|
|
Post by yellowperil on Feb 1, 2019 11:38:47 GMT
I reckon with half a chance at a proper campaign and a bit better weather the Lib Dems would have had that... Quite so! Bit better weather. Bit better candidate. Bit better campaign. Slightly different electorate and they would have pulled it off. That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks.  |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 1, 2019 11:49:45 GMT
Quite so! Bit better weather. Bit better candidate. Bit better campaign. Slightly different electorate and they would have pulled it off. That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks. Nothing snide about it. It was all so very LD like your lying bar-charts and telling different electors in different places different policies. You just lost. Period. No need for the blather about weather and postals. The snow falls on Labour voters too! Postals are available to LDs if they bother to organize personally or centrally. You lost. Give over on these tedious 'What Ifs'. What If the LDs admitted they are a tedious irrelevance to general politics everywhere and get in the way of the serious results of the serious parties? Just asking? What If? |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Feb 1, 2019 11:56:07 GMT
That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks. Nothing snide about it. It was all so very LD like your lying bar-charts and telling different electors in different places different policies. You just lost. Period. No need for the blather about weather and postals. The snow falls on Labour voters too! Postals are available to LDs if they bother to organize personally or centrally. You lost. Give over on these tedious 'What Ifs'. What If the LDs admitted they are a tedious irrelevance to general politics everywhere and get in the way of the serious results of the serious parties? Just asking? What If? Oh dear! Things not going well for you, old chap? |
|
|
|
Post by liverpoolliberal on Feb 1, 2019 12:13:42 GMT
That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks. Nothing snide about it. It was all so very LD like your lying bar-charts and telling different electors in different places different policies. You just lost. Period. No need for the blather about weather and postals. The snow falls on Labour voters too! Postals are available to LDs if they bother to organize personally or centrally. You lost. Give over on these tedious 'What Ifs'. What If the LDs admitted they are a tedious irrelevance to general politics everywhere and get in the way of the serious results of the serious parties? Just asking? What If? I must admit I do find it curious how pre-occupied you always seem to be with a party you insist on calling an 'irrelevance', but hey ho. Do you charge us rent for living your head? On a more serious point, you are actually right about organisation, one would think if you're having a by-election in January, signing up your support to postal votes would be a crucial element of strategy, but obviously a short campaign hinders the smaller, less-organised party. I know it's foolish to extrapolate from a single by-election but it does suggest that in the Districts like this coming up in May there is an opportunity for our well organised local parties to make up good ground on the Tories. How many well organised local parties we have left is anyone's guess however... |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Feb 1, 2019 12:15:31 GMT
Nothing snide about it. It was all so very LD like your lying bar-charts and telling different electors in different places different policies. You just lost. Period. No need for the blather about weather and postals. The snow falls on Labour voters too! Postals are available to LDs if they bother to organize personally or centrally. You lost. Give over on these tedious 'What Ifs'. What If the LDs admitted they are a tedious irrelevance to general politics everywhere and get in the way of the serious results of the serious parties? Just asking? What If? I must admit I do find it curious how pre-occupied you always seem to be with a party you insist on calling an 'irrelevance', but hey ho. Do you charge us rent for living your head?  |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 1, 2019 12:17:43 GMT
Nothing snide about it. It was all so very LD like your lying bar-charts and telling different electors in different places different policies. You just lost. Period. No need for the blather about weather and postals. The snow falls on Labour voters too! Postals are available to LDs if they bother to organize personally or centrally. You lost. Give over on these tedious 'What Ifs'. What If the LDs admitted they are a tedious irrelevance to general politics everywhere and get in the way of the serious results of the serious parties? Just asking? What If? Oh dear! Things not going well for you, old chap? It is snowing hard. We could not get out of the village on Wednesday and missed our long awaited hospital appointments. So yes they are not going well. But this was banter and nothing else. |
|
|
|
Post by middleenglander on Feb 1, 2019 12:19:12 GMT
Quite so! Bit better weather. Bit better candidate. Bit better campaign. Slightly different electorate and they would have pulled it off. That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks. When I was new to this site / its predecessors some dozen years or so ago, the late Mark Senior posted that the Liberal Democrats would have easily won a by-election somewhere in sheep country if they had bothered to stand a candidate!! There is a long history of political parties putting a brave face on a disappointing result / getting overly excited by another. In the January to March period ahead of the 2011 annual elections, the Conservatives lost 6 of their 15 seats defended. But they then managed to gain seats when the May elections occurred. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 1, 2019 12:22:59 GMT
Nothing snide about it. It was all so very LD like your lying bar-charts and telling different electors in different places different policies. You just lost. Period. No need for the blather about weather and postals. The snow falls on Labour voters too! Postals are available to LDs if they bother to organize personally or centrally. You lost. Give over on these tedious 'What Ifs'. What If the LDs admitted they are a tedious irrelevance to general politics everywhere and get in the way of the serious results of the serious parties? Just asking? What If? I must admit I do find it curious how pre-occupied you always seem to be with a party you insist on calling an 'irrelevance', but hey ho. Do you charge us rent for living your head? On a more serious point, you are actually right about organisation, one would think if you're having a by-election in January, signing up your support to postal votes would be a crucial element of strategy, but obviously a short campaign hinders the smaller, less-organised party. I know it's foolish to extrapolate from a single by-election but it does suggest that in the Districts like this coming up in May there is an opportunity for our well organised local parties to make up good ground on the Tories. How many well organised local parties we have left is anyone's guess however... Those are all very well made points. I agree your views. Yes, why post at all if I consider it to be irrelevant? Just banter when bored. If I could charge rent for a back office up there it would not be expensive. |
|
|
|
Post by liverpoolliberal on Feb 1, 2019 12:28:47 GMT
I must admit I do find it curious how pre-occupied you always seem to be with a party you insist on calling an 'irrelevance', but hey ho. Do you charge us rent for living your head? On a more serious point, you are actually right about organisation, one would think if you're having a by-election in January, signing up your support to postal votes would be a crucial element of strategy, but obviously a short campaign hinders the smaller, less-organised party. I know it's foolish to extrapolate from a single by-election but it does suggest that in the Districts like this coming up in May there is an opportunity for our well organised local parties to make up good ground on the Tories. How many well organised local parties we have left is anyone's guess however... Those are all very well made points. I agree your views. Yes, why post at all if I consider it to be irrelevant? Just banter when bored. If I could charge rent for a back office up there it would not be expensive. Very true! I consider Manchester United to be irrelevant at the moment too but it doesn't stop me taking joy in the banter |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Feb 1, 2019 12:36:16 GMT
That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks. When I was new to this site / its predecessors some dozen years or so ago, the late Mark Senior posted that the Liberal Democrats would have easily won a by-election somewhere in sheep country if they had bothered to stand a candidate!! There is a long history of political parties putting a brave face on a disappointing result / getting overly excited by another. In the January to March period ahead of the 2011 annual elections, the Conservatives lost 6 of their 15 seats defended. But they then managed to gain seats when the May elections occurred. There are times when one of us will step back and say what are we getting so excited about the numbers in some obscure by-election the significance of which will be soon forgotten. True. But its what we do. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 1, 2019 12:56:08 GMT
Quite so! Bit better weather. Bit better candidate. Bit better campaign. Slightly different electorate and they would have pulled it off. That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks. When I used to do the predictions competition, where county council seats were involved I would not just look at the most recent county council election result but at the most recent election in the district wards covering the area. Last May these only took place in the two wards covering Warlingham itself but this does cover some 70% of the total electorate (and 40% of the total is in Warlingham East, a solid Lib Dem ward). IN district elections last May the Conservatives and Lib Dems were basically neck and neck. Certainly Woldingham is ultra-safe for the Tories but doesn't cast a large proportion of the total votes in this division and the other single member ward is Independent at distrcit level. I would say that based on this broader picture, your characterisation of this division as a very safe Tory seat is not very accurate. Also in my experience the Lib Dems are more proactive in signing up postal voters than the Conservatives and so a large number would have come from their supporters in Warlingham East in particular |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Feb 1, 2019 14:01:36 GMT
That's a bit naughty, Carlton! It was a short campaign in in January in quite atrocious conditions. This was an apparently very safe Tory seat where over a thousand votes were postals and it seems reasonably safe to assume those were heavily weighted in favour of the incumbent party who would long have had the organisation to have them in place. For the Lib Dems to get anywhere near the Conservative vote on the day hundreds more of them must have braved the cold and the snow in order to vote in person than did so for the Conservatives, and they got the Tory majority down to just over 200. I think you might allow us Lib Dems a bit of a speculative "what ifs" without the need for snide remarks. When I used to do the predictions competition, where county council seats were involved I would not just look at the most recent county council election result but at the most recent election in the district wards covering the area. Last May these only took place in the two wards covering Warlingham itself but this does cover some 70% of the total electorate (and 40% of the total is in Warlingham East, a solid Lib Dem ward). IN district elections last May the Conservatives and Lib Dems were basically neck and neck. Certainly Woldingham is ultra-safe for the Tories but doesn't cast a large proportion of the total votes in this division and the other single member ward is Independent at distrcit level. I would say that based on this broader picture, your characterisation of this division as a very safe Tory seat is not very accurate. Also in my experience the Lib Dems are more proactive in signing up postal voters than the Conservatives and so a large number would have come from their supporters in Warlingham East in particular Some interesting points- of course none of us knows what the actual split on the pvs was, I am speculating one way, you another, and I would stand by my assumptions. It isn't always the case of course that votes for one party in a district ward transfer across at a county level even within the ward, let alone across the rest of the division. Interesting you think LDs are more proactive in garnering pvs than Conservatives - no idea what it's like here in Surrey but in spite of my best efforts that was far from true in my neck of the woods. |
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979 
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Feb 2, 2019 1:13:58 GMT
I was going to see if it was possible to walk into this Warlingham ward, but it was snowy, so I didn't bother.
Obviously it's possible *somehow* but I meant in a reasonably straight line across hills and fields'n'shit rather than going by road which involves going a long way out ones way.
|
|
bigfatron
Lib Dem
Posts: 1,963
Member is Online
|
Post by bigfatron on Feb 2, 2019 9:19:08 GMT
Well I was interested in speculating because I live here and know/have met two of the candidates!
Having chatted on Thursday to both Tories and Lib Dem activists they seemed to agree that:
- Tories went for a short campaign punctuated by Christmas and NY because they were worried the seat was at risk, despite a ~30% lead last time
- Lib Dems felt it was beyond them, as the two minor wards are very heavily Tory leaning (Tatsfield votes Ind at local but Tory at GE)
- the bulk of the postal votes here tend to be Tory (both parties seem to think that, so I assume they are right)
- Lib Dems rely far more on canvassing and knocking up (we have lived here for nearly twenty years and have only seen non-Lib Dem canvassers twice, one Tory and one UKIP, both a few years ago - conversely Lib Dems turn up at least once a year)
@carlton is suitably entertaining, and I take the point that we can all play 'what if's, but it does appear that with a bit better weather the outcome could have been surprisingly close.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 2, 2019 10:11:05 GMT
Well I was interested in speculating because I live here and know/have met two of the candidates! Having chatted on Thursday to both Tories and Lib Dem activists they seemed to agree that: - Tories went for a short campaign punctuated by Christmas and NY because they were worried the seat was at risk, despite a ~30% lead last time - Lib Dems felt it was beyond them, as the two minor wards are very heavily Tory leaning (Tatsfield votes Ind at local but Tory at GE) - the bulk of the postal votes here tend to be Tory (both parties seem to think that, so I assume they are right) - Lib Dems rely far more on canvassing and knocking up (we have lived here for nearly twenty years and have only seen non-Lib Dem canvassers twice, one Tory and one UKIP, both a few years ago - conversely Lib Dems turn up at least once a year) @carlton is suitably entertaining, and I take the point that we can all play 'what if's, but it does appear that with a bit better weather the outcome could have been surprisingly close. That final paragraph can only be true if you postulate... 1) LDs are too nesh to go out in bad weather AND 2) LDs are too dim to take out Postal Votes Which is it? Timidity? Stupidity? Both? Perhaps the rules should be altered to ensure circumstances are completely suitable for flaky LD potential voter susceptibilities? |
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on Feb 2, 2019 10:48:45 GMT
Well I was interested in speculating because I live here and know/have met two of the candidates! Having chatted on Thursday to both Tories and Lib Dem activists they seemed to agree that: - Tories went for a short campaign punctuated by Christmas and NY because they were worried the seat was at risk, despite a ~30% lead last time - Lib Dems felt it was beyond them, as the two minor wards are very heavily Tory leaning (Tatsfield votes Ind at local but Tory at GE) - the bulk of the postal votes here tend to be Tory (both parties seem to think that, so I assume they are right) - Lib Dems rely far more on canvassing and knocking up (we have lived here for nearly twenty years and have only seen non-Lib Dem canvassers twice, one Tory and one UKIP, both a few years ago - conversely Lib Dems turn up at least once a year) @carlton is suitably entertaining, and I take the point that we can all play 'what if's, but it does appear that with a bit better weather the outcome could have been surprisingly close. That final paragraph can only be true if you postulate... 1) LDs are too nesh to go out in bad weather AND 2) LDs are too dim to take out Postal Votes Which is it? Timidity? Stupidity? Both? Perhaps the rules should be altered to ensure circumstances are completely suitable for flaky LD potential voter susceptibilities? You won't give up on this, will you Carlton? Neither of course is true. All the evidence is that LDs turned out in greater numbers in the cold and snow than did the Tories, so 1) is clearly not true. 2) is nearer to being true, but a gross oversimplification.Its less a question of being dim as a matter of local tradition and organisation. This is a weak division for the LDs but including one strong ward where the local tradition had depended on vigorous campaigning style based on canvassing and GOTV rather than relying on postal votes, a campaigning style ok, maybe, for May elections but pretty disastrous for a short campaign in mid-winter. Local Lib Dems therefore concluded the seat was not winnable and came close to being proved wrong. There probably wasn't enough time to convert many of their likely supporters into postals in a short campaign across Christmas. Even with a January poll, it was sheer bad luck that the polling day proved to be the coldest and snowiest day of the year to date. The local Lib Dems could be accused of being dim in not seeing their potential to win the division in present circumstances until it was too late, but that would be harsh. Incidentally, I think that neither bigfatron, a non-aligned local resident who clearly has some contacts with the local LDs and Tories, nor myself, were approaching this analysis in a particularly partisan way. It was more a matter of psephological interest as is appropriate to this forum. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 2, 2019 10:57:09 GMT
That final paragraph can only be true if you postulate... 1) LDs are too nesh to go out in bad weather AND 2) LDs are too dim to take out Postal Votes Which is it? Timidity? Stupidity? Both? Perhaps the rules should be altered to ensure circumstances are completely suitable for flaky LD potential voter susceptibilities? You won't give up on this, will you Carlton? Neither of course is true. All the evidence is that LDs turned out in greater numbers in the cold and snow than did the Tories, so 1) is clearly not true. 2) is nearer to being true, but a gross oversimplification.Its less a question of being dim as a matter of local tradition and organisation. This is a weak division for the LDs but including one strong ward where the local tradition had depended on vigorous campaigning style based on canvassing and GOTV rather than relying on postal votes, a campaigning style ok, maybe, for May elections but pretty disastrous for a short campaign in mid-winter. Local Lib Dems therefore concluded the seat was not winnable and came close to being proved wrong. There probably wasn't enough time to convert many of their likely supporters into postals in a short campaign across Christmas. Even with a January poll, it was sheer bad luck that the polling day proved to be the coldest and snowiest day of the year to date. The local Lib Dems could be accused of being dim in not seeing their potential to win the division in present circumstances until it was too late, but that would be harsh. Incidentally, I think that neither bigfatron, a non-aligned local resident who clearly has some contacts with the local LDs and Tories, nor myself, were approaching this analysis in a particularly partisan way. It was more a matter of psephological interest as is appropriate to this forum. This is the thing though - there isn't any actual evidence proving any such thing is there? There is purely speculation. This may range from the quite well-informed speculation of bigfatron, based on local knowledge, to your own which is based on nothing more than what you would like to believe - in either case it is speculation. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Feb 2, 2019 11:01:26 GMT
That final paragraph can only be true if you postulate... 1) LDs are too nesh to go out in bad weather AND 2) LDs are too dim to take out Postal Votes Which is it? Timidity? Stupidity? Both? Perhaps the rules should be altered to ensure circumstances are completely suitable for flaky LD potential voter susceptibilities? You won't give up on this, will you Carlton? Neither of course is true. All the evidence is that LDs turned out in greater numbers in the cold and snow than did the Tories, so 1) is clearly not true. 2) is nearer to being true, but a gross oversimplification.Its less a question of being dim as a matter of local tradition and organisation. This is a weak division for the LDs but including one strong ward where the local tradition had depended on vigorous campaigning style based on canvassing and GOTV rather than relying on postal votes, a campaigning style ok, maybe, for May elections but pretty disastrous for a short campaign in mid-winter. Local Lib Dems therefore concluded the seat was not winnable and came close to being proved wrong. There probably wasn't enough time to convert many of their likely supporters into postals in a short campaign across Christmas. Even with a January poll, it was sheer bad luck that the polling day proved to be the coldest and snowiest day of the year to date. The local Lib Dems could be accused of being dim in not seeing their potential to win the division in present circumstances until it was too late, but that would be harsh. Incidentally, I think that neither bigfatron , a non-aligned local resident who clearly has some contacts with the local LDs and Tories, nor myself, were approaching this analysis in a particularly partisan way. It was more a matter of psephological interest as is appropriate to this forum. It is not a case of me not giving up on it nor of me being partisan about it. It is a matter of LD continual blather on this sort of subject. The 'If Only' and 'What If' matters. Why do you do it? If LDs turn out in better numbers than Conservatives in bad weather why are you citing bad weather as a factor. And what is all this about organising the postal vote. I take out my own postal vote. It is not organised for me. If one has a life that demands a postal, or one is sick or old or a long way from a polling station then one takes out a postal. The plain fact is you lost. You lost because you got fewer votes. You got fewer votes because fewer people normally and naturally want a LD to represent them. That is why you all have to work so hard to win. In normal life you just lack popularity and have to organise a vote to make up for that factor. |
|
timmullen1
Labour
Closing account as BossMan declines to respond to messages seeking support.
Posts: 11,823
|
Post by timmullen1 on Feb 2, 2019 12:19:14 GMT
As it’s my birthday, and I’m now officially two years over the life expectancy for my disability, can I remind the LDs in this thread of the first rule of the Internet: don’t feed the troll it only encourages them.
|
|
|
|
Post by lbarnes on Feb 2, 2019 12:29:03 GMT
You won't give up on this, will you Carlton? Neither of course is true. All the evidence is that LDs turned out in greater numbers in the cold and snow than did the Tories, so 1) is clearly not true. 2) is nearer to being true, but a gross oversimplification.Its less a question of being dim as a matter of local tradition and organisation. This is a weak division for the LDs but including one strong ward where the local tradition had depended on vigorous campaigning style based on canvassing and GOTV rather than relying on postal votes, a campaigning style ok, maybe, for May elections but pretty disastrous for a short campaign in mid-winter. Local Lib Dems therefore concluded the seat was not winnable and came close to being proved wrong. There probably wasn't enough time to convert many of their likely supporters into postals in a short campaign across Christmas. Even with a January poll, it was sheer bad luck that the polling day proved to be the coldest and snowiest day of the year to date. The local Lib Dems could be accused of being dim in not seeing their potential to win the division in present circumstances until it was too late, but that would be harsh. Incidentally, I think that neither bigfatron , a non-aligned local resident who clearly has some contacts with the local LDs and Tories, nor myself, were approaching this analysis in a particularly partisan way. It was more a matter of psephological interest as is appropriate to this forum. It is not a case of me not giving up on it nor of me being partisan about it. It is a matter of LD continual blather on this sort of subject. The 'If Only' and 'What If' matters. Why do you do it? If LDs turn out in better numbers than Conservatives in bad weather why are you citing bad weather as a factor. And what is all this about organising the postal vote. I take out my own postal vote. It is not organised for me. If one has a life that demands a postal, or one is sick or old or a long way from a polling station then one takes out a postal. The plain fact is you lost. You lost because you got fewer votes. You got fewer votes because fewer people normally and naturally want a LD to represent them. That is why you all have to work so hard to win. In normal life you just lack popularity and have to organise a vote to make up for that factor. Sometimes I think Carlton is playing the part of a tribal idiot just for the hell of it. Recently that's been less clear. It seems his maths is awry too. First the case of postal votes. If these had to be applied for at each election then he'd have a point but they're not. This is traditionally a Tory ward in a Tory constituency so it's likely that most postal voters will have been signed up in previous elections and are more likely to be Tories. So not only was this a deliberately short campaign straddling Christmas but it was even shorter for postal voters and little time to sign up more. The point about the Lib Dems winning on polling day therefore shouldn't use the weather as a reason for not getting closer also misses the point by a mile. If turnout was suppressed on Thirsday then it meant there was less opportunity to make up the deficit from people who voted the previous week. QED. |
|
