Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922 
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Oct 31, 2012 20:46:56 GMT
Now, this might be seen as a strange one, but here's the reasoning why. Northamptonshire police force area is, in effect, Northamptonshire county. At the general election, the votes cast in the county were: Con 47%, Lab 26%, Lib Dem 19%, UKIP 3%, BNP 2%, Eng Dems 1%, Ind 1%, Green 1%, Others 0% (Con lead of 22%) The most recent ICM poll suggested a swing from Con to Lab of 9% (and as Northamptonshire is an area that Labour has had strength in, in the past, I can see no reason why Labour shouldn't win this area on an SV vote). However, if they do, then there would have to be an almost immediate by-election as the Labour candidate has been banned from standing www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-20160584 but his name will still be on the ballot paper. If this does happen, then any shred of respectabilty these elections have will be thrown out of the window (along with the whole scheme, I hope) |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 31, 2012 21:51:24 GMT
I can see no reason why Labour shouldn't win this area on an SV vote There are all kind of reasons, but might not one rather compelling reason be that many voters will be disinclined to vote for him knowing what they now know? |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 31, 2012 22:17:35 GMT
Harry's final point - that his still winning despite all that would do a great deal to terminally discredit this unwanted idiocy - is a valid one, however  |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Nov 1, 2012 1:06:53 GMT
Is it possible that the people who voted for him could be deemed to have wasted their vote, knowing that he was ineligible, and that therefore the runner-up would be declared the winner? Such things have happened once or thrice in parliamentary by-elections (in cases where it was public knowledge that the winning candidate was not eligible to be elected).
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,922
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Nov 1, 2012 9:42:43 GMT
Is it possible that the people who voted for him could be deemed to have wasted their vote, knowing that he was ineligible, and that therefore the runner-up would be declared the winner? Such things have happened once or thrice in parliamentary by-elections (in cases where it was public knowledge that the winning candidate was not eligible to be elected). Newham North East 1994 should answer that question en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newham_North_East_by-election,_1994 |
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Nov 1, 2012 10:06:42 GMT
That is a different situation - although Alec Kellaway had left the LDs, he was still eligible to serve as an MP if elected.
The more relevant precedent here is Bristol South East, 1961.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2012 10:38:54 GMT
I can see no reason why Labour shouldn't win this area on an SV vote There are all kind of reasons, but might not one rather compelling reason be that many voters will be disinclined to vote for him knowing what they now know? it may be the other way round in that the voters see through such a stupid rule that allows someone to be a magistrate but not a PCC. they may just say what utter nonsense this all is and stiick two fingers up. IF I was in Northampton I would have no problem voting for our candidate. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Nov 1, 2012 10:44:09 GMT
There are all kind of reasons, but might not one rather compelling reason be that many voters will be disinclined to vote for him knowing what they now know? it may be the other way round in that the voters see through such a stupid rule that allows someone to be a magistrate but not a PCC. they may just say what utter nonsense this all is and stiick two fingers up. IF I was in Northampton I would have no problem voting for our candidate. I would suggest that the majority of people who see these elections as nonsense will not vote at all. The number of people who understand the rules and are irate enough about them to let it sway their vote is actually probably pretty small. Overall, I would guess that the ineligible candidate would be probably be a net vote loser for Labour (I see no evidence that he is in fact some kind of Tony Benn figure who will attract a huge personal vote despite being ineligible), but the overall impact might not be big one way or the other. |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Nov 1, 2012 11:27:21 GMT
Is it possible that the people who voted for him could be deemed to have wasted their vote, knowing that he was ineligible, and that therefore the runner-up would be declared the winner? Such things have happened once or thrice in parliamentary by-elections (in cases where it was public knowledge that the winning candidate was not eligible to be elected). Newham North East 1994 should answer that question en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newham_North_East_by-election,_1994 What the fuck-a-doodle-doo has that got to do with the question I asked? Was Stephen Timms disqualified, like Tony Benn was in 1961 or C. Beattie was in 1955? |
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873
|
Post by Pimpernal on Nov 2, 2012 7:58:55 GMT
There are all kind of reasons, but might not one rather compelling reason be that many voters will be disinclined to vote for him knowing what they now know? it may be the other way round in that the voters see through such a stupid rule that allows someone to be a magistrate but not a PCC. they may just say what utter nonsense this all is and stiick two fingers up. IF I was in Northampton I would have no problem voting for our candidate. I could easily be tempted by such logic... cue the usual catcalls and digs...  |
|
