|
|
Post by beastofbedfordshire on Jun 15, 2018 20:11:59 GMT
Well no, because Labour gained the ward which previously returned Conservative councillors. The Lib Dems seat gain comes entirely from the fact that one of their safe wards was split into two wards which now returns a total of 5 Lib Dem councillors where previously it returned three. They have gained a seat from Labour effectively in this ward (relative to the old Grange which was split 2/1 in their favour) but that is more than offset by the two seats they lost to Labour in East Dulwich/Goose Green History will just show that the Lib Dems and Labour have one more Councillor each, and the Tories 2 less! And that the Lib Dems made more gains overall than Labour or the Tories for the first time in many years! Not too bad for an irrelevant Party... The lib dems are irrelevant in about 3/4 of the country where they have no chance of winning anything. Kind of like the snp with more sporadic support. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 15, 2018 20:16:54 GMT
Well no, because Labour gained the ward which previously returned Conservative councillors. The Lib Dems seat gain comes entirely from the fact that one of their safe wards was split into two wards which now returns a total of 5 Lib Dem councillors where previously it returned three. They have gained a seat from Labour effectively in this ward (relative to the old Grange which was split 2/1 in their favour) but that is more than offset by the two seats they lost to Labour in East Dulwich/Goose Green And that the Lib Dems made more gains overall than Labour or the Tories for the first time in many years! Not too bad for an irrelevant Party... What an idiotic comment. History will show exactly what I describe - that the Lib Dems basically held their own in the North of the borough but gained some seats because an additional ward was created in the area and that they lost their seats in the Dulwich area. Meanwhile the Tories lost their seats in the Duwlcih area. These are the facts and this is what 'history will show' unless perhaps we enter some kind of new dark age in which these details are lost and all we have left is the overall number of seats won by each party in Southwark which is what you seem to be envisaging |
|
|
|
Post by mattb on Jun 15, 2018 21:00:32 GMT
History will just show that the Lib Dems and Labour have one more Councillor each, and the Tories 2 less! And that the Lib Dems made more gains overall than Labour or the Tories for the first time in many years! Not too bad for an irrelevant Party... What an idiotic comment. History will show exactly what I describe - that the Lib Dems basically held their own in the North of the borough but gained some seats because an additional ward was created in the area and that they lost their seats in the Dulwich area. Meanwhile the Tories lost their seats in the Duwlcih area. These are the facts and this is what 'history will show' unless perhaps we enter some kind of new dark age in which these details are lost and all we have left is the overall number of seats won by each party in Southwark which is what you seem to be envisaging The “more gains than Labour or Tories” comment refers to the national totals. These 3 seats make the difference between Lab and LD having the largest number of net gains, as I understand it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 21:16:28 GMT
What an idiotic comment. History will show exactly what I describe - that the Lib Dems basically held their own in the North of the borough but gained some seats because an additional ward was created in the area and that they lost their seats in the Dulwich area. Meanwhile the Tories lost their seats in the Duwlcih area. These are the facts and this is what 'history will show' unless perhaps we enter some kind of new dark age in which these details are lost and all we have left is the overall number of seats won by each party in Southwark which is what you seem to be envisaging The “more gains than Labour or Tories” comment refers to the national totals. These 3 seats make the difference between Lab and LD having the largest number of net gains, as I understand it. I'm still unclear who these net gains are from if as Pete says the increase in Lib Dem cllrs in Southwark is the a result of splitting a safe Lib Dem ward giving them 5 new cllrs rather than the 3 they had |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on Jun 15, 2018 21:36:28 GMT
They don't really have to be "from" anyone, when there is a boundary change. It's the way notionals work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 23:08:30 GMT
They don't really have to be "from" anyone, when there is a boundary change. It's the way notionals work. but when you have a change in boundaries usually notionally a seat will be a parties to defend and anothers to gain. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2018 23:42:02 GMT
Some people describe themselves as non-aligned when they clearly aren't I liked the “lean” descriptors, they were useful. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jun 16, 2018 6:47:35 GMT
History will just show that the Lib Dems and Labour have one more Councillor each, and the Tories 2 less! And that the Lib Dems made more gains overall than Labour or the Tories for the first time in many years! Not too bad for an irrelevant Party... What an idiotic comment. History will show exactly what I describe - that the Lib Dems basically held their own in the North of the borough but gained some seats because an additional ward was created in the area and that they lost their seats in the Dulwich area. Meanwhile the Tories lost their seats in the Duwlcih area. These are the facts and this is what 'history will show' unless perhaps we enter some kind of new dark age in which these details are lost and all we have left is the overall number of seats won by each party in Southwark which is what you seem to be envisaging Well, since I don't like being called an idiot I just went through the entire Southwark thread to check for the authoritative notionals for the new boundaries that I was sure would be available to judge the history of this election. I found only David Boothroyd's quick estimate on page 1, which was the same in total as the 2014 result. Then I found the same assertion by you about wards in Bermondsey. There were clearly major changes in boundaries in Dulwich that may have affected results there as well. I am sorry Pete, but however high your opinion may be of your influence on historical record, two posts of speculation on this site are not going to do it. The fact is that the number of councillors is the same as before, there have not been any notionals by Rallings and Thrasher or any authoritative body, and so history will record exactly what I said. Random speculation by individuals does not make history. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jun 16, 2018 6:55:13 GMT
Some people describe themselves as non-aligned when they clearly aren't Non aligned is the default setting. Some may choose it, and some just can't be bothered to change it. I might decide to change it one of these days.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2018 8:46:58 GMT
Well no, because Labour gained the ward which previously returned Conservative councillors. The Lib Dems seat gain comes entirely from the fact that one of their safe wards was split into two wards which now returns a total of 5 Lib Dem councillors where previously it returned three. They have gained a seat from Labour effectively in this ward (relative to the old Grange which was split 2/1 in their favour) but that is more than offset by the two seats they lost to Labour in East Dulwich/Goose Green History will just show that the Lib Dems and Labour have one more Councillor each, and the Tories 2 less! And that the Lib Dems made more gains overall than Labour or the Tories for the first time in many years! Not too bad for an irrelevant Party... but how have the lib dems gained more than labour before thursday the totals were labour 79 lib dems 75. Another 3 seats makes it 79 to 78 |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823 
|
Post by timmullen1 on Jun 16, 2018 8:48:16 GMT
Not being very bright when it comes to most things computery it took me six months and an offer from Admin to reset mine from non-affiliated to Labour, and I wouldn’t have the first clue on how to change it back as I am so often tempted to do.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2018 8:53:45 GMT
Not being very bright when it comes to most things computery it took me six months and an offer from Admin to reset mine from non-affiliated to Labour, and I wouldn’t have the first clue on how to change it back as I am so often tempted to do. You can't do it yourself - you have to ask AdminSTB to do it for you. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2018 8:55:02 GMT
Not being very bright when it comes to most things computery it took me six months and an offer from Admin to reset mine from non-affiliated to Labour, and I wouldn’t have the first clue on how to change it back as I am so often tempted to do. are you not labour now? |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 16, 2018 9:09:20 GMT
History will just show that the Lib Dems and Labour have one more Councillor each, and the Tories 2 less! And that the Lib Dems made more gains overall than Labour or the Tories for the first time in many years! Not too bad for an irrelevant Party... but how have the lib dems gained more than labour before thursday the totals were labour 79 lib dems 75. Another 3 seats makes it 79 to 78 But if one of the seats was "notionally" Labour before, that would tip the balance. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2018 9:13:45 GMT
but how have the lib dems gained more than labour before thursday the totals were labour 79 lib dems 75. Another 3 seats makes it 79 to 78 But if one of the seats was "notionally" Labour before, that would tip the balance. but more than 1 seat would have to change hands to give the lib dems more seats overall |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 16, 2018 9:24:42 GMT
DONCASTER Town MCDONALD, Tosh (Labour Party) 1,084 WHITWOOD, Chris (The Yorkshire Party) 570 BUCKLEY, Julie (Green Party) 294 GREENHALGH, Carol (The Conservative Party Candidate) 260 SMITH, Ian Michael (Liberal Democrats) 66 PENDRY, Gareth (Independent) 43 Electorate 12,883 BPs issued 2,326 Rejected 9 Turnout 18% Well, well!! On a derisory 18% vote (well girls you wanted the damn vote and are celebrating getting it but not actually using it!) in heartland Labour area Doncaster and in the heartland of the heartland of that Doncaster, Labour can't even pull 50%. This has never been one of Labour's strongest areas on the council, and is actually a swing in their favour compared to the previous election. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 16, 2018 9:27:04 GMT
What an idiotic comment. History will show exactly what I describe - that the Lib Dems basically held their own in the North of the borough but gained some seats because an additional ward was created in the area and that they lost their seats in the Dulwich area. Meanwhile the Tories lost their seats in the Duwlcih area. These are the facts and this is what 'history will show' unless perhaps we enter some kind of new dark age in which these details are lost and all we have left is the overall number of seats won by each party in Southwark which is what you seem to be envisaging Well, since I don't like being called an idiot I just went through the entire Southwark thread to check for the authoritative notionals for the new boundaries that I was sure would be available to judge the history of this election. I found only David Boothroyd's quick estimate on page 1, which was the same in total as the 2014 result. Then I found the same assertion by you about wards in Bermondsey. There were clearly major changes in boundaries in Dulwich that may have affected results there as well. I am sorry Pete, but however high your opinion may be of your influence on historical record, two posts of speculation on this site are not going to do it. The fact is that the number of councillors is the same as before, there have not been any notionals by Rallings and Thrasher or any authoritative body, and so history will record exactly what I said. Random speculation by individuals does not make history. My initial intervention on this subject was in response to one of your fellow Lib Dem cheerleaders suggesting that the increase in the number of Lib Dem seats in Southwark was at the expense of the Conservatives and that this, other than in the loosest possible sense was a nonsense. As far as notionals go, it is very difficult to do these before the changes have taken effect because of an absence of data lower than at ward level but it becomes easier after there is electoral data on the new ward boundaries to work with. David's suggestions were based on an assumption that St George's ward would take the better Labour areas of Cathedrals ward with the better Lib Dem areas going into Borough & Bankside. This was a correct assumption but it may not have been to the extent that Labour would have won that ward in 2014. We obviously can't know how votes would have been cast within the area of that ward in 2014 (though those at the count then may have a pretty good idea as the ward fairly closely corresponds to two polling districts from then). What we do know is that the Lib Dems on average vote were about 11% ahead of Labour in 2014 in Cathedrals and on the aggregate vote of the two wards entirely carved out of that ward they were 14% ahead this May. Which equates to a swing of 1.5% while in St George's the Lib Dem (average vote) lead was 5% this May. So it seems likely based on that that the Lib Dems may in fact have carried St George's which means that all other things being equal the Lib Dems would have been down one rather than up one. Another way to look at this is to imagine if the boundary changes had not happened. Clearly the Conservatives would have lost their two seats to Labour in Dulwich Village either way. It may be that James Barber would have held on in East Dulwich where he did not in Goose Green but they would have lost their other seat in that ward. Grange ward relative to London Bridge & West Bermondsey would have been better for Labour so on the basis of the recent result Labour would have probably gained a seat there making it 2 Lab 1 LD where previously it was 2 LD 1 Lab. So what we would actually have seen is Labour gaining 4 seats - 2 each from the Conservatives and Lib Dems but that this was averted due to favourable (for the Lib Dems) boundary changes - whereas Labour won all the available seats in the Dulwich area, gaining from both other parties, this area overall lost two seats with two new seats then being created out of a safe Lib Dem ward. Therefore the net increase in Lib Dem seats is entirely attributable to ward boundary changes |
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Jun 16, 2018 10:05:35 GMT
Some people describe themselves as non-aligned when they clearly aren't Yes, of ALL political hues. If they chose to do so, so be it and I notice in particular that it is Labour members who in particular stamp their feet about this - although not usually about some of their own people who choose to not be aligned on here. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,766
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on Jun 16, 2018 10:07:27 GMT
Labour members also complain about other reds not acting red enough  Nothing new... |
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Jun 16, 2018 10:08:42 GMT
Not being very bright when it comes to most things computery it took me six months and an offer from Admin to reset mine from non-affiliated to Labour, and I wouldn’t have the first clue on how to change it back as I am so often tempted to do. You can't do it yourself - you have to ask AdminSTB to do it for you. You actually can do this yourself, but I don't advice it, the software doesn't always get it right, especially for people who have 'alternative' tags and want party room access. I normally process such requests within a few hours. The default btw is Non-Aligned but only after you've made a certain number of posts. Also, it can get funny when "Top Poster" is involved as well. |
|
Nothing new...