Local Council By-elections 7th November 2019

[phil156]

Oct 25, 2019 23:01:21 GMT Robert Waller said:

I am really looking forward to predicting the above ...

[phil156]

The worse one is Pembrokeshire 6 Ind!! How does anyone go to the booth and vote. Expect who buys the most beer lol

[Andrew_S]

Do the local by-elections continue regardless of the general election campaign?

[greenchristian]

Oct 31, 2019 20:09:17 GMT Andrew_S said:

Do the local by-elections continue regardless of the general election campaign?

Yes. The 2017 regular local elections continued on regardless of the general election campaign that year.

[evergreenadam]

Oct 29, 2019 12:10:56 GMT johnloony said:

Oct 27, 2019 11:59:14 GMT johnloony said:

Very. The old Fairfield ward had probably the biggest variation of demography within any ward in Croydon. In the north-west bit are lots of multi-flat converted old homes, transient population, two big YMCA hostels, students, low turnouts. In the south-west bit are new downtown blocks of flats with probably lots of young renting people. But the new Fairfield also takes in a large chunk from what used to be Broad Green ward, which is one of the very safe Labour wards in Croydon North constituency. It wouldn't surprise me if almost all of Labour's lead in the new Fairfield is in that one polling district. The old Fairfield also lost a small bit in the south-East which went into South Croydon ward (what used to be called Croham).

For further clarity and elucidation, here is a map:



new Fairfield = A + B (marginal Labour)
new Park Hill & Whitgift = E (safe Conservative)

old Fairfield = B + C + D + E (marginal Conservative)

A is from the old Broad Green ward (very safe Labour)
C went to the new South Croydon ward (moderately Conservative)
D went to the new Addiscombe West ward (marginal)

So B is marginal Conservative?

[johnloony]

Oct 31, 2019 23:08:35 GMT evergreenadam said:

Oct 29, 2019 12:10:56 GMT johnloony said:

For further clarity and elucidation, here is a map:



new Fairfield = A + B (marginal Labour)
new Park Hill & Whitgift = E (safe Conservative)

old Fairfield = B + C + D + E (marginal Conservative)

A is from the old Broad Green ward (very safe Labour)
C went to the new South Croydon ward (moderately Conservative)
D went to the new Addiscombe West ward (marginal)

So B is marginal Conservative?

No - I think that on the 2018 figures, B on its own is marginal Labour. The northern bit of B is more safe Labour than the rest of B. The southern bits of B are about equal between Lab and Con.

Meanwhile, the western bit of E is comfortably Conservative, but not overwhelmingly so, whereas the east it of E is ridiculously safe Conservative. I live in western E and my parents live in eastern E.

[Tony Otim]

Nov 1, 2019 11:59:12 GMT Defenestrated Fipplebox said:

Oct 25, 2019 23:01:21 GMT Robert Waller said:

I am really looking forward to predicting the above ...

Are all wards being predicted this coming week?

Or are some being dropped as being too 🤪

And if so which?


👽

Historically, we've excluded wards from the prediction competition where there was no party candidate standing, so Lerwick South would be excluded , but all the others included.

robbienicoll will make the call about that, though.

[wallington]

If Labour lose Fairfield, they literally have no chance in Croydon Central. I mean, they won't lose.. But damn, the local Labour party is just constantly sabotaging itself.

[Toylyyev]

Some Pembrokeshire Council by-elections for orientation purposes: (sextant required)

 13/9/18 Pembroke St Mary North
 11/4/13 Burton
 18/9/08 St Dogmaels
 20/9/07 Pembroke St Michael
  7/2/02 Martletwy
 30/5/02 Rudbaxton
 29/6/01 East Williamstone
  9/3/00 Haverfordwest Prendergast
12/12/96 Fishguard
19/12/96 Hakin

[hedgehog]

I'm sure I should know this, but it must have slipped me by, what's the difference between an (independent) and someone described as (no description)

[yellowperil]

Nov 5, 2019 22:06:42 GMT hedgehog said:

I'm sure I should know this, but it must have slipped me by, what's the difference between an (independent) and someone described as (no description)

Surely as simple as it sounds- an independent self-describes as an independent, a ND fails to offer any description

[hedgehog]

Nov 5, 2019 22:09:55 GMT yellowperil said:

Nov 5, 2019 22:06:42 GMT hedgehog said:

I'm sure I should know this, but it must have slipped me by, what's the difference between an (independent) and someone described as (no description)

Surely as simple as it sounds- an independent self-describes as an independent, a ND fails to offer any description

Is there a reason why no one asks the candidate if by entering no description, they mean they are an independent, or are they too polite to do such a thing.

From a psephology point of view, this ambiguity seems frustrating.

[gwynthegriff]

Nov 5, 2019 22:27:15 GMT hedgehog said:

Nov 5, 2019 22:09:55 GMT yellowperil said:

Surely as simple as it sounds- an independent self-describes as an independent, a ND fails to offer any description

Is there a reason why no one asks the candidate if by entering no description, they mean they are an independent, or are they too polite to do such a thing.

From a psephology point of view, this ambiguity seems frustrating.

Who are you suggesting should ask such a question?

[yellowperil]

Nov 5, 2019 22:27:15 GMT hedgehog said:

Nov 5, 2019 22:09:55 GMT yellowperil said:

Surely as simple as it sounds- an independent self-describes as an independent, a ND fails to offer any description

Is there a reason why no one asks the candidate if by entering no description, they mean they are an independent, or are they too polite to do such a thing.

From a psephology point of view, this ambiguity seems frustrating.

There are often fun answers in  the description box, especially from non- party candidates who have no idea what is required , and especially at parish council level. I'm sure we could all list our best ones which could probably make a thread on its own. Not the funniest , but the one I have liked best from my own patch, was the parish council candidate in my patch who wrote "aviator" as his description. Not a wise move in a parish where objections to aircraft noise was a live issue. With 8 candidates for 7 places on the parish council, he unsurprisingly came well 8th.

[johnloony]

Nov 5, 2019 23:19:01 GMT yellowperil said:

Nov 5, 2019 22:27:15 GMT hedgehog said:

Is there a reason why no one asks the candidate if by entering no description, they mean they are an independent, or are they too polite to do such a thing.

From a psephology point of view, this ambiguity seems frustrating.

There are often fun answers in  the description box, especially from non- party candidates who have no idea what is required , and especially at parish council level. I'm sure we could all list our best ones which could probably make a thread on its own. Not the funniest , but the one I have liked best from my own patch, was the parish council candidate in my patch who wrote "aviator" as his description. Not a wise move in a parish where objections to aircraft noise was a live issue. With 8 candidates for 7 places on the parish council, he unsurprisingly came well 8th.

The restrictions the PPERA2000 are such that the only descriptions which are allowed are the party name (or registered description), the word "Independent", no description at all, or "The Speaker Seeking Re-Election". Before the registration of political parties, there was much more variety. I remember that there was one candidate in a general election (I forget which one) who wrote "Black Hair Medium Build Caucasian Male"; I remember that at the time it never occurred to me that he might have made a mistake or misunderstood what it was for.

I have a theory that some No-Decription candidates are in fact members of political parties which are not registered. There is also the possibility that they might simply think that the word "Independent" would be unsuitable or inaccurate. In my own notes, I write the description as "(-)" merely to indicate that I haven't forgotten to write in the description. Strictly speaking, the candidate should of course be written as "Gertrude Bumble" rather than "Gertrude Bumble (No Description)" or "Gertrude Bumble (-)". It should not be abbreviated to "(ND)" because that used to mean "National Democrats".

[froome]

Nov 5, 2019 22:06:42 GMT hedgehog said:

I'm sure I should know this, but it must have slipped me by, what's the difference between an (independent) and someone described as (no description)

Some No Descriptions are where parties have rushed in their nomination forms and mistakenly left that bit of the form blank. I have no idea how often this happens, but there are certainly times it has.

[yellowperil]

Nov 6, 2019 2:31:14 GMT johnloony said:

Nov 5, 2019 23:19:01 GMT yellowperil said:

There are often fun answers in  the description box, especially from non- party candidates who have no idea what is required , and especially at parish council level. I'm sure we could all list our best ones which could probably make a thread on its own. Not the funniest , but the one I have liked best from my own patch, was the parish council candidate in my patch who wrote "aviator" as his description. Not a wise move in a parish where objections to aircraft noise was a live issue. With 8 candidates for 7 places on the parish council, he unsurprisingly came well 8th.

The restrictions the PPERA2000 are such that the only descriptions which are allowed are the party name (or registered description), the word "Independent", no description at all, or "The Speaker Seeking Re-Election". Before the registration of political parties, there was much more variety. I remember that there was one candidate in a general election (I forget which one) who wrote "Black Hair Medium Build Caucasian Male"; I remember that at the time it never occurred to me that he might have made a mistake or misunderstood what it was for.

I have a theory that some No-Decription candidates are in fact members of political parties which are not registered. There is also the possibility that they might simply think that the word "Independent" would be unsuitable or inaccurate. In my own notes, I write the description as "(-)" merely to indicate that I haven't forgotten to write in the description. Strictly speaking, the candidate should of course be written as "Gertrude Bumble" rather than "Gertrude Bumble (No Description)" or "Gertrude Bumble (-)". It should not be abbreviated to "(ND)" because that used to mean "National Democrats".

Incidentally I did like your candidate Gertrude Bumble. We do have a keen Lib Dem in our village who is now the local party membership secretary and a perennial paper candidate somehere, who uses the name Mr Bumble for commercial purposes. He is of course a beekeper and honey salesman and everybody in this neck of the woods eats Mr Bumble honey.  Everybody in the village knows him as Mr Bumble and a lot fewer could tell you his actual name. Nevertheless on nomination forms he of course uses his real name  (could he have got away with the "commonly known as" formula?).   Anyway Mr Bumble (Lib Dem) would probably confirmed a lot of people's stereotypes.

[greenchristian]

Nov 6, 2019 5:22:38 GMT froome said:

Nov 5, 2019 22:06:42 GMT hedgehog said:

I'm sure I should know this, but it must have slipped me by, what's the difference between an (independent) and someone described as (no description)

Some No Descriptions are where parties have rushed in their nomination forms and mistakenly left that bit of the form blank. I have no idea how often this happens, but there are certainly times it has.

Or, alternatively, have cocked up some part of the form authorising them to stand as a party candidate.

[tonygreaves]

I think (without checking) that you can use old-fashioned descriptions such as "housewife" and "grocer" or "fat old busybody" on parish council ballot papers. ?

[Robert Waller]

I don't think anyone's put up these yet

britainelects.com/2019/11/07/previews-07-nov-2019/

Is there something else going on?!