Merseymike
Independent
Don't vote. It only encourages them.
Posts: 30,236
|
Post by Merseymike on Aug 7, 2019 9:49:58 GMT
I simply don't know why she did it. Speeding points - that's what we are talking about Something most drivers get at one time or another. It's almost as if she started believing her own lies and the entire story ran away with itself Me neither. She started with a bizarre lack of proportion and then got worse. Leaving aside the criminal and moral issues, she showed she hasn't the judgement to be an MP. It is sort of sad but in the long run a lucky escape for her constituents. To be honest when she then started on the religious martyrdom stuff I thought things weren't right. It just seems all so odd. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2019 9:52:13 GMT
Me neither. She started with a bizarre lack of proportion and then got worse. Leaving aside the criminal and moral issues, she showed she hasn't the judgement to be an MP. It is sort of sad but in the long run a lucky escape for her constituents. To be honest when she then started on the religious martyrdom stuff I thought things weren't right. It just seems all so odd. The more exposure she got, the greater the suspicion that she is actually a bit bonkers. |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Don't vote. It only encourages them.
Posts: 30,236
|
Post by Merseymike on Aug 7, 2019 9:54:12 GMT
To be honest when she then started on the religious martyrdom stuff I thought things weren't right. It just seems all so odd. The more exposure she got, the greater the suspicion that she is actually a bit bonkers. Well. I wanted to avoid that word, but whether the case unravelled her somewhat I don't know. I hope she can get some assistance. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 7, 2019 10:05:58 GMT
I simply don't know why she did it. Speeding points - that's what we are talking about Something most drivers get at one time or another. It's almost as if she started believing her own lies and the entire story ran away with itself I think that may be the essence of it Mike. It is an awful warning to us all not to get swept along in thoughtless action beyond the point of reason. I should know as I have done it often enough in words but happily tend not to do so in actions. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 26,700
|
Post by The Bishop on Aug 7, 2019 10:29:40 GMT
Well, when is this mythical petition going to be submitted? You can't ask questions like that! |
|
|
|
Post by David Boothroyd on Aug 21, 2019 10:48:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Sept 12, 2019 16:33:17 GMT
Apparently the petition is going to court on October 27:
No doubt various procedural hearings to determine such key questions as whether or not Mike Greene was a candidate in the election (and thus has standing to bring the petition) will be held up as vindication of the challenge.
|
|
|
|
Post by David Boothroyd on Sept 19, 2019 9:27:57 GMT
The Peterborough Telegraph has been through the expenses returns. (Limit was £100,000 as for all Parliamentary byelections)
Lisa Forbes (Labour) £82,708.32, including £7,357.72 on Facebook ads, £9,823 on other adverts, £12,685.04 on printing, and £600 to hire the Holiday Inn for a Gordon Brown speech
Mike Greene (Brexit Party) £76,656.61, including £2,620.30 on newspaper adverts, £9,271.49 on Facebook, and £21,420.20 on printing. Also includes £8,400 on security.
Paul Bristow (Conservative) £91,206.32, of which printing was £44,113.45, and £7,889.27 was media and digital advertising. The transport expenses were nil.
Beki Sellick (Liberal Democrat) £26,880.44, with printing covering £17,737.40 and advertising totalling £1,977.52
John Whitby (UKIP) £7,822, of which £6,340 was for printing leaflets.
Peter Ward (Renew) £17,984 including £4,677.23 on Facebook advertising, £1,200 on digital marketing and £5,579.76 on digital advertising, all for 45 votes.
Patrick O'Flynn (SDP) £18,599.35 for the scarcely better total of 135 votes.
Joseph Wells (Green Party) £10 but the Peterborough Telegraph has reminded them that a visit by Natalie Bennett incurred £15 more.
Alan Hope (Loony) £nil.
Later in the paper there's a full page advert for Mike Greene.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Sept 19, 2019 10:52:50 GMT
The Peterborough Telegraph has been through the expenses returns. (Limit was £100,000 as for all Parliamentary byelections) Lisa Forbes (Labour) £82,708.32, including £7,357.72 on Facebook ads, £9,823 on other adverts, £12,685.04 on printing, and £600 to hire the Holiday Inn for a Gordon Brown speech Mike Greene (Brexit Party) £76,656.61, including £2,620.30 on newspaper adverts, £9,271.49 on Facebook, and £21,420.20 on printing. Also includes £8,400 on security. Paul Bristow (Conservative) £91,206.32, of which printing was £44,113.45, and £7,889.27 was media and digital advertising. The transport expenses were nil. Beki Sellick (Liberal Democrat) £26,880.44, with printing covering £17,737.40 and advertising totalling £1,977.52 John Whitby (UKIP) £7,822, of which £6,340 was for printing leaflets. Peter Ward (Renew) £17,984 including £4,677.23 on Facebook advertising, £1,200 on digital marketing and £5,579.76 on digital advertising, all for 45 votes. Patrick O'Flynn (SDP) £18,599.35 for the scarcely better total of 135 votes. Joseph Wells (Green Party) £10 but the Peterborough Telegraph has reminded them that a visit by Natalie Bennett incurred £15 more. Alan Hope (Loony) £nil. Later in the paper there's a full page advert for Mike Greene. Perhaps worth putting those expenses and votes they "bought" alongside, at least for the major players: Labour £82,708 and 10,484 votes BxP £76,656 and 9,801 votes Con £91,206 and 7,243 votes LD £26,880 and 4,149 votes SDP £ 18,599 and 135 votes Renew £ 17,984 and 45 votes UKIP £ 7822 and 400 votes GP £10 and 1,045 votes MRLP £0 and 112 votes I assume the other 6 candidates also had nil returns like the Loonies, and between them garnered 506 votes. What conclusions should I draw? Maybe if you are looking for value for money don't look to the Conservatives, who are even rather worse than Labour at getting a return on their investment, and LDs are significantly better than either without doing brilliantly, either. Brexiteers, on the other hand, might have spent more and won if they had really believed in themselves? They should have bought out UKIP? One just have to assume SDP and Renew were spending to buy something different than actual votes ? The Green Party are brilliant at getting something for nothing as long as they weren't interested in a serious campaign. Or of course expenses returns aren't worth the paper they are written on, and should be up for a major fiction prize? |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Sept 19, 2019 10:56:03 GMT
Patrick O'Flynn really jumped the gun joining the SDP and then through some kind of sense of honour sticking with it even after the Brexit party had emerged. He would have been well placed to take the BP nomination here had he not done that and possibly would have performed better*. Presumably he would also still be an MEP (unless he had won here of course)
*By which I mean performed better than Mike Green did, not better than Patrick did as an SDP candidate which is a given
|
|
|
|
Post by lennon on Sept 19, 2019 11:24:19 GMT
The Peterborough Telegraph has been through the expenses returns. (Limit was £100,000 as for all Parliamentary byelections) Lisa Forbes (Labour) £82,708.32, including £7,357.72 on Facebook ads, £9,823 on other adverts, £12,685.04 on printing, and £600 to hire the Holiday Inn for a Gordon Brown speech Mike Greene (Brexit Party) £76,656.61, including £2,620.30 on newspaper adverts, £9,271.49 on Facebook, and £21,420.20 on printing. Also includes £8,400 on security. Paul Bristow (Conservative) £91,206.32, of which printing was £44,113.45, and £7,889.27 was media and digital advertising. The transport expenses were nil. Beki Sellick (Liberal Democrat) £26,880.44, with printing covering £17,737.40 and advertising totalling £1,977.52 John Whitby (UKIP) £7,822, of which £6,340 was for printing leaflets. Peter Ward (Renew) £17,984 including £4,677.23 on Facebook advertising, £1,200 on digital marketing and £5,579.76 on digital advertising, all for 45 votes. Patrick O'Flynn (SDP) £18,599.35 for the scarcely better total of 135 votes. Joseph Wells (Green Party) £10 but the Peterborough Telegraph has reminded them that a visit by Natalie Bennett incurred £15 more. Alan Hope (Loony) £nil. Later in the paper there's a full page advert for Mike Greene. Perhaps worth putting those expenses and votes they "bought" alongside, at least for the major players: Labour £82,708 and 10,484 votes BxP £76,656 and 9,801 votes Con £91,206 and 7,243 votes LD £26,880 and 4,149 votes SDP £ 18,599 and 135 votes Renew £ 17,984 and 45 votes UKIP £ 7822 and 400 votes GP £10 and 1,045 votes MRLP £0 and 112 votes I assume the other 6 candidates also had nil returns like the Loonies, and between them garnered 506 votes. What conclusions should I draw? Maybe if you are looking for value for money don't look to the Conservatives, who are even rather worse than Labour at getting a return on their investment, and LDs are significantly better than either without doing brilliantly, either. Brexiteers, on the other hand, might have spent more and won if they had really believed in themselves? They should have bought out UKIP? One just have to assume SDP and Renew were spending to buy something different than actual votes ? The Green Party are brilliant at getting something for nothing as long as they weren't interested in a serious campaign. Or of course expenses returns aren't worth the paper they are written on, and should be up for a major fiction prize? When it comes to these sorts of comparisons - I always think that it's more accurate to include the £500 deposit as well (for those that don't retain it) Makes the 'Vote per £' numbers slightly more sensible / realistic for the smaller players, |
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Sept 19, 2019 12:49:38 GMT
Works out at
£7.89 per Labour vote
£7.82 per Brexit Party LTD vote
£12.59 per Conservative vote
£6.49 per Liberal Democrat vote
£137.77 per Renew Vote
£19.56 per UKIP vote
and just under a penny for each Green Party vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Sept 19, 2019 15:30:12 GMT
Perhaps worth putting those expenses and votes they "bought" alongside, at least for the major players: Labour £82,708 and 10,484 votes BxP £76,656 and 9,801 votes Con £91,206 and 7,243 votes LD £26,880 and 4,149 votes SDP £ 18,599 and 135 votes Renew £ 17,984 and 45 votes UKIP £ 7822 and 400 votes GP £10 and 1,045 votes MRLP £0 and 112 votes I assume the other 6 candidates also had nil returns like the Loonies, and between them garnered 506 votes. What conclusions should I draw? Maybe if you are looking for value for money don't look to the Conservatives, who are even rather worse than Labour at getting a return on their investment, and LDs are significantly better than either without doing brilliantly, either. Brexiteers, on the other hand, might have spent more and won if they had really believed in themselves? They should have bought out UKIP? One just have to assume SDP and Renew were spending to buy something different than actual votes ? The Green Party are brilliant at getting something for nothing as long as they weren't interested in a serious campaign. Or of course expenses returns aren't worth the paper they are written on, and should be up for a major fiction prize? When it comes to these sorts of comparisons - I always think that it's more accurate to include the £500 deposit as well (for those that don't retain it) Makes the 'Vote per £' numbers slightly more sensible / realistic for the smaller players, fair point, but I wouldn't take my comments above too seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by boogieeck on Sept 23, 2019 15:10:50 GMT
Useful benchmarks. £7.80 - £7.90 a vote should be enough to get you elected or come very very close, therefore if you calculate how many votes you expect to need, you can reverse engineer how much money you should expect to have to spend. You know that spending more than that does not garner more votes, but you know that spending less than that will make you look like you are not at the races.
So you should spend £8 per required vote, and if it does not work, then conclude that it is not because of how much you spent, it is either how you spent it or your underlying inelectability in that contest.
|
|
