|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 4, 2018 22:25:32 GMT
CHESTERFIELD Moor
ROGERS, Tony (Liberal Democrat) 532
MIHALY, Ron (Labour) 445
PARTINGTON, Gordon Franklin (Conservative) 84
THOMPSON, Barry (UKIP) 69
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 4, 2018 22:28:00 GMT
Half expected that result, didn't the Labour candidate lose another byelection last year?
Of course, the winner was Tony Benn's at one time seemingly eternal opponent at parliamentary level - they must be getting on now??
|
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Oct 4, 2018 22:31:26 GMT
Half expected that result, didn't the Labour candidate lose another byelection last year? Of course, the winner was Tony Benn's at one time seemingly eternal opponent at parliamentary level - they must be getting on now?? 80 or so I understand. I actually wasn't expecting it. |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823 
|
Post by timmullen1 on Oct 4, 2018 22:35:57 GMT
Local newspaper editor, the excellent john elworthy @johnelworthy tweets; "Can we expect an upset in today’s @cambscc by election in Soham and Isleham? It’s intrigued me sufficiently to head to Isleham for the count. The manner by which the by election has come about could cost Conservatives an awful lot of votes but enough to lose?" Poor Mr Elworthy has an apparent case of gout so hasn’t been able to journey to Isleham after all. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2018 22:48:37 GMT
Con HOLD Soham North & Isleham (Cambridgeshire)
Con 858
LD 527
Lab 191
Ind 182
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,746
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Oct 4, 2018 22:49:51 GMT
Con HOLD Soham North & Isleham (Cambridgeshire) Con 858 LD 527 Lab 191 Ind 182 So not *that* close really. But a decent challenge, and daylight between us and Labour. |
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,623
|
Post by ricmk on Oct 4, 2018 22:50:38 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2018 22:58:15 GMT
According to my spreadsheet, the %ages are:
Con: 48.8% (-17.4)
LD: 30% (+12.5)
Lab: 10.9% (-5.5)
Ind: 10.4% (+10.4)
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 4, 2018 23:04:00 GMT
Are we expecting Thirsk tonight? Have seen no signs, but Hambleton is such a rural area I would have thought it's probably used to counting in the morning.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2018 23:07:03 GMT
Thirsk counting tonight? I presume it's not a rural ward but just the town itself. If Thirsk can be called a town. Looking at the map in Andrew's previews, it seems to miss out half of Thirsk and take in a large rural area with nothing and nobody in it. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 4, 2018 23:10:59 GMT
It's not a small ward. Thirsk is a town but the ward covers only half of it (assuming Sowerby is regarded as part of Thirsk) plus some villages to the west. There are four different polling places, two in Thirsk, two in outlying villages.
|
|
|
|
Post by middleenglander on Oct 4, 2018 23:17:56 GMT
There was a "double" election in Northallerton on 26 May 2016, a County and a District seat. That counted Friday morning
|
|
peter
Conservative
Posts: 47
|
Post by peter on Oct 4, 2018 23:21:38 GMT
In 2013, on different boundaries, the margin between the Conservatives in the then Soham and Fordham villages was 15%
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Oct 5, 2018 9:57:46 GMT
Con HOLD Soham North & Isleham (Cambridgeshire) Con 858 LD 527 Lab 191 Ind 182 Wow! That was damn close. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Oct 5, 2018 10:08:12 GMT
Thirsk counting tonight? I presume it's not a rural ward but just the town itself. If Thirsk can be called a town. Looking at the map in Andrew's previews, it seems to miss out half of Thirsk and take in a large rural area with nothing and nobody in it.So why should that take long to count?  |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Oct 5, 2018 10:08:47 GMT
Con HOLD Soham North & Isleham (Cambridgeshire) Con 858 LD 527 Lab 191 Ind 182 Wow! That was damn close. Only 9 votes in the 3rd place contest.. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Oct 5, 2018 10:10:35 GMT
Con HOLD Soham North & Isleham (Cambridgeshire) Con 858 LD 527 Lab 191 Ind 182 Wow! That was damn close. said the Iron Duke. |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Oct 5, 2018 10:15:50 GMT
It occurs to me that the original twitter reports said it was close between Con and Lib Dem "in Soham North". Did they literally mean that and the difference was Isleham?
|
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Oct 5, 2018 10:25:04 GMT
It occurs to me that the original twitter reports said it was close between Con and Lib Dem "in Soham North". Did they literally mean that and the difference was Isleham? To be honest, it looked like ramping to me. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,952
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 5, 2018 10:29:36 GMT
It seems quite common for reports at the count to say that a contest (at parliamentary level as well as council) is "looking close" and then for it to actually turn out not close at all. Whilst ramping is certainly a thing, isn't the truth that results are often hard to call until all the votes are in?
And perhaps our host can inform us what was behind one of the (in retrospect) strangest rumours ever - that the LibDems had won Perry Barr at the 2005 GE??
|
|
