|
|
Post by andrewp on Oct 8, 2021 7:38:59 GMT
Also, I believe Tony's stat is perhaps potentially misleading - using all of the results except Flintshire I get: Labour -9.2% (down 359 votes) Tory -0.8% (down 36 votes) Lib Dem 0.0% (up 1 vote) The intervention of the Nottingham Independents in an area of Labour strength will undoubtedly introduce an artificial skew against Labour overall - without that they would have been up, and given the gain in Flintshire then a good night for Labour. Four successful defenses and a flat vote overall looks like a success to me for the Lib Dems. Four possible targets, no successes, during conference week and an overall drop in votes looks like a weak night for the Tories. Unlike some recent weeks, I would say it was largely a very predictable and nothing to see here night. |
|
|
|
Post by froome on Oct 8, 2021 8:29:55 GMT
Also, I believe Tony's stat is perhaps potentially misleading - using all of the results except Flintshire I get: Labour -9.2% (down 359 votes) Tory -0.8% (down 36 votes) Lib Dem 0.0% (up 1 vote) The intervention of the Nottingham Independents in an area of Labour strength will undoubtedly introduce an artificial skew against Labour overall - without that they would have been up, and given the gain in Flintshire then a good night for Labour. Four successful defenses and a flat vote overall looks like a success to me for the Lib Dems. Four possible targets, no successes, during conference week and an overall drop in votes looks like a weak night for the Tories. Unlike some recent weeks, I would say it was largely a very predictable and nothing to see here night. Agreed, though the performance of the Nottingham Independents is interesting. Do they offer the best opportunity to break the Labour hegemony in the city? |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Oct 8, 2021 9:11:32 GMT
I knew this would happen-Labour got in because the Independents' personal votes worked against each other, even though this is exactly the type of place that is not fond of Sir Keir Starmer. How do you figure that one out? It's a by-election in a Welsh village, so trying to relate it to national politics is a fool's errand at the best of times, but even if it wasn't we have very little evidence about which bits of the country Starmer is and isn't popular in. |
|
|
|
Post by edgbaston on Oct 8, 2021 9:23:55 GMT
Croydon Referendum Status Quo 11,519 (19.6%) Elected Mayor 47,165 (80.4%) spoilt 213 Turnout 58,897 (21.3%) Electorate 277,022 A fairly high possibility of a Labour council and a Conservative Mayor next May then? |
|
|
|
Post by grahammurray on Oct 8, 2021 10:29:57 GMT
So did the entire county want a devolved metro mayor? I have no idea, but that wasn’t the original question. The question was asking for an example of where the government has imposed a directly elected mayor on a local authority when it has been explicitly rejected in a referendum (or abolished one without a referendum), and that is not the case in Manchester. Croydon Referendum Status Quo 11,519 (19.6%) Elected Mayor 47,165 (80.4%) spoilt 213 Turnout 58,897 (21.3%) Electorate 277,022 The obvious conclusion from this for the government would be to ignore the result, lump Croydon in with neighbouring boroughs and then don't let them have an elected Mayor. |
|
|
|
Post by owainsutton on Oct 8, 2021 10:41:18 GMT
All three of those boroughs now have participated in an election for a Mayor. Therefore they have a Mayor.
All three of those boroughs rejected the idea of having an elected Mayor by large majorities in referendums. No further referendums have been held regarding a Mayor for West Yorkshire - that Mayor has been imposed without consultation.
Since the much narrower Brexit referendum has been interpreted by the Tories as rejection of membership of the Single Market, I think I am perfectly entitled to interpret the Mayoral referendums as rejection of the concept of an elected Mayor in general. And as we know, such decisions last for generations, apparently
The fact they happen to have the same title does not mean they are the same job. They rejected a directly elected local authority mayor as a change from the cabinet system. They did not reject a devolved metro mayor as that was not on the ballot paper at the time. The fact that no referendum was held on the metro mayor is not the same as saying it was imposed against the result of a referendum - it was simply done without one. It would be like using the result of the EU referendum to claim a mandate to also withdraw from NATO and the UN, even though neither of those things were part of the question. At least the single market is part of the EU - metro mayors and local authority mayors are entirely separate things. I guess it'd be like insisting that the EU referendum required us to leave the Single Market and abandon freedom of movement. Or that the 2011 AV referendum required the scrapping of SV for mayoral and PCC elections. Nobody would do such ridiculous things. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Oct 8, 2021 10:51:25 GMT
Also, I believe Tony's stat is perhaps potentially misleading - using all of the results except Flintshire I get: Labour -9.2% (down 359 votes) Tory -0.8% (down 36 votes) Lib Dem 0.0% (up 1 vote) The intervention of the Nottingham Independents in an area of Labour strength will undoubtedly introduce an artificial skew against Labour overall - without that they would have been up, and given the gain in Flintshire then a good night for Labour. Four successful defenses and a flat vote overall looks like a success to me for the Lib Dems. Four possible targets, no successes, during conference week and an overall drop in votes looks like a weak night for the Tories. Unlike some recent weeks, I would say it was largely a very predictable and nothing to see here night. As already said, there was speculation a "conference bounce" would mean the Tories making at least one gain. In fact they went back on their 2019 performance in some contests, which can't be good really. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Oct 8, 2021 11:04:41 GMT
Unlike some recent weeks, I would say it was largely a very predictable and nothing to see here night. As already said, there was speculation a "conference bounce" would mean the Tories making at least one gain. In fact they went back on their 2019 performance in some contests, which can't be good really. Well, true, 2019 was a very bad local election year for the Tories |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,098
|
Post by ilerda on Oct 8, 2021 11:50:13 GMT
The fact they happen to have the same title does not mean they are the same job. They rejected a directly elected local authority mayor as a change from the cabinet system. They did not reject a devolved metro mayor as that was not on the ballot paper at the time. The fact that no referendum was held on the metro mayor is not the same as saying it was imposed against the result of a referendum - it was simply done without one. It would be like using the result of the EU referendum to claim a mandate to also withdraw from NATO and the UN, even though neither of those things were part of the question. At least the single market is part of the EU - metro mayors and local authority mayors are entirely separate things. I guess it'd be like insisting that the EU referendum required us to leave the Single Market and abandon freedom of movement. Or that the 2011 AV referendum required the scrapping of SV for mayoral and PCC elections. Nobody would do such ridiculous things. At least the single market and freedom of movement are a result of EU membership - Liverpool has shown that there is no connection at all between having a directly elected local authority mayor and a devolved metro mayor. And I don't think the 2011 referendum is a justification for scrapping SV, because the two are unrelated. A referendum is about the issue that is on the ballot paper, and its results should not be extrapolated to anything else. For example, I don't think that the EU referendum result is a mandate to reduce immigration levels. The 2019 Tory election manifesto is, however. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Oct 8, 2021 11:57:59 GMT
Adding the changes since last time where comparisons are possible gives Lab + 6.6%; Con + 5.4%, and LibDem - 13.2%. I don't know if this is a useful metric or not - maybe time will tell. I think there are 2 big problems with this measure: 1. It amalgamates vote changes from different years - 2021 and 2019 were, for example, very different performances for most of the parties. 2. It takes no account of who else is standing - so, for example last week's Tory positive was entirely the result of an increased vote share in one contest which had previously been dominated by independents who didn't stand this time. Ignoring that they were down, so their positive change is thus largely meaningless. Similarly this week, the falls in Nottingham may be largely explicable by more parties fielding candidates whilst in Cranleigh both parties had an increased share because Labour didn't stand. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyhill on Oct 8, 2021 16:15:06 GMT
The critics of this idea may well be right - I'm just trying it out, and of course there will be wide variations on a particular night due to patterns of candidature, local circumstances, etc. Aggregating it over time might be interesting though - or it might be a complete waste of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Oct 8, 2021 19:03:30 GMT
I guess it'd be like insisting that the EU referendum required us to leave the Single Market and abandon freedom of movement. Or that the 2011 AV referendum required the scrapping of SV for mayoral and PCC elections. Nobody would do such ridiculous things. At least the single market and freedom of movement are a result of EU membership - Liverpool has shown that there is no connection at all between having a directly elected local authority mayor and a devolved metro mayor. And I don't think the 2011 referendum is a justification for scrapping SV, because the two are unrelated. A referendum is about the issue that is on the ballot paper, and its results should not be extrapolated to anything else. For example, I don't think that the EU referendum result is a mandate to reduce immigration levels. The 2019 Tory election manifesto is, however. The AV referendum has been used in the Press as an argument for getting rid of SV in the Mayor and PCC elections. The main justification levelled is that FPTP "allows voters to get rid of politicians who don't do a good job" which is a good contestant for a "most specious argument of all time" award, since SV does that perfectly well |
|
ilerda
Conservative
Posts: 1,098
|
Post by ilerda on Oct 9, 2021 10:36:56 GMT
At least the single market and freedom of movement are a result of EU membership - Liverpool has shown that there is no connection at all between having a directly elected local authority mayor and a devolved metro mayor. And I don't think the 2011 referendum is a justification for scrapping SV, because the two are unrelated. A referendum is about the issue that is on the ballot paper, and its results should not be extrapolated to anything else. For example, I don't think that the EU referendum result is a mandate to reduce immigration levels. The 2019 Tory election manifesto is, however. The AV referendum has been used in the Press as an argument for getting rid of SV in the Mayor and PCC elections. The main justification levelled is that FPTP "allows voters to get rid of politicians who don't do a good job" which is a good contestant for a "most specious argument of all time" award, since SV does that perfectly well The press may well have used that argument, but it doesn’t mean it’s correct. If anything the opposite. But I fail to see the relevance of that to my core argument. I’m not saying that we should use the AV referendum to scrap SV because I know the two are unconnected. If you object to the AV referendum being used to scrap SV then surely you must also recognise that the directly elected local authority mayors are nothing to do with the creation of devolved metro mayors? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Oct 9, 2021 11:00:30 GMT
The AV referendum has been used in the Press as an argument for getting rid of SV in the Mayor and PCC elections. The main justification levelled is that FPTP "allows voters to get rid of politicians who don't do a good job" which is a good contestant for a "most specious argument of all time" award, since SV does that perfectly well The press may well have used that argument, but it doesn’t mean it’s correct. If anything the opposite. But I fail to see the relevance of that to my core argument. I’m not saying that we should use the AV referendum to scrap SV because I know the two are unconnected. If you object to the AV referendum being used to scrap SV then surely you must also recognise that the directly elected local authority mayors are nothing to do with the creation of devolved metro mayors? The point is "Tory hypocrisy". Just because you are the exception that proves the rule does not invalidate the point |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Oct 10, 2021 15:11:10 GMT
Although neither council will be contested again, just for interest I applied the swing in the 2 Somerset by elections this week across the District and county
Applying the County division swing uniformly for the County Council would give
LD 30 (+16)
Con 20 (-13)
Lab 3 (no change)
Ind 1 (-2)
Green 1 (-1)
LD gain control from the Conservatives
Applying the DC swing uniformly across the DC gives
LD 21 (-9)
Con 19 (+9j
Ind 13 (-1)
Lab 4 (+1)
Green 2 (no change)
LD lose to NOC.
I would think that if all out elections were held for both councils tomorrow, it’s almost certain that the Conservatives would lose their majority on the CC and the Lib Dem’s would lose their majority on the DC.
|
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473 
|
Post by peterl on Oct 10, 2021 17:36:40 GMT
I think there can be little doubt all things considered that the new Somerset authority will be one of the more interesting contests in May.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Oct 10, 2021 18:18:24 GMT
Although neither council will be contested again, just for interest I applied the swing in the 2 Somerset by elections this week across the District and county Applying the County division swing uniformly for the County Council would give LD 30 (+16) Con 20 (-13) Lab 3 (no change) Ind 1 (-2) Green 1 (-1) LD gain control from the Conservatives Applying the DC swing uniformly across the DC gives LD 21 (-9) Con 19 (+9j Ind 13 (-1) Lab 4 (+1) Green 2 (no change) LD lose to NOC. I would think that if all out elections were held for both councils tomorrow, it’s almost certain that the Conservatives would lose their majority on the CC and the Lib Dem’s would lose their majority on the DC. In other words, if it is a goodish year for the Lib Dems and a very bad year for the Tories like 2019, the Lib Dems will get control.. There is a forecast of huge gas price increases next April. It could well be a bad year for the Tories.. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Oct 10, 2021 18:32:38 GMT
Although neither council will be contested again, just for interest I applied the swing in the 2 Somerset by elections this week across the District and county Applying the County division swing uniformly for the County Council would give LD 30 (+16) Con 20 (-13) Lab 3 (no change) Ind 1 (-2) Green 1 (-1) LD gain control from the Conservatives Applying the DC swing uniformly across the DC gives LD 21 (-9) Con 19 (+9j Ind 13 (-1) Lab 4 (+1) Green 2 (no change) LD lose to NOC. I would think that if all out elections were held for both councils tomorrow, it’s almost certain that the Conservatives would lose their majority on the CC and the Lib Dem’s would lose their majority on the DC. In other words, if it is a goodish year for the Lib Dems and a very bad year for the Tories like 2019, the Lib Dems will get control.. There is a forecast of huge gas price increases next April. It could well be a bad year for the Tories.. If it’s a 2019, then the Lib Dem’s will gain control very comfortably. Had there been an election in 2021, I think the Conservatives would have held, |
|
