|
|
Post by Richard Gadsden on Nov 16, 2012 15:29:32 GMT
no they had 4.96% - you arent couting the others Are there more others than listed? Ah well. There were 35,045 votes in the results I quoted. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Nov 16, 2012 15:30:07 GMT
Lab 17,267 Con 9,476 UKIP 5,108 LD 1,770 BNP 614 ED 432 Green 378 Lab maj 7,791 LD: 5.05% - needed 1753 to save our deposit, so made it with 17 votes to spare. I think you're missing all the small candidates below the Greens out. I make it the LDs on 4.9489% and just missing out on keeping the deposit. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Nov 16, 2012 15:31:17 GMT
A nice result to get, though of course the majority is probably primarily down to Tory voters shifting heavily to UKIP. The fact that the Labour share is 7.5% above UKIP+Conservatives reflects the relatively fixed nature of the electoral map here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Gadsden on Nov 16, 2012 15:31:43 GMT
LD: 5.05% - needed 1753 to save our deposit, so made it with 17 votes to spare. I think you're missing all the small candidates below the Greens out. I make it the LDs on 4.9489% and just missing out on keeping the deposit. Yes, That was precisely what I did, following the posting of the results (I'm at work - on a coffee break in case my boss is reading this - and didn't see the declaration). |
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Nov 16, 2012 15:32:38 GMT
Obviously a bad result for us and a good result for Labour and UKIP. At the same time I don't think it's so bad that it should cause panic in Tory ranks, after all it's a mid term by election caused by the MP resigning to go and live in New York, that can't have helped.
|
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Nov 16, 2012 15:38:13 GMT
I know they're not exactly rolling in cash, but calling for two recounts to save a deposit is just pathetic on every level. £500 might only be an average evening's drinking for a local Tory party Yes I lost £500 down the side of a seat in my Rolls Royce the other day. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Nov 16, 2012 15:38:25 GMT
Lab 17267 48.4% Con 9476 26.6% UKIP 5108 14.3% LD 1770 5.0% BNP 614 1.7% ED 432 1.2% Grn 378 1.1% Ind G 212 0.6% Can 137 0.4% Elv 99 0.3% Ind M 73 0.2% YPP 39 0.1% Dem 35 0.1% UPP 25 0.1% Changes from 2010: Lab +9.7 Con -15.6 UKIP + 14.3 LD -9.4 BNP -3.0 ED +1.2 Grn +1.1 I |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 16, 2012 15:39:42 GMT
A nice result to get, though of course the majority is probably primarily down to Tory voters shifting heavily to UKIP. The fact that the Labour share is 7.5% above UKIP+Conservatives reflects the relatively fixed nature of the electoral map here. Admittedly anecdotal evidence suggested UKIP were also picking up non-negligible support amongst working class voters in Corby itself - maybe that was what stopped us topping 50%?? I agree that most of their support came from the right, obviously........ Anyway, this is a polarised constituency which has historically tended to low swings. Given that, an excellent result for us  |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Nov 16, 2012 15:40:48 GMT
LD: 5.05% - needed 1753 to save our deposit, so made it with 17 votes to spare. I think you're missing all the small candidates below the Greens out. I make it the LDs on 4.9489% and just missing out on keeping the deposit. I was just doing the main candidates to begin with and then I was going to put the minor ones on a couple of minutes later. Didn't mean to be misleading.  |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Nov 16, 2012 15:41:36 GMT
A nice result to get, though of course the majority is probably primarily down to Tory voters shifting heavily to UKIP. The fact that the Labour share is 7.5% above UKIP+Conservatives reflects the relatively fixed nature of the electoral map here. UKIP do pick up votes from Labour as well - a certain type of Labour voter in my experience (white, working-class, male and middle-aged). Also, they have become the default 'none of the above' protest vote party now that the LibDems are in government. So I don't entirely agree with your analysis. They do, but the areas where that's most prominent are not the areas found in the Corby seat. Some of the UKIP share is down to that, but a supermajority are protesting Tories. There's no way the Tory floor here is as low as 26%. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Nov 16, 2012 15:43:37 GMT
The combined Tory/UKIP vote was only down by 1.9% compared to 2010, (although UKIP didn't stand then).
2010: Con 42.2%
2012: Con 26.6%, UKIP 14.3%, combined = 40.9%
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2012 15:44:32 GMT
So the swing is 12.7%, which is comparable with Vale of Glamorgan in 1989. Well it's bad, but actually I'm surprised it wasn't worse in the circumstances.
Congratulations to UKIP on an impressive performance. One wonders where their votes would have gone had they not fielded a candidate.
I'm still very angry with Louise Mensch. I feel most sorry for all those who worked so hard to get her elected in 2010 after 13 years of Labour representation.
|
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Nov 16, 2012 15:45:23 GMT
Yes I lost £500 down the side of a seat in my Rolls Royce the other day. Only one Roller? Pleb. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Nov 16, 2012 15:47:41 GMT
There's certainly a possibility that the two big movements were Con to UKIP and LD to Lab creating a biggish looking swing.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 16, 2012 15:48:01 GMT
UKIP were obviously a conduit for protest votes more generally. Had they not stood, it is likely only a minority would have gone Tory (and, of course, some Labour) It might have meant a slightly lower swing to Labour overall - maybe by a point or two - but also their topping half the vote?? The assumption that you can just add the two together is wrong on all sorts of levels |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Nov 16, 2012 15:51:00 GMT
I would suspect that's the case. There simply aren't enough swing voters in the seat and much of the 2010 LD vote was probably an ex-Labour protest vote. We got those back and won some switchers, but I don't think we could have got much more, because there are too many voters who'd never consider us.
I'd be interested to see how he did in the TC by-election in Raunds. That might establish how much there were breakthroughs in the non-Corby vote.
|
|
baloo
Conservative
Posts: 760
|
Post by baloo on Nov 16, 2012 15:53:43 GMT
I would guess that left leaning voters in the constituency would already have been voting Labour as the Lib Dems clearly stood no chance of winning (it's a two horse race!). The strong Labour performance could be due to their supporters feeling more motivated although of course even they polled less than they did in 2010.
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Nov 16, 2012 15:57:39 GMT
The combined Tory/UKIP vote was only down by 1.9% compared to 2010, (although UKIP didn't stand then). That's an utterly meaningless statistic. I don't agree. UKIP didn't stand last time. This time they did stand and what happens? The Tory vote goes down by 14.3% and UKIP polls 15.6%. Of course it wasn't a direct swing from Tory to UKIP but it suggests a lot of Tories switched to UKIP. Similarly the Lab vote goes up by 9.7% and the LD vote goes down by 9.4%. |
|
doktorb in absentia
Guest
|
Post by doktorb in absentia on Nov 16, 2012 16:02:47 GMT
I know they're not exactly rolling in cash, but calling for two recounts to save a deposit is just pathetic on every level. Having the bottomless pockets of Union paymasters is just pathetic on every level. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Nov 16, 2012 16:04:34 GMT
I would guess that left leaning voters in the constituency would already have been voting Labour as the Lib Dems clearly stood no chance of winning (it's a two horse race!). The strong Labour performance could be due to their supporters feeling more motivated although of course even they polled less than they did in 2010. Plenty of voters on the left no longer felt able to vote Labour in 2010. That was less the case in marginals, of course, but not absent even there. |
|
