nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 7, 2020 19:25:25 GMT
I think 2001 was more influential - during the IDS years there were groups starting on the fringes taking an interest in the bias in the system and calling for improvements. 2005 saw a small step back from the extremes but a lot of the talk seemed to still assume the problems of 201 applied. Labour need to take an interest now in the bias |
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 7, 2020 19:54:44 GMT
The number of votes (in thousands) needed to elect an MP for the two major parties. Year: Con / Lab 1945: 44.2 / 30.5 1950: 41.9 / 42.0 1951: 42.7 / 47.3 1955: 38.6 / 44.8 1959: 37.6 / 47.3 1964: 39.5 / 38.5 1966: 45.1 / 35.9 1970: 39.8 / 42.3 1974: 40.0 / 38.7 1974: 37.8 / 35.9 1979: 40.4 / 42.9 1983: 32.7 / 40.5 1987: 36.6 / 43.8 1992: 41.9 / 42.7 1997: 58.1 / 32.3 2001: 50.3 / 25.9 2005: 44.3 / 26.9 2010: 35.0 / 33.4 2015: 34.2 / 40.3 2017: 43.0 / 49.2 2019: 38.3 / 50.8 It didn't "need" that many votes to elect an MP except in a very small number of constituencies (if any). |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Sept 7, 2020 20:06:15 GMT
I think 2001 was more influential - during the IDS years there were groups starting on the fringes taking an interest in the bias in the system and calling for improvements. 2005 saw a small step back from the extremes but a lot of the talk seemed to still assume the problems of 201 applied. Labour need to take an interest now in the bias But isn't the "bias" simply a function of how well the third party (i.e. the Liberals/Lib Dems) does and its demographics. Up until relatively recently, the Lib Dem demographic matched that of the Conservatives i.e predominantly middle class. So a high third party vote hurt the Tories more. But now the Tories are picking up enough of the non-metropolitan working class vote that it doesn't hurt them any more. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 7, 2020 20:09:35 GMT
Labour need to take an interest now in the bias But isn't the "bias" simply a function of how well the third party (i.e. the Liberals/Lib Dems) does and its demographics. Up until relatively recently, the Lib Dem demographic matched that of the Conservatives i.e predominantly middle class. So a high third party vote hurt the Tories more. But now the Tories are picking up enough of the non-metropolitan working class vote that it doesn't hurt them any more. Lib dems start winning back Tory seats the effect hurts the Tories, but win significant vote in their seats without winning helps the Tories to an extent but it will be interesting to see the effect of tory working class votes on the bias. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 7, 2020 20:16:06 GMT
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,755 
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Sept 7, 2020 22:07:09 GMT
Labour need to take an interest now in the bias But isn't the "bias" simply a function of how well the third party (i.e. the Liberals/Lib Dems) does and its demographics. Up until relatively recently, the Lib Dem demographic matched that of the Conservatives i.e predominantly middle class. So a high third party vote hurt the Tories more. But now the Tories are picking up enough of the non-metropolitan working class vote that it doesn't hurt them any more. And a lot of the "bias" is Labour seats where Labour pile up piles and piles of votes well past the 40%-ish they really need, whereas Conservative seats are won against strong showings for other candidates. Eg: NORTH: Lab 40,000, Con 5,000, LD 3,000 SOUTH: Lab 15,000, Con 30,000, LD 3,000 CENTRAL: Lab 15,000, Con 10,000, LD 23,000 Look! It takes 40,000 votes to elect a Labour MP, but only 30,000 to elect a Conservative, and 23,000 to elect a LibDem!!!111!!!""!!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2020 16:36:52 GMT
But isn't the "bias" simply a function of how well the third party (i.e. the Liberals/Lib Dems) does and its demographics. Up until relatively recently, the Lib Dem demographic matched that of the Conservatives i.e predominantly middle class. So a high third party vote hurt the Tories more. But now the Tories are picking up enough of the non-metropolitan working class vote that it doesn't hurt them any more. And a lot of the "bias" is Labour seats where Labour pile up piles and piles of votes well past the 40%-ish they really need, whereas Conservative seats are won against strong showings for other candidates. Eg: NORTH: Lab 40,000, Con 5,000, LD 3,000 SOUTH: Lab 15,000, Con 30,000, LD 3,000 CENTRAL: Lab 15,000, Con 10,000, LD 23,000 Look! It takes 40,000 votes to elect a Labour MP, but only 30,000 to elect a Conservative, and 23,000 to elect a LibDem!!!111!!!""!!! That sort of proves the point though because Lab 70,000 Con 45,000 LD 29,000 would lead to Lab 2 Con 1 under a proportional system (list method using D'Hondt as in European elections, obviously there are other methods) but in this case as actually lead to Lab 1 Con 1 LD 1 |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 29, 2020 16:50:42 GMT
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 29, 2020 17:02:15 GMT
The main points are on a uniform swing 4.7% Con lead for majority, equal votes a 23 seat Con lead,12.3% Lab lead for a majority,Lab to draw level in seats about 2.3%
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 29, 2020 20:23:47 GMT
uniform swing needed to move between bare majority for one party to the other after the following elections:
1979:2.6%
1983:5.3%
1987:4.1%
1992:3.6%(3.7% after boundary change)
1997:4.3%
2001:3.9%(4.0% after boundary change)
2005:5.5%
2010:6.95%
2015:9.15%
2017:5.2%
2019:8.5%
|
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Sept 29, 2020 20:45:07 GMT
uniform swing needed to move between bare majority for one party to the other after the following elections: 1979:2.6% 1983:5.3% 1987:4.1% 1992:3.6%(3.7% after boundary change) 1997:4.3% 2001:3.9%(4.0% after boundary change) 2005:5.5% 2010:6.95% 2015:9.15% 2017:5.2% 2019:8.5% Likely 9% for 2024 after boundary changes. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 29, 2020 21:15:55 GMT
uniform swing needed to move between bare majority for one party to the other after the following elections: 1979:2.6% 1983:5.3% 1987:4.1% 1992:3.6%(3.7% after boundary change) 1997:4.3% 2001:3.9%(4.0% after boundary change) 2005:5.5% 2010:6.95% 2015:9.15% 2017:5.2% 2019:8.5% Likely 9% for 2024 after boundary changes. Ouch! These wide ranges also increase the chance of the no man's land of a hung parliament |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Sept 29, 2020 21:19:05 GMT
Likely 9% for 2024 after boundary changes. Ouch! These wide ranges also increase the chance of the no man's land of a hung parliament And then the chance of a second election within months of the first. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 29, 2020 21:33:47 GMT
Ouch! These wide ranges also increase the chance of the no man's land of a hung parliament And then the chance of a second election within months of the first. Yay!(with the help of the repeal of the FPTA) |
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Sept 30, 2020 12:45:24 GMT
uniform swing needed to move between bare majority for one party to the other after the following elections: 1979:2.6% 1983:5.3% 1987:4.1% 1992:3.6%(3.7% after boundary change) 1997:4.3% 2001:3.9%(4.0% after boundary change) 2005:5.5% 2010:6.95% 2015:9.15% 2017:5.2% 2019:8.5% That 1997 figure looks dubious. Only 4.3% needed to overturn Blair's huge majority? |
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,664
Member is Online
|
Post by pl on Sept 30, 2020 12:47:21 GMT
uniform swing needed to move between bare majority for one party to the other after the following elections: 1979:2.6% 1983:5.3% 1987:4.1% 1992:3.6%(3.7% after boundary change) 1997:4.3% 2001:3.9%(4.0% after boundary change) 2005:5.5% 2010:6.95% 2015:9.15% 2017:5.2% 2019:8.5% That 1997 figure looks dubious. Only 4.3% needed to overturn Blair's huge majority? I think the numbers are showing what hypothetical swing would have been required at that election to move from a Lab maj 1 to Cons maj 1. Not the actual Lab maj to Cons maj 1. |
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Sept 30, 2020 12:50:58 GMT
That 1997 figure looks dubious. Only 4.3% needed to overturn Blair's huge majority? I think the numbers are showing what hypothetical swing would have been required at that election to move from a Lab maj 1 to Cons maj 1. Not the actual Lab maj to Cons maj 1. Ah, got it. My bad. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Sept 30, 2020 13:06:19 GMT
I think the numbers are showing what hypothetical swing would have been required at that election to move from a Lab maj 1 to Cons maj 1. Not the actual Lab maj to Cons maj 1. Ah, got it. My bad. Sorry should have made it clear-so for examples 1987-Con needed 4.0% for bare maj and Lab 4.2% hence 4.1% swing to move between these 2 points |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Oct 1, 2020 10:01:20 GMT
From Britain Votes, Sir JC's calcs, the %spread of Con/Lab seats at equal shares (Tory advantage of 28 seats, 293-265):-  More marginal seats for Labour but also more strongholds. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,447
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Oct 1, 2020 10:22:38 GMT
From Britain Votes, Sir JC's calcs, the %spread of Con/Lab seats at equal shares (Tory advantage of 28 seats, 293-265):- More marginal seats for Labour but also more strongholds. the 80-100 to figure for Lab is not good, they need more in the middle of these spreads |
|
