Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 15, 2018 21:20:06 GMT
Yes.
Notionally, Labour would've come 2nd in Oxford West & Abingdon in 1979.
Which Oxford wards would they have been ahead in?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 15, 2018 23:54:06 GMT
Yes. Notionally, Labour would've come 2nd in Oxford West & Abingdon in 1979. Which Oxford wards would they have been ahead in? There were local elections on the same day so it isn't hard to guess. The only ward in the current seat within Oxford where Labour would have been ahead was the old West ward (Jericho and Osney). They would also have been competitive in one or two wards in Abingdon and Kidlington |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 0:07:20 GMT
Yes. Notionally, Labour would've come 2nd in Oxford West & Abingdon in 1979. Which Oxford wards would they have been ahead in? There were local elections on the same day so it isn't hard to guess. The only ward in the current seat within Oxford where Labour would have been ahead was the old West ward (Jericho and Osney). They would also have been competitive in one or two wards in Abingdon and Kidlington That’s interesting. The Tories get absolutely trounced in North, Summertown, and St Margaret’s nowadays. But this happens to the Tories in demographically similar wards in Cambridge and larger cities like Sheffield too of course. I have a friend standing in one of the Oxford West wards this year - he’ll lose by a country mile. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 16, 2018 18:40:25 GMT
Miriam Mirwitch being elected Chair of Young Labour beating the Momentum candidate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 18:47:01 GMT
Looking at previous elections, there are many surprises I can see. Of course, a lot of these are surprising because the seats in question have changed drastically since then. Other shocks could be down to boundary changes (there are some that are both). In 1983, Oxford East going Conservative (though I don't think Blackbird Leys and Littlemore were in the seat yet, and Oxford was a more Conservative city back then). Also, Carlisle staying Labour even with a strong SDP challenge, though again Carlisle has been trending strongly away from Labour and has gained large rural areas since. In 1997, the scale of Labour's victories still stuns me. Especially their gains in parts of Essex - Romford, Upminster, Castle Point and the like are all very much Conservative seats now, and I can't see the latter two going back to Labour in my lifetime (Romford only in a huge landslide or with major demographic change). Special mention to Labour coming within 222 votes in rural Hexham. Considering how much development the red parts of the seat (especially Prudhoe) have seen since then, if some of those new estates had existed, Hexham would have gone red. If there was a Blair-level landslide tomorrow, Hexham would certainly fall. In 2010, the fact Labour held on in Tynemouth. And lastly, some of the results this time stunned me. I know Kensington has hugely deprived areas, but the scale of the wealth in South Kensington made that a big surprise for me. Similarly, the results across the South East - areas like Banbury, Aylesbury, Hitchin, and Wycombe are all now safer than North West Leicestershire. Not to mention Chelsea and Fulham of course, which is much closer than any of those five. Closer to home, the fact Tynemouth is a safer Labour seat than Blyth Valley or Durham NW still surprises me. While few seats were won or lost in 2017, I think the real surprise is how 2017 has rearranged seats - at the next landslide either way there will be plenty of seats thought to be "ultra-safe" that will fall, and plenty of seats people think of as marginals that will hold. I don’t see any evidence that Hexham would be lost in a 1997 style scenario. Under UNS it wouldn’t. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Mar 16, 2018 18:58:26 GMT
Russell Johnston's win in Inverness in 1992.
I remember going to bed assuming he was a goner, having seen Malcolm Bruce's majority reduced to under 300 from 9,000.
|
|
|
|
Post by pragmaticidealist on Mar 16, 2018 19:33:19 GMT
Looking at previous elections, there are many surprises I can see. Of course, a lot of these are surprising because the seats in question have changed drastically since then. Other shocks could be down to boundary changes (there are some that are both). In 1983, Oxford East going Conservative (though I don't think Blackbird Leys and Littlemore were in the seat yet, and Oxford was a more Conservative city back then). Also, Carlisle staying Labour even with a strong SDP challenge, though again Carlisle has been trending strongly away from Labour and has gained large rural areas since. In 1997, the scale of Labour's victories still stuns me. Especially their gains in parts of Essex - Romford, Upminster, Castle Point and the like are all very much Conservative seats now, and I can't see the latter two going back to Labour in my lifetime (Romford only in a huge landslide or with major demographic change). Special mention to Labour coming within 222 votes in rural Hexham. Considering how much development the red parts of the seat (especially Prudhoe) have seen since then, if some of those new estates had existed, Hexham would have gone red. If there was a Blair-level landslide tomorrow, Hexham would certainly fall. In 2010, the fact Labour held on in Tynemouth. And lastly, some of the results this time stunned me. I know Kensington has hugely deprived areas, but the scale of the wealth in South Kensington made that a big surprise for me. Similarly, the results across the South East - areas like Banbury, Aylesbury, Hitchin, and Wycombe are all now safer than North West Leicestershire. Not to mention Chelsea and Fulham of course, which is much closer than any of those five. Closer to home, the fact Tynemouth is a safer Labour seat than Blyth Valley or Durham NW still surprises me. While few seats were won or lost in 2017, I think the real surprise is how 2017 has rearranged seats - at the next landslide either way there will be plenty of seats thought to be "ultra-safe" that will fall, and plenty of seats people think of as marginals that will hold. I don’t see any evidence that Hexham would be lost in a 1997 style scenario. Under UNS it wouldn’t. The Tories won Hexham by 20% last year, while their seat lead over us nationally was similar to 1992. In 1997 we gained seats that had voted Tory by over 30% in 1992, so Hexham would at the very least likely be in jeopardy (from a Tory POV) in another 1997 scenario. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 20:45:17 GMT
I don’t see it happening.
Labour need a swing of over 10% to take it.
That would put them on 50% nationally.
|
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 16, 2018 21:09:08 GMT
Looking at previous elections, there are many surprises I can see. Of course, a lot of these are surprising because the seats in question have changed drastically since then. Other shocks could be down to boundary changes (there are some that are both). In 1983, Oxford East going Conservative (though I don't think Blackbird Leys and Littlemore were in the seat yet, and Oxford was a more Conservative city back then). Also, Carlisle staying Labour even with a strong SDP challenge, though again Carlisle has been trending strongly away from Labour and has gained large rural areas since. In 1997, the scale of Labour's victories still stuns me. Especially their gains in parts of Essex - Romford, Upminster, Castle Point and the like are all very much Conservative seats now, and I can't see the latter two going back to Labour in my lifetime (Romford only in a huge landslide or with major demographic change). Special mention to Labour coming within 222 votes in rural Hexham. Considering how much development the red parts of the seat (especially Prudhoe) have seen since then, if some of those new estates had existed, Hexham would have gone red. If there was a Blair-level landslide tomorrow, Hexham would certainly fall. In 2010, the fact Labour held on in Tynemouth. And lastly, some of the results this time stunned me. I know Kensington has hugely deprived areas, but the scale of the wealth in South Kensington made that a big surprise for me. Similarly, the results across the South East - areas like Banbury, Aylesbury, Hitchin, and Wycombe are all now safer than North West Leicestershire. Not to mention Chelsea and Fulham of course, which is much closer than any of those five. Closer to home, the fact Tynemouth is a safer Labour seat than Blyth Valley or Durham NW still surprises me. While few seats were won or lost in 2017, I think the real surprise is how 2017 has rearranged seats - at the next landslide either way there will be plenty of seats thought to be "ultra-safe" that will fall, and plenty of seats people think of as marginals that will hold. I don’t see any evidence that Hexham would be lost in a 1997 style scenario. Under UNS it wouldn’t. In 1997, Labour gained 147 seats. Hexham is number 133 on the target list, and is a seat which tends to be quite elastic and swingy, so Labour would have no trouble taking it in a landside. It is also demographically getting better for Labour: in the west and centre of the seat more people move to the towns from Newcastle while the rural areas decline, and the east is basically the same as Blaydon. The next time Labour win a majority, I expect Hexham will slip under 10% majority and will start to be seen as at least a semi-marginal seat, while Berwick will become the North East's safe Conservative seat (unfortunately). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 21:14:47 GMT
2017 - Hexham is around 17.5 points net better for the Tories than the national average.
1997 - Hexham is around 14 points net better for the Tories than the national average
So if anything it’s trended slightly towards the Conservatives and would likely be held with a slightly higher majority than in 1997 if the shares of the vote nationally were the same as 1997. I honestly don’t see the data to support your conclusions. Essentially as ever it’s a seat that Labour could only win in a huge landslide year. Hexham itself is actually trending Conservative.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 21:27:35 GMT
I don’t see any evidence that Hexham would be lost in a 1997 style scenario. Under UNS it wouldn’t. In 1997, Labour gained 147 seats. Hexham is number 133 on the target list, and is a seat which tends to be quite elastic and swingy, so Labour would have no trouble taking it in a landside. It is also demographically getting better for Labour: in the west and centre of the seat more people move to the towns from Newcastle while the rural areas decline, and the east is basically the same as Blaydon. The next time Labour win a majority, I expect Hexham will slip under 10% majority and will start to be seen as at least a semi-marginal seat, while Berwick will become the North East's safe Conservative seat (unfortunately). But Labour are only 3% behind 1997 nationally. What sort of nationwide vote share are they going to get if Hexham votes for PM Corbyn? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 21:30:17 GMT
In 1997, Labour gained 147 seats. Hexham is number 133 on the target list, and is a seat which tends to be quite elastic and swingy, so Labour would have no trouble taking it in a landside. It is also demographically getting better for Labour: in the west and centre of the seat more people move to the towns from Newcastle while the rural areas decline, and the east is basically the same as Blaydon. The next time Labour win a majority, I expect Hexham will slip under 10% majority and will start to be seen as at least a semi-marginal seat, while Berwick will become the North East's safe Conservative seat (unfortunately). But Labour are only 3% behind 1997 nationally. What sort of nationwide vote share are they going to get if Hexham votes for PM Corbyn? About 18% higher than us. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 21:35:12 GMT
Corbyn would need a nationwide vote share higher than Attlee in 1945.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 21:37:35 GMT
But Labour are only 3% behind 1997 nationally. What sort of nationwide vote share are they going to get if Hexham votes for PM Corbyn? About 18% higher than us. If that happened the list of Labour gains would include such seats as Altrincham, Banbury, Chelsea & Fulham, Croydon South and Macclesfield. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 16, 2018 21:39:49 GMT
In 1997, Labour gained 147 seats. Hexham is number 133 on the target list, and is a seat which tends to be quite elastic and swingy, so Labour would have no trouble taking it in a landside. It is also demographically getting better for Labour: in the west and centre of the seat more people move to the towns from Newcastle while the rural areas decline, and the east is basically the same as Blaydon. The next time Labour win a majority, I expect Hexham will slip under 10% majority and will start to be seen as at least a semi-marginal seat, while Berwick will become the North East's safe Conservative seat (unfortunately). But Labour are only 3% behind 1997 nationally. What sort of nationwide vote share are they going to get if Hexham votes for PM Corbyn? They don't need much of an increase in vote share, they just need to hope Opperman stands down (because he's very popular) and hope for more a Lib Dem squeeze on the vote. Labour are only 4% behind their 1997 result in Hexham. It's just there's a very popular liberal Conservative who they'll struggle to get rid of. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2018 21:41:45 GMT
But Labour are only 3% behind 1997 nationally. What sort of nationwide vote share are they going to get if Hexham votes for PM Corbyn? They don't need much of an increase in vote share, they just need to hope Opperman stands down (because he's very popular) and hope for more a Lib Dem squeeze on the vote. Labour are only 4% behind their 1997 result in Hexham. It's just there's a very popular liberal Conservative who they'll struggle to get rid of. I think Labour should be more bothered about seats like Derbyshire North East and Walsall North than Hexham. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2018 9:34:26 GMT
Manchester East, 1906
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2018 10:37:03 GMT
So apparently at the count for the Oxford Union election last term they took bets on who would come last for Standing (10 people ran for 7 spots) and all but 1 thought it would be me.
Anyone got any advice on running for election baving list one previously? I’d greatly appreciate it.
|
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,902 
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 31, 2018 11:14:33 GMT
So apparently at the count for the Oxford Union election last term they took bets on who would come last for Standing (10 people ran for 7 spots) and all but 1 thought it would be me. Anyone got any advice on running for election baving list one previously? I’d greatly appreciate it. Why did they uniformly place you so low? What are you presenting that is so unpopular? Why do you want to win? |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,902
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on Mar 31, 2018 11:28:43 GMT
Why did they uniformly place you so low? What are you presenting that is so unpopular? Why do you want to win? They thought I had no chance apparently. I want to win because I feel more state comp representation is needed in such an influential institution and because I believe slates should be banned as these are a barrier to entry. I was 6 votes off being eliminated 2nd and 6 votes off winning. Poor answers.
Of course it is inherent that is what they thought..................WHY is the question?
Your given reason for standing would turn me right off just it has done for others. It is a piss poor reason of the worst gesture politcs grandstanding nature.
If elected (fat chance in my opinion) what do you want to EFFECT and to DO?
|
|
