By-Elections - 19th/20th December 2012

[middleenglander]

Dec 21, 2012 11:47:49 GMT The Bishop said:

I presume the changes for Meopham are with the previous by-election there (rather than the 2011 vote)??

Compared to "average" 2011 shares:

Conservative -17.3%
Labour -14.0%
UKIP +26.6% from nowhere
Lib Dem +4.7% from nowhere

[markgoodair]

Dec 21, 2012 11:47:49 GMT The Bishop said:

I presume the changes for Meopham are with the previous by-election there (rather than the 2011 vote)??

Yes

[Pimpernal]

Dec 21, 2012 10:58:30 GMT Tony Otim said:

Gravesham Rural:
Con 61.3
UKIP 21.8
Lab 13.7
LD 3.1


Meopham North:
Con 54.6
UKIP 26.6
Lab 14.1
LD 4.7

I wonder what UKIP could have done with a really strong candidate?

we had just over 500 pledges though 50-60 odd were dubious in the sense the canvasser had marked the house not the person as UKIP so all numbers had to go down for knocking up. Due to circumstamces I hadn't bothered to remove the postals from that list either.
I had expected a vote in the range of 380-420 - from what it seems, this would have been a winning result, as obvious waverers were probably lost and remained Tory, whilst a lot of others would have simply stayed at home.

[tricky]

Dec 21, 2012 13:57:31 GMT Pimpernal said:

Dec 21, 2012 10:58:30 GMT Tony Otim said:

Gravesham Rural:
Con 61.3
UKIP 21.8
Lab 13.7
LD 3.1


Meopham North:
Con 54.6
UKIP 26.6
Lab 14.1
LD 4.7

I wonder what UKIP could have done with a really strong candidate?

we had just over 500 pledges though 50-60 odd were dubious in the sense the canvasser had marked the house not the person as UKIP so all numbers had to go down for knocking up. Due to circumstamces I hadn't bothered to remove the postals from that list either.
I had expected a vote in the range of 380-420 - from what it seems, this would have been a winning result, as obvious waverers were probably lost and remained Tory, whilst a lot of others would have simply stayed at home.

Interesting that you talk about knocking up. I thought you had abandoned the candidate?

I may have misunderstood and be doing you a disservice.

[stepney]

Dec 21, 2012 2:50:55 GMT johnloony said:

Dec 20, 2012 9:04:46 GMT Arthur Figgis said:

Middlesex County Council might have been, Middlesex most certainly wasn't.

Yes it was. Middlesex ceased to exist as a county in 1964, when Greater London was created.

No it wasn't. Middlesex no longer exists for administrative or Lord Lieutenancy purposes, but continues to exist for all other purposes, including county cricket which is the most important thing in life.

[greatkingrat]

Although as far as cricket is concerned, Spelthorne is considered part of Surrey, not Middlesex. The cricketing Middlesex is now entirely within Greater London.

[Pimpernal]

Dec 21, 2012 18:57:48 GMT tricky said:

Interesting that you talk about knocking up. I thought you had abandoned the candidate?

I may have misunderstood and be doing you a disservice.

We did abandon the candidate.

But I had already designed the knocking up sheets and had the numbers prepared by Monday. Another 20 sheets of wasted paper to go with the 1000 'on the day' leaflets that are sitting on my stairs unopened...

Mr Clark attended the polling station on his own, from 7 till 10 in order that anyone who wanted to challenge him would have the opportunity to do so.

He had no help from anyone at all. It must have been a long, lonely, and rather sad day for him. But he can at least relax in the thought that he will never have to go through the whole election experience again.

[Pete Whitehead]

Dec 21, 2012 19:43:29 GMT greatkingrat said:

Although as far as cricket is concerned, Spelthorne is considered part of Surrey, not Middlesex. The cricketing Middlesex is now entirely within Greater London.

Is that really so? That is strange. What about Potters Bar then, which doesn't otherwise have a major county. Surely many people from there would support Middlesex anyway, as would people in Spelthorne

[greatkingrat]

Hertfordshire still have a cricket board who are responsible for cricket in their county, even though they are not a first-class county. It is easier to manage things like promotion of cricket in schools if the county cricket boundaries match current local government boundaries rather than historical ones.

[Pete Whitehead]

So does your area come under Middlesex CCC now?

[greatkingrat]

Yes, Middlesex is all of London north of the Thames and west of the Lea (including all of Richmond).

[tricky]

Dec 21, 2012 19:44:15 GMT Pimpernal said:

Dec 21, 2012 18:57:48 GMT tricky said:

Interesting that you talk about knocking up. I thought you had abandoned the candidate?

I may have misunderstood and be doing you a disservice.

We did abandon the candidate.

But I had already designed the knocking up sheets and had the numbers prepared by Monday. Another 20 sheets of wasted paper to go with the 1000 'on the day' leaflets that are sitting on my stairs unopened...

Mr Clark attended the polling station on his own, from 7 till 10 in order that anyone who wanted to challenge him would have the opportunity to do so.

He had no help from anyone at all. It must have been a long, lonely, and rather sad day for him. But he can at least relax in the thought that he will never have to go through the whole election experience again.

You've just had the experience that every agent fears. I have some sympathy for you.

No sympathy for Mr Clark though.

[Pete Whitehead]

I wonder how this cricket thing works in regard to say Lancashire/Greater Manchester or Warwickshire/West Midlands

[tricky]

Dec 21, 2012 22:57:07 GMT Pete Whitehead said:

I wonder how this cricket thing works in regard to say Lancashire/Greater Manchester or Warwickshire/West Midlands

Lancashire play some of their home games at Aigburth, Liverpool.

[Pete Whitehead]

Yes but that is presumably historical, in the same way as Warwickshire playing at Edgbaston. I was wondering in terms of how the county boards that gkr was talking about are organised in these areas. Lancashire's main ground is in Trafford but half of Trafford is ex-Cheshire. IN the West M idlands its even more complex with both Dudley and sandwell being part Staffordshire and part Worcestershire and while Birmingham is itself originally in Warwickshire parts of the area of the MB originate in both those counties too

[Andrew_S]

Dec 21, 2012 22:57:07 GMT Pete Whitehead said:

I wonder how this cricket thing works in regard to say Lancashire/Greater Manchester or Warwickshire/West Midlands

I know there's a cricket ground in Bristol but I'm not sure whether it's Somerset or Gloucestershire who play there.

[johnloony]

Dec 21, 2012 19:27:53 GMT stepney said:

Middlesex no longer exists for administrative or Lord Lieutenancy purposes, but continues to exist for all other purposes,...

No it doesn't. Middlesex does not exist.

[Deleted]

Dec 22, 2012 1:16:29 GMT Andrew_S said:

Dec 21, 2012 22:57:07 GMT Pete Whitehead said:

I wonder how this cricket thing works in regard to say Lancashire/Greater Manchester or Warwickshire/West Midlands

I know there's a cricket ground in Bristol but I'm not sure whether it's Somerset or Gloucestershire who play there.

The County Ground is north of the river in Ashley Down, & is used as headquarters by Gloucestershire (as well as the occasional one day international). There will be a first test match played there in 2017 against the Saffies, after the planned redevelopment.

However it isn't actually in Gloucestershire, as Bristol is a city and county, & has been from 1373..... making Gloucestershire the only county who are not based at home, so to speak .....

Somerset used to play south of the river at the Imperial Ground until 1979.

Historically there have been another 3 grounds used in Bristol by the 2 counties.

[cibwr]

And of course Glamorgan also play at Rhos-on-Sea - in North Wales....

www.glamorgancricket.com/detail-item.php?int_id=36&str_page_name=8

[The Bishop]

I think that Bristol was (and possibly still is) considered part of Gloucestershire in a "ceremonial" sense??