|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Feb 23, 2018 12:21:50 GMT
Off topic but the LDs went from holding Bradford East in 2010 to getting 1.8% in 2017 which is quite a drop off over two elections. The Bradford East results in 2015 & 2017 were odd. In 2015 David Ward only lost 4.2% which must have been one of the best results for a defending Lib Dem, unfortunately for him he was starting from 33.7% and Labour surged. Then in 2017 the Lib Dems refused to reselect Ward so he stood as an independent and got 7.8% which is quite good for an ex MP who's gone independent once out of Parliament. Does anyone with local/inside knowledge know if the Bradford East Lib Dems really wanted Ward last year and basically did no campaigning for the new candidate? |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 23, 2018 12:24:03 GMT
There must have been some good examples in Canada 1993, surely? There are some good examples in specifically Newfoundland in 2008 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2018 12:43:28 GMT
The issue there is one of two things can happen: People continue to vote tactically for the constituency stage, which makes the list stage less representative of people's views than it could be People don't vote tactically, and constituency MPs are elected with 'personal mandates' of, perhaps, less than a third of the vote. Of course, this occasionally happens anyway, and even more so on the local level. AV+ solves both of these - the first preference votes can be used to allocate list seats, whilst constituency MPs need 50%+1 mandates (if every vote is transferable). AMS has thrown up some low winning results already - for instance my London Assembly seat was won with 29.1% in 2004 and I suspect that's not the lowest. Tactical voting & campaigning can and does happen in AV as people try to get the most winnable opponent into the last two by inverting their true preferences so it's not a solution to the first problem. And AV+ offers a massive recipe for voter confusion with preferential & proportional votes flying around (a problem we see in London with SV and AMS list votes at the same time) and doesn't really offer any great benefits to overcome the problem beyond the notional idea that raking in third and fourth choices enhances the mandate. Tactical voting of the sort you mention does happen, but it's considerably less common (and has less impact) than tactical voting in FPTP. I do see your point about voter confusion, but I think ultimately it's less of an issue than some seem to think, and I understand that the initial AV+ proposal was seemingly less complicated, since: The most important change would be the use of Alternative Vote in the election of single member constituency MPs; A very small proportion of MPs (I seem to recall 10-15% being considered) would be elected to make the Commons more party-proportional. Which I don't personally see as too complicated. A personal idea of mine that I've recently liked the idea of (for a few reasons) would be 450 MPs elected in 4 year terms through either AV or even a French-style system, and another 150 in a completely unlinked list-PR election, staggered by 2 years. It's quite simple to understand, but I realise that it would never happen. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Feb 23, 2018 13:13:46 GMT
France last year will be a goldmine.
Aisne 4th: held by Marie-Francoise Bechtel (MRC) in 2012, she failed to reach the second round in 2017 and took only 7.96%, down from 23.37% in the first round last time.
Aude 1st: the sitting PS deputy got 41% in the first round in 2012, then just 5% in 2017 standing as DVG.
Bouches-de-Rhone 14th, where the PS fell from 1st place to 5th.
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Feb 23, 2018 13:37:14 GMT
Tactical voting of the sort you mention does happen, but it's considerably less common (and has less impact) than tactical voting in FPTP. It's less common because the countries that use AV rarely have the sort of party system that throws up the contests where it can become a real possibility. A lot of the problems come at the casting stage hence many more spoils than usual. All the elections in this country which combine preferential and proportional ballots at the same time suggest it's best avoided where possible. A system that locks the two together is really undesirable. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2018 13:57:12 GMT
This is the same reason why the ACT party in New Zealand still have an MP, and extreme efforts to exploit this effect lead both Italy and Albania to abandon MMP. Germany has rules which prohibit parties from endorsing other candidates, and votes for successful candidates from parties who got less than 5% of list votes (nationwide) aren't counted in the list stage. However, left-of-centre people in Germany can often 'increase the value' of their vote by voting SPD in their constituency and Green in the list, or right-of-centre voters can benefit from voting CDU then FDP. I understand that there were some campaigns for pro-independence voters in Scotland in 2016 to vote SNP in the constituency vote and Green in the regional vote, and I also understand that Labour considered running Co-operative Party lists in parts of Scotland when they were the strongest force there. And to complicate things further, in Scotland at the moment, voting tactically against the SNP in the constituency whilst voting Green on the regional list is the best way to increase Green representation. The second Green MSP in Lothian effectively owes his seat to the fact that the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats all won a constituency in the region. This is why we should encourage Ruth Davidson to continue winning Edinburgh Central by, perversely, standing Alison Johnstone against her. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on Feb 23, 2018 14:02:42 GMT
This is the same reason why the ACT party in New Zealand still have an MP, and extreme efforts to exploit this effect lead both Italy and Albania to abandon MMP. Germany has rules which prohibit parties from endorsing other candidates, and votes for successful candidates from parties who got less than 5% of list votes (nationwide) aren't counted in the list stage. However, left-of-centre people in Germany can often 'increase the value' of their vote by voting SPD in their constituency and Green in the list, or right-of-centre voters can benefit from voting CDU then FDP. I understand that there were some campaigns for pro-independence voters in Scotland in 2016 to vote SNP in the constituency vote and Green in the regional vote, and I also understand that Labour considered running Co-operative Party lists in parts of Scotland when they were the strongest force there. And to complicate things further, in Scotland at the moment, voting tactically against the SNP in the constituency whilst voting Green on the regional list is the best way to increase Green representation. The second Green MSP in Lothian effectively owes his seat to the fact that the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats all won a constituency in the region. This is why we should encourage Ruth Davidson to continue winning Edinburgh Central by, perversely, standing Alison Johnstone against her. "See how simple, clear and scientific this is?" |
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,842 
|
Post by Crimson King on Feb 23, 2018 16:04:04 GMT
Off topic but the LDs went from holding Bradford East in 2010 to getting 1.8% in 2017 which is quite a drop off over two elections. The Bradford East results in 2015 & 2017 were odd. In 2015 David Ward only lost 4.2% which must have been one of the best results for a defending Lib Dem, unfortunately for him he was starting from 33.7% and Labour surged. Then in 2017 the Lib Dems refused to reselect Ward so he stood as an independent and got 7.8% which is quite good for an ex MP who's gone independent once out of Parliament. Does anyone with local/inside knowledge know if the Bradford East Lib Dems really wanted Ward last year and basically did no campaigning for the new candidate? one might like to reflect on quite how much and how effective a campaign could be run for someone who's name was not known to the local party until a few days before close of nominations. But yes, we selected David early (all seats were asked to do so given the speculation about an early election) were congratulated for our promptness in doing so by the national party had been shoving out literature with his name on for a year and had an office full of literature also with his name on and a bunch of pissed of volunteers. We might have had a chance of winning the seat (from the narrative before the election, though in retrospect the surprising performance of Labour meant we almost certainly would not have done) but none at all in the new circumstances. Not conducive to enthusiasm in workers |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Feb 23, 2018 22:48:29 GMT
I met Robertson at an event with David Reed, another MP often forgotten by history. He was doing some sort of public affairs thing (perhaps Davıd Boothroyd can shed some light? Robertson I mean, I had professional reasons to come into contact with Reed's team). Sadly I didn't get to ask Reed if he was a bit gutted about Sedgefield being abolished and then recreated, depriving him of a parliamentary career. David Reed (who died last year) was Director of Corporate Communications for Whitbread plc for 15 years so had quite a lot of public affairs involvement. Yes indeed, he was involved with the British Beer and Pub Association as well which is how I came across him. I've since checked out Robertson and he's working in crisis management for a public affairs firm. |
|
|
|
Post by warofdreams on Feb 24, 2018 2:05:30 GMT
On the original question, William Doris of the Irish Parliamentary Party won West Mayo in December 1910 with 78.4% of the vote. By the next election, in 1918, Sinn Fein easily took the seat, and Doris managed only 13.3%.
|
|
|
|
Post by warofdreams on Feb 24, 2018 2:15:28 GMT
Yes indeed, pragmaticidealist , an example being Oshawa (which for many years previously had been held by NDP leader Ed Broadbent). Michael Breaugh, who succeeded him as NDP MP, saw his vote share collapse from 44.3% to 14.9%. Charlevoix is a good example - previously held by PC leader Brian Mulroney, who had taken 80.0% in 1988, but his successor only managed 17.8% and third place in 1993. |
|
Foggy
Non-Aligned
Yn Ennill Yma
Posts: 6,135
|
Post by Foggy on Feb 24, 2018 22:22:49 GMT
Yes indeed, pragmaticidealist , an example being Oshawa (which for many years previously had been held by NDP leader Ed Broadbent). Michael Breaugh, who succeeded him as NDP MP, saw his vote share collapse from 44.3% to 14.9%. Charlevoix is a good example - previously held by PC leader Brian Mulroney, who had taken 80.0% in 1988, but his successor only managed 17.8% and third place in 1993. Already mentioned by Devil Wincarnate I believe. It's notable that Charlevoix was later held provincially by Pauline Marois. In that same province, the NDP had a few spectacular collapses in 2015. They went from over 50% of the vote to just 23.7% in Shefford, whilst in Louis-Saint-Laurent they fell from a winning position to only 15.9% and barely into five figures in raw vote terms... with a reasonably high-profile candidate too. That was just one of many third places at that election in seats they'd gained in 2011. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Feb 25, 2018 12:08:34 GMT
The SDP managed 4.2% in Devonport in 1992, compared to David Owen's 42.3% in 1987. That though was the Continuing Continuing SDP. However if we accept anti-merger parties' claims to be the originals as meaning they get to compete for this wooden spoon then some interesting results open up. Plymouth Devonport was the only constituency where the SDP of 1992 stood in a seat that the SDP had won in 1987. In 1992 the Continuity Liberal Party stood in three seats that had elected Liberals in 1987 and got: Tweeddale, Ettrick & Lauderdale 177 0.6% Truro 208 0.3% North East Fife 85 0.2% The North East Fife result may be unbeatable. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Feb 25, 2018 12:24:35 GMT
That must be the biggest drop in raw votes too. He went down from 201,556 in 2009 to just 20,006 at the following election. An amusing special type of this sort of thing - it's a bit different because what's lost isn't genuine support - can be the drops that can occur when a party with a small vote bank gets doled out seats by a larger partner in an alliance because every vote helps and then goes it alone next election. A UK example may be Fermanagh & South Tyrone in the 1950s. Sinn Féin won it with 30,529 50.2% in 1955, although the MP was unseated for ineligibility and replaced by the UUP without a contest. In 1959 the notionally defending Sinn Féin collapsed to 7,348 18.6%. IIRC much of this was down to the Sinn Féin candidate securing the Irish Nationalist nomination in 1955, but by 1959 the Border Campaign led to the Nationalist repudiating SF, but offering no alternative candidate and instead calling for a boycott of the poll. |
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Dec 14, 2019 21:29:44 GMT
In Great Britain a new record was set on Thursday with the 1.4% secured by Chris Williamson.
|
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,675
Member is Online
|
Post by Jack on Dec 14, 2019 22:04:46 GMT
In Great Britain a new record was set on Thursday with the 1.4% secured by Chris Williamson. Couldn't happen to a nicer bloke... |
|
|
|
Post by swingometer on Apr 9, 2024 13:44:02 GMT
What's the worst result ever secured by a sitting MP or defending party? For the former one to beat is Mike Hancock getting 1.7% in Portsmouth South in 2015, albeit as an independent. I suspect the latter may technically be another MP who left the party they were elected for and fought as another. But for parties elected the previous time, a starting point is the Ulster Unionist in Belfast North in 2001 got 12.0% and came in fourth place. George Gardiner for Reigate in 1997, defected to the Referendum Party six weeks before polling day |
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,675
Member is Online
|
Post by Jack on Apr 9, 2024 14:27:12 GMT
In the context of 1997, Raymond Robertson’s result was not THAT bad. Yes he was 3rd but he was only 3920 behind Anne Begg. David Shaw lost Dover by 11700 for example. I wonder why Edwina Currie lost by 14,000 votes when she was one of the most high profile MPs in the country, it was if she didn’t exist, electorally I mean One member of the forum is now standing tall after reading this post.  |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Apr 9, 2024 14:33:12 GMT
In the context of 1997, Raymond Robertson’s result was not THAT bad. Yes he was 3rd but he was only 3920 behind Anne Begg. David Shaw lost Dover by 11700 for example. I wonder why Edwina Currie lost by 14,000 votes when she was one of the most high profile MPs in the country, it was if she didn’t exist, electorally I mean Because she was a Conservative candidate in a marginal constituency at a time of a Labour landslide. Being "high profile" doesn't suddenly mean that people will be more likely to vote for a candidate than otherwise, if they are in the "wrong" party anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by uthacalthing on Apr 9, 2024 14:40:04 GMT
In the context of 1997, Raymond Robertson’s result was not THAT bad. Yes he was 3rd but he was only 3920 behind Anne Begg. David Shaw lost Dover by 11700 for example. I wonder why Edwina Currie lost by 14,000 votes when she was one of the most high profile MPs in the country, it was if she didn’t exist, electorally I mean It was the quality of the Labour candidate |
|
