|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Mar 26, 2020 12:32:15 GMT
May I briefly float an idea I've had?
As I think many people will get very bored, I was wondering if anyone here would like to contribute to a kind of on-line version of my old Almanac.
I'm completely flexible, but initially thinking along the lines of contributors choosing a constituency or constituencies, then explaining why it votes / has voted the way it has, and maybe relevant and interesting statistics. When I did this, I was also very keen on how the different parts of the constituency varied in character and hence political preference.
I would suggest, given the experience that finally killed off my Routledge publication, leaving the MPs out of it ... places are unlikely to threaten to sue for libel!
I'm just inviting responses to this general idea ... I would also not commit to the role beyond this start I may play (not least because though currently physically very well, I'm suffering from loss of sleep at present ...)
Anyway, just an idea to kick around ...
Best wishes to everyone,
Robert
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 26, 2020 12:47:25 GMT
May I briefly float an idea I've had? As I think many people will get very bored, I was wondering if anyone here would like to contribute to a kind of on-line version of my old Almanac. I'm completely flexible, but initially thinking along the lines of contributors choosing a constituency or constituencies, then explaining why it votes / has voted the way it has, and maybe relevant and interesting statistics. When I did this, I was also very keen on how the different parts of the constituency varied in character and hence political preference. I would suggest, given the experience that finally killed off my Routledge publication, leaving the MPs out of it ... places are unlikely to threaten to sue for libel!I'm just inviting responses to this general idea ... I would also not commit to the role beyond this start I may play (not least because though currently physically very well, I'm suffering from loss of sleep at present ...) Anyway, just an idea to kick around ... Best wishes to everyone, Robert If they did you'd have heard from Netherley's solicitors by now! I'm definitely up for being involved in this. I always thought the MP biographies which appeared in the later editions were useful and entertaining but ultimately an unnecessary addition to the work anyway. It's all about the geography for me |
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,418
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Mar 26, 2020 12:52:57 GMT
May I briefly float an idea I've had? As I think many people will get very bored, I was wondering if anyone here would like to contribute to a kind of on-line version of my old Almanac. I'm completely flexible, but initially thinking along the lines of contributors choosing a constituency or constituencies, then explaining why it votes / has voted the way it has, and maybe relevant and interesting statistics. When I did this, I was also very keen on how the different parts of the constituency varied in character and hence political preference. I would suggest, given the experience that finally killed off my Routledge publication, leaving the MPs out of it ... places are unlikely to threaten to sue for libel! I'm just inviting responses to this general idea ... I would also not commit to the role beyond this start I may play (not least because though currently physically very well, I'm suffering from loss of sleep at present ...) Anyway, just an idea to kick around ... Best wishes to everyone, Robert Excellent idea. And I'm sure you would have loved to be far more honest about some of our esteemed Members! |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Mar 26, 2020 13:26:57 GMT
May I briefly float an idea I've had? As I think many people will get very bored, I was wondering if anyone here would like to contribute to a kind of on-line version of my old Almanac. I'm completely flexible, but initially thinking along the lines of contributors choosing a constituency or constituencies, then explaining why it votes / has voted the way it has, and maybe relevant and interesting statistics. When I did this, I was also very keen on how the different parts of the constituency varied in character and hence political preference. I would suggest, given the experience that finally killed off my Routledge publication, leaving the MPs out of it ... places are unlikely to threaten to sue for libel! I'm just inviting responses to this general idea ... I would also not commit to the role beyond this start I may play (not least because though currently physically very well, I'm suffering from loss of sleep at present ...) Anyway, just an idea to kick around ... Best wishes to everyone, Robert Excellent idea, I’d be up for being involved in that. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Mar 26, 2020 13:43:43 GMT
May I briefly float an idea I've had? As I think many people will get very bored, I was wondering if anyone here would like to contribute to a kind of on-line version of my old Almanac. I'm completely flexible, but initially thinking along the lines of contributors choosing a constituency or constituencies, then explaining why it votes / has voted the way it has, and maybe relevant and interesting statistics. When I did this, I was also very keen on how the different parts of the constituency varied in character and hence political preference. I would suggest, given the experience that finally killed off my Routledge publication, leaving the MPs out of it ... places are unlikely to threaten to sue for libel! I'm just inviting responses to this general idea ... I would also not commit to the role beyond this start I may play (not least because though currently physically very well, I'm suffering from loss of sleep at present ...) Anyway, just an idea to kick around ... Best wishes to everyone, Robert I could probably contribute something. |
|
|
|
Post by warofdreams on Mar 26, 2020 13:53:27 GMT
May I briefly float an idea I've had? As I think many people will get very bored, I was wondering if anyone here would like to contribute to a kind of on-line version of my old Almanac. I'm completely flexible, but initially thinking along the lines of contributors choosing a constituency or constituencies, then explaining why it votes / has voted the way it has, and maybe relevant and interesting statistics. When I did this, I was also very keen on how the different parts of the constituency varied in character and hence political preference. I would suggest, given the experience that finally killed off my Routledge publication, leaving the MPs out of it ... places are unlikely to threaten to sue for libel! I'm just inviting responses to this general idea ... I would also not commit to the role beyond this start I may play (not least because though currently physically very well, I'm suffering from loss of sleep at present ...) Anyway, just an idea to kick around ... Best wishes to everyone, Robert I would be interested in contributing, time permitting. |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,053 
|
Post by jamie on Mar 26, 2020 13:54:57 GMT
May I briefly float an idea I've had? As I think many people will get very bored, I was wondering if anyone here would like to contribute to a kind of on-line version of my old Almanac. I'm completely flexible, but initially thinking along the lines of contributors choosing a constituency or constituencies, then explaining why it votes / has voted the way it has, and maybe relevant and interesting statistics. When I did this, I was also very keen on how the different parts of the constituency varied in character and hence political preference. I would suggest, given the experience that finally killed off my Routledge publication, leaving the MPs out of it ... places are unlikely to threaten to sue for libel! I'm just inviting responses to this general idea ... I would also not commit to the role beyond this start I may play (not least because though currently physically very well, I'm suffering from loss of sleep at present ...) Anyway, just an idea to kick around ... Best wishes to everyone, Robert Happy to contribute. |
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Mar 26, 2020 15:41:01 GMT
Many thanks for all the positive replies so far - most encouraging!
All suggestions on this thread welcome, including 'what to include and how to proceed'.
I'm sure all contributions would be welcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by therealriga on Mar 26, 2020 16:52:55 GMT
Would certainly be interested, when I first got interested in psephology your Almanac was close to holy scripture for me. Interestingly, I followed recommendations to get the book that had inspired it: The Almanac of American politics, and was hugely disappointed. Barone, the editor of that, was simply unable to keep his bias in check and the result was often partisan commentary rather than a descriptive work.
I always assumed that the reason your almanac had ceased publication was due to the increasing availability of internet sources covering the same ground.
|
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Mar 26, 2020 17:56:56 GMT
I still have a couple of editions on the shelves. Happy to help out with Birmingham & the Black Country.
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Mar 27, 2020 11:12:49 GMT
Excellent, more encouraging enthusiasm and support!
As I had a much better night's sleep, my mood has lifted and 'raring to go'.
I'd like this to be a really cooperative venture, so I invite suggestions as to next steps.
To start off, maybe those interested in contributing would like to start by drafting out and posting profiles of their favourite constituencies, so we can get the ball (Log?) rolling.
I would like people to suggest where to post these. May the admin/moderators (not sure who does these things) could start a new sub-section of the forum, itself divided by region? - but perhaps only when we have enough entries to justify this.
Until then, maybe the initial samples on this thread? Or within General Psephology on one or more 'Vote UK Almanac Profiles' threads?
Anyway, I'm not going to be laying any laws down. I am really excited to read what people have to say. There are some immensely knowledgeable psephologists an very good writers who have already suggested they may contribute. I have greatly admired the contributions of many of those who have already posted up-thread.
So, please - chocks away, and let's fight the insidious mental effects of our current world situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 27, 2020 11:25:32 GMT
I'm a fairly shoddy writer (and to be honest I'm interested in what others have to say about the constituencies I know best), so I probably can't be much help there. What I can look into is the statistics side - specifically I'll download the census results for a large number of indicators and try and find exceptional results for each constituency. I suspect almost all will be in the top 10 or 20 for at least some figures.
Are there any particular types of statistic which might of particular interest?
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 27, 2020 12:02:15 GMT
I'm a fairly shoddy writer (and to be honest I'm interested in what others have to say about the constituencies I know best), so I probably can't be much help there. What I can look into is the statistics side - specifically I'll download the census results for a large number of indicators and try and find exceptional results for each constituency. I suspect almost all will be in the top 10 or 20 for at least some figures. It's worth noting that there are separate Censuses for England and Wales, for Scotland, and for Northern Ireland. The results are almost always compatible but sometimes require work to put them together. Since the OPCS decommissioned their website, NOMIS is probably the easiest source for England and Wales and they have some other non-Census stats for Parliamentary constituencies. Scotland's Census is far better as an official site: www.scotlandscensus.gov.ukNISRA has the NI results: www.nisra.gov.uk/statistics/census/2011-census |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 27, 2020 12:21:09 GMT
I'm a fairly shoddy writer (and to be honest I'm interested in what others have to say about the constituencies I know best), so I probably can't be much help there. What I can look into is the statistics side - specifically I'll download the census results for a large number of indicators and try and find exceptional results for each constituency. I suspect almost all will be in the top 10 or 20 for at least some figures. It's worth noting that there are separate Censuses for England and Wales, for Scotland, and for Northern Ireland. The results are almost always compatible but sometimes require work to put them together. Since the OPCS decommissioned their website, NOMIS is probably the easiest source for England and Wales and they have some other non-Census stats for Parliamentary constituencies. Scotland's Census is far better as an official site: www.scotlandscensus.gov.ukNISRA has the NI results: www.nisra.gov.uk/statistics/census/2011-censusThat Scottish site is excellent, and I hadn't noticed it before, so cheers for that. My plan was actually to use the UK Data service site and then use a lookup table to collate the figures from all the output areas in each constituency. It would be a bit more work, but it would allow me to be more flexible with the indicators that I use. Non-census statistics will need to come from another source like NOMIS. |
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Mar 27, 2020 16:00:08 GMT
Thanks so much for your offer, bjornhattan. Would folk like to nominate some statistics for constituencies for him to search out? |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,053
|
Post by jamie on Mar 27, 2020 16:41:08 GMT
Thanks so much for your offer, bjornhattan . Would folk like to nominate some statistics for constituencies for him to search out? Employment by industry could be interesting. We often hear claims about how important x industry is to a constituency, so data to back up (or disprove) would be useful. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 27, 2020 16:44:33 GMT
Thanks so much for your offer, bjornhattan. Would folk like to nominate some statistics for constituencies for him to search out? I think the best ones are broadly those you used to use yourself. Ethnicity and religion is always an interesting one, Housing tenure, Social class is more tricky these days, the definition seems to keep changing but educational qualifications are a useful indicator. I suppose some age related data is going to be particularly relevant these days |
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Mar 27, 2020 17:55:32 GMT
I suggested above that people might start to write some sample entries.
It has occurred to me that it might be a good idea to nominate these here before starting so as not to duplicate and thus waste anyone's time and work ...
All further suggestions welcome!
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,797
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Mar 27, 2020 20:47:40 GMT
Thanks so much for your offer, bjornhattan. Would folk like to nominate some statistics for constituencies for him to search out? I think the best ones are broadly those you used to use yourself. Ethnicity and religion is always an interesting one, Housing tenure, Social class is more tricky these days, the definition seems to keep changing but educational qualifications are a useful indicator. I suppose some age related data is going to be particularly relevant these days Population Density! |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Mar 27, 2020 22:19:42 GMT
Thanks so much for your offer, bjornhattan . Would folk like to nominate some statistics for constituencies for him to search out? Employment by industry could be interesting. We often hear claims about how important x industry is to a constituency, so data to back up (or disprove) would be useful. I've calculated a value comparing the proportion of workers in each industry (as defined by the census) with the national average for every constituency. For example, if 15% of the population of a constituency worked in education, that would be divided by the 10% who work in education nationally to give a figure of 1.5. The top ten values for this measure (including the percentages working in that industry in brackets) are: 1. West Suffolk, Extraterrestrial organisations: 71.0 (5.7%) 2. South West Norfolk, Extraterrestrial organisations: 18.0 (1.4%) 3. Cities of London and Westminster, Extraterrestrial organisations: 16.6 (1.3%) 4. Harrogate and Knaresborough, Extraterrestrial organisations: 13.6 (1.1%) 5. Leicester East, Textiles manufacturing: 13.4 (5.4%) 6. Huntingdon, Extraterrestrial organisations: 12.7 (1.0%) 7. Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, Mining: 11.7 (2.1%) 8. Kensington, Extraterrestrial organisations: 11.5 (0.9%) 9. St Austell and Newquay, Mining: 11.4 (2.0%) 10. Westminster North, Extraterrestrial organisations: 10.3 (0.8%) Do note that this measure is biased towards smaller industries, which is why extraterrestrial organisations (I'm assuming this is embassies and foreign military bases rather than flying saucers) features so heavily. Another figure which may be of interest is 23.1% - this is the proportion of workers employed in Education in Cambridge, and is the highest proportion of workers in one industry in any constituency. At present all of this data is for England and Wales only, since there doesn't seem to be a lookup table converting Scottish or Northern Irish OAs to constituencies, and while I have found another source for Scotland I'm yet to actually see how that is structured. |
|
