Electoral Calculus: Con: 249 Lab: 254 LD: 100 UKIP: 12 SNP/Plaid: 11 Others (incl NI parties): 24 :S *falls off chair* |
|
|
|
Post by listener on Oct 4, 2013 15:10:44 GMT
Wantage Town Council (Charlton ward) - Con 444, Lib Dem 394, Lab 220 - Con hold
Sleaford Town Council (Holdingham ward) - Lincolnshire Independent 75, Independent 53 - Lincolnshire Independent replaces No Description.
The turnout here was 6.12% (sic).
|
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Oct 4, 2013 17:48:33 GMT
UKIP came second in 3 of the 4 contests last night. If people are saying that represents a bad night for them, then it really is, paradoxically, a sign of their success. The Aylersbury result is disappointing for them, but is still a very decent vote share. I have to say I agree with this. Since the start of September there have been 34 local by elections. UKIP has contested 32 of them, won 3 and came second in another 17. In the same period last year there were 20 local by elections. UKIP contested 14 of them, won 0 and came second in 1. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 4, 2013 21:04:41 GMT
eneral Election @ukelections2015 LASTNIGHTS SHARE OF THE VOTE CON 21.6% (-9.3%) UKIP 20.7% (+11.3%) LD 19.7% (-0.1%) LAB 19.1% (+6.9%) It's a four-horse race  Wot? no bar chart?  |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 6, 2013 11:10:03 GMT
In fact I'd suggest East Lindsey was a good result for Labour and an attrocious one for the Conservatives, with UKIP and the 2 indies splitting the none of the above vote three ways to let Labour in. It's a very good result for Labour and one I wasn't expecting at all. Even though the vote was undoubtedly split, Labour still had to come out on top of the split in a ward where we hadn't even stood a candidate since at least 1999 ( I can't find the 1999 results by ward so I can't be certain...). 33% from a standing start is pretty astonishing for us . There have been plenty of other by elections recently where the vote has split all over the place, and Labour came nowhere close to winning. And although lots of second places technically get you nowhere in FPTP, I don't see why this constitutes a bad set of results for UKIP. Most parties would be glad of that sort of result in a fairly diverse set of electoral districts. |
|
|
|
Post by middleenglander on Oct 6, 2013 11:18:48 GMT
It's a very good result for Labour and one I wasn't expecting at all. Even though the vote was undoubtedly split, Labour still had to come out on top of the split in a ward where we hadn't even stood a candidate since at least 1999 ( I can't find the 1999 results by ward so I can't be certain...). 33% from a standing start is pretty astonishing for us. Labour had two candidates in 2003 polling some 20% of the total vote. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 6, 2013 11:49:36 GMT
It's a very good result for Labour and one I wasn't expecting at all. Even though the vote was undoubtedly split, Labour still had to come out on top of the split in a ward where we hadn't even stood a candidate since at least 1999 ( I can't find the 1999 results by ward so I can't be certain...). 33% from a standing start is pretty astonishing for us. Labour had two candidates in 2003 polling some 20% of the total vote. sorry, my fault , I missed that. I was writing us off retrospectively... Even so, it's still impressive after such an absence, and not typical of what happens when Labour stands after a long gap. It would be interesting to speculate whether the Indy vote would have combined if only one had stood, or been dispersed among all the other candidates. |
|
