rcronald
Likud
Posts: 6,361
Member is Online
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 6, 2021 10:00:02 GMT
If all London boroughs had the same demographic composition they had in 2001, which boroughs and Constituencies would be Tory held that are not Tory held today?
Obvious ones to me are Croydon Central,Enfield North & Southgate, Dagenham & Rainham and Ilford North in the constituency level and Croydon & Enfield in the borough level.
All of the Wandsworth constituencies are also a possibility as the amount of renters would be substantially lower.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 6, 2021 11:48:52 GMT
You can probably add Eltham and Erith & Thamesmead too. I could see even somewhere like Ealing North being relatively close
|
|
rcronald
Likud
Posts: 6,361
Member is Online
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 6, 2021 16:50:29 GMT
You can probably add Eltham and Erith & Thamesmead too. I could see even somewhere like Ealing North being relatively close I didn’t add Eltham as the demographic change didn’t seem significant there to me, but it is also a strong possibility just for being a marginal. I assume the likes of Brent North,Hayes & Harlington , Ealing North and Feltham & Heston already had too much of a demographic change by 01?. The one I would be fascinated by is Barking as it had a real life version of the great replacement in the second half of the 2000s… |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,054 
|
Post by jamie on Oct 7, 2021 12:06:09 GMT
All of the Wandsworth constituencies are also a possibility as the amount of renters would be substantially lower. Although they would presumably have a more working class electorate than they do today which would help Labour (which factor would be more important I’m admittedly not sure). |
|
rcronald
Likud
Posts: 6,361
Member is Online
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 7, 2021 14:39:13 GMT
All of the Wandsworth constituencies are also a possibility as the amount of renters would be substantially lower. Although they would presumably have a more working class electorate than they do today which would help Labour (which factor would be more important I’m admittedly not sure). It’s why I didn’t put any of them in the sure fire category but as a possibility, the only one of them that I am almost certain had a more favourable electorate then is Tooting and then current margin is probably too big now for it to be Tory even in 01 demographics. |
|
|
|
Post by londonseal80 on Oct 7, 2021 16:57:59 GMT
You can probably add Eltham and Erith & Thamesmead too. I could see even somewhere like Ealing North being relatively close I didn’t add Eltham as the demographic change didn’t seem significant there to me, but it is also a strong possibility just for being a marginal. I assume the likes of Brent North,Hayes & Harlington , Ealing North and Feltham & Heston already had too much of a demographic change by 01?. The one I would be fascinated by is Barking as it had a real life version of the great replacement in the second half of the 2000s… Mitcham and Morden would have probably had a smaller majority (maybe more between 6,000 and 10,000) and the tories may have carried St Helier and Ravensbury but the Mitcham wards demographically changed completely by that time. Was it really a classic marginal or a seat Labour never should have lost in the first place? Angela Rumbold probably had quite a lot personal vote, in the 1986 and 1990 local elections Labour were miles in ahead in the constituency vote. |
|
rcronald
Likud
Posts: 6,361
Member is Online
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 7, 2021 17:06:26 GMT
I didn’t add Eltham as the demographic change didn’t seem significant there to me, but it is also a strong possibility just for being a marginal. I assume the likes of Brent North,Hayes & Harlington , Ealing North and Feltham & Heston already had too much of a demographic change by 01?. The one I would be fascinated by is Barking as it had a real life version of the great replacement in the second half of the 2000s… Mitcham and Morden would have probably had a smaller majority (maybe more between 6,000 and 10,000) and the tories may have carried St Helier and Ravensbury but the Mitcham wards demographically changed completely by that time. Was it really a classic marginal or a seat Labour never should have lost in the first place? Angela Rumbold probably had quite a lot personal vote, in the 1986 and 1990 local elections Labour were miles in ahead in the constituency vote. I also think that McDonagh has a decent amount of personal vote and if another Lab candidate is standing there in 2019 the margin is probably 28% rather then 36%. BTW, I find it really odd that St.Hillier on the Merton side is mostly BAME while in Sutton it is still largely WWC. |
|
rcronald
Likud
Posts: 6,361
Member is Online
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 7, 2021 17:10:56 GMT
Other seats Lab would have held but by a much lower margin are the Lewisham seats and perhaps Greenwich,Croydon North and Bermondsey (in a world without Simon Hughes)
|
|
|
|
Post by londonseal80 on Oct 7, 2021 19:15:32 GMT
Mitcham and Morden would have probably had a smaller majority (maybe more between 6,000 and 10,000) and the tories may have carried St Helier and Ravensbury but the Mitcham wards demographically changed completely by that time. Was it really a classic marginal or a seat Labour never should have lost in the first place? Angela Rumbold probably had quite a lot personal vote, in the 1986 and 1990 local elections Labour were miles in ahead in the constituency vote. I also think that McDonagh has a decent amount of personal vote and if another Lab candidate is standing there in 2019 the margin is probably 28% rather then 36%. BTW, I find it really odd that St.Hillier on the Merton side is mostly BAME while in Sutton it is still largely WWC. Agree it’s odd how different sides of the same estate are demographically and politically. The estate forms part of the suburbs Morden and Carshalton but both are very different. Morden is perhaps even different from South London, it’s a metroland area (unique to South of the river) with most of the housing from the 1920s and 1930s, due to being a tube commuter area the demographics have changed far quicker, Morden would probably fit more in Brent North and Ealing North than anywhere in South London. Carshalton as a whole area is still very outer london in character, very White British and perhaps more similar to Bromley or even Epsom and Ewell. So taking these things in account the sides of the estate reflect the demographics of the suburb they are in rather than one demographic for the whole area. Just think of an estate spanning Greenford and Chislehurst and the St Helier Estate is what you would come up with? |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Oct 8, 2021 4:58:12 GMT
Agree it’s odd how different sides of the same estate are demographically and politically. The estate forms part of the suburbs Morden and Carshalton but both are very different. Morden is perhaps even different from South London, it’s a metroland area (unique to South of the river) with most of the housing from the 1920s and 1930s, due to being a tube commuter area the demographics have changed far quicker, Morden would probably fit more in Brent North and Ealing North than anywhere in South London. Carshalton as a whole area is still very outer london in character, very White British and perhaps more similar to Bromley or even Epsom and Ewell. So taking these things in account the sides of the estate reflect the demographics of the suburb they are in rather than one demographic for the whole area. Just think of an estate spanning Greenford and Chislehurst and the St Helier Estate is what you would come up with? The mind boggles. On the actual issue the 2 sides of the St Helier estate differ because council housing these days is restricted to homeless households, and the estate forms a high proportion of the council housing in both boroughs. People therefore get moved here from elsewhere by default, and inevitably reflect the demographics of poorer households in general in the boroughs concerned. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2021 12:26:08 GMT
How would London have voted in 2010 if it had its 1991 demographics?
|
|
|
|
Post by rivers10 on Oct 10, 2021 16:29:04 GMT
Mitcham and Morden would have probably had a smaller majority (maybe more between 6,000 and 10,000) and the tories may have carried St Helier and Ravensbury but the Mitcham wards demographically changed completely by that time. Was it really a classic marginal or a seat Labour never should have lost in the first place? Angela Rumbold probably had quite a lot personal vote, in the 1986 and 1990 local elections Labour were miles in ahead in the constituency vote. I also think that McDonagh has a decent amount of personal vote and if another Lab candidate is standing there in 2019 the margin is probably 28% rather then 36%. BTW, I find it really odd that St.Hillier on the Merton side is mostly BAME while in Sutton it is still largely WWC. Without meaning to derail this thread I highly doubt Siobhain McDonagh has a personal vote Personal votes for MP's are nearly always massively overhyped even for MP's that are nationally or regionally iconic. McDonagh on the other hand doesn't even make the cut as one of those well known MP's that often get spoken about like they might have a personal vote, I honestly reckon most of the Westminster bubble don't even know who she is let alone her constituents |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 10, 2021 16:39:21 GMT
I also think that McDonagh has a decent amount of personal vote and if another Lab candidate is standing there in 2019 the margin is probably 28% rather then 36%. BTW, I find it really odd that St.Hillier on the Merton side is mostly BAME while in Sutton it is still largely WWC. Without meaning to derail this thread I highly doubt Siobhain McDonagh has a personal vote Never been to Mitcham, obviously. |
|
|
|
Post by rivers10 on Oct 10, 2021 16:53:36 GMT
Without meaning to derail this thread I highly doubt Siobhain McDonagh has a personal vote Never been to Mitcham, obviously. Don't need to have personally visited a constituency to be able to tell when an MP has a noteworthy personal vote or not Sometimes an outisders perspective is what's needed, I've fell victim to it myself in the past on a local level, because I knew the incumbent and moved in similar circles I assumed person X was well known and liked based on my interactions only to be proven categorically wrong If an (ex) MP like Greg Mulholland can lose their seat after having a personal vote so huge that literally everyone in politics admired it and non politcally engaged people in other parts of Leeds knew about him and thought he was their MP then I'm not convinced a non entity like McDonagh (who's only claim to fame in the past decade is making a comment against anti semitism which itself turned out to be anti semitic) has anything of note in the way of a personal vote MP's personal votes are always hyped to absurd levels, I'd say in the present Parliament about 10 MP's have actual tangible personal votes and most of them are Lib Dems |
|
rcronald
Likud
Posts: 6,361
Member is Online
|
Post by rcronald on Oct 10, 2021 17:25:28 GMT
Never been to Mitcham, obviously. Don't need to have personally visited a constituency to be able to tell when an MP has a noteworthy personal vote or not Sometimes an outisders perspective is what's needed, I've fell victim to it myself in the past on a local level, because I knew the incumbent and moved in similar circles I assumed person X was well known and liked based on my interactions only to be proven categorically wrong If an (ex) MP like Greg Mulholland can lose their seat after having a personal vote so huge that literally everyone in politics admired it and non politcally engaged people in other parts of Leeds knew about him and thought he was their MP then I'm not convinced a non entity like McDonagh (who's only claim to fame in the past decade is making a comment against anti semitism which itself turned out to be anti semitic) has anything of note in the way of a personal vote MP's personal votes are always hyped to absurd levels, I'd say in the present Parliament about 10 MP's have actual tangible personal votes and most of them are Lib Dems Considering that even Chris Leslie got 4% as an independent, I think it is reasonable to assume she gets at least the same personal as him…. Until I moved a couple of mouths ago, My MP was Mike Freer (who is very low key on the national stage) and I can tell you with confidence that he has a decent personal vote for his solid work as a constituency MP and a moderate. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 10, 2021 17:33:24 GMT
Never been to Mitcham, obviously. Don't need to have personally visited a constituency to be able to tell when an MP has a noteworthy personal vote or not Sometimes an outisders perspective is what's needed, I've fell victim to it myself in the past on a local level, because I knew the incumbent and moved in similar circles I assumed person X was well known and liked based on my interactions only to be proven categorically wrong If an (ex) MP like Greg Mulholland can lose their seat after having a personal vote so huge that literally everyone in politics admired it and non politcally engaged people in other parts of Leeds knew about him and thought he was their MP then I'm not convinced a non entity like McDonagh (who's only claim to fame in the past decade is making a comment against anti semitism which itself turned out to be anti semitic) has anything of note in the way of a personal vote MP's personal votes are always hyped to absurd levels, I'd say in the present Parliament about 10 MP's have actual tangible personal votes and most of them are Lib Dems Some MPs and indeed councillors, do indeed have personal votes. Whether that personal vote is enough to hold or 'save' a constituency against national swing, difficult circumstances etc is another matter. They could have a considerable personal vote and still lose. I have also known councillors with 'anti personal votes'.
McDonagh worked the constituency tremendously hard after the loss via by-election and subsequent Tory capture. Have the demographics also changed in that time to Labour's advantage? Probably. Would we lose the seat tomorrow if she wasn't the candidate? Probably not. But that doesn't mean she doesn't have a personal vote.
|
|
|
|
Post by rivers10 on Oct 10, 2021 17:58:05 GMT
I am perhaps being a bit unfair but after 2015 when we had to endure so many guarantees that certain Lib Dems would hold their seats cos of a personal vote only for almost all of them to get totally slaughtered on election day I've been incredibly cynical of the effects of personal votes for MP's. Many of the Lib Dem MP's in question that we were assured had personal votes actually performed worse than average
Another thing we have to consider is whether a personal vote is causing a voter to flip politcal allegiance or its just cementing an existing one? What I mean by this is I have no doubt that some MP's have a local following but I'd hazard the vast majority of it consists of people who'd support that party anyway. So yes these people will always enthusiastically vote for party A so long as X is the candidate, they might even switch and vote for party B if X defected and became the candidate but I highly doubt they'd switch to party B when X retires and a new candidate is selected. So less of a personal vote and more of a local fan club who'd vote for you anyway
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 10, 2021 18:17:40 GMT
I am perhaps being a but unfair but after 2015 when we had to endure so many guarantees that certain Lib Dems would hold their seats cos of a personal vote only for almost all of them to get totally slaughtered on election day I've been incredibly cynical of the effects of personal votes for MP's. Many of the Lib Dem MP's in question that we were assured had personal votes actually performed worse than average Another thing we have to consider is whether a personal vote is causing a voter to flip politcal allegiance or its just cementing an existing one? What I mean by this is I have no doubt that some MP's have a local following but I'd hazard the vast majority of it consists of people who'd support that party anyway. So yes these people will always enthusiastically vote for party A so long as X is the candidate, they might even switch and vote for party B if X defected and became the candidate but I highly doubt they'd switch to party B when X retires and a new candidate is selected. So less of a personal vote and more of a local fan club who'd vote for you anyway Well I can't answer for the Lib Dems but I suspect that was a product of them for so long having so few MPs that the supposition was made that all of them must have some sort of personal vote to be able to hold on. Almost certainly not true.
When McDonagh became the candidate it was widely supposed that M&M was the sort of seat in London that Labour had lost forever, and that Merton borough would become another Wandsworth. She was on Merton council for sixteen years and has lived in the constituency all her life. If it has now become a Labour stronghold it is, at least in part, down to all the work she has put in.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,427
|
Post by iain on Oct 10, 2021 18:51:15 GMT
I am perhaps being a but unfair but after 2015 when we had to endure so many guarantees that certain Lib Dems would hold their seats cos of a personal vote only for almost all of them to get totally slaughtered on election day I've been incredibly cynical of the effects of personal votes for MP's. Many of the Lib Dem MP's in question that we were assured had personal votes actually performed worse than average Another thing we have to consider is whether a personal vote is causing a voter to flip politcal allegiance or its just cementing an existing one? What I mean by this is I have no doubt that some MP's have a local following but I'd hazard the vast majority of it consists of people who'd support that party anyway. So yes these people will always enthusiastically vote for party A so long as X is the candidate, they might even switch and vote for party B if X defected and became the candidate but I highly doubt they'd switch to party B when X retires and a new candidate is selected. So less of a personal vote and more of a local fan club who'd vote for you anyway Well I can't answer for the Lib Dems but I suspect that was a product of them for so long having so few MPs that the supposition was made that all of them must have some sort of personal vote to be able to hold on. Almost certainly not true.
When McDonagh became the candidate it was widely supposed that M&M was the sort of seat in London that Labour had lost forever, and that Merton borough would become another Wandsworth. She was on Merton council for sixteen years and has lived in the constituency all her life. If it has now become a Labour stronghold it is, at least in part, down to all the work she has put in.
TBF I think *most* of them did have personal votes (as evidenced by 2017 / the fact that 2015 was so much worse in seats where MPs stood down) - but a personal vote doesn’t mean you are invulnerable, particularly against that sort of tidal wave. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 10, 2021 18:54:51 GMT
Personal votes do exist, but a) they are conditional on circumstances and b) are as likely to be negative as positive. A really bad negative one, say, is often latent and only comes out when the party of the unpopular candidate is taking a battering. And to add to the confusion, this is expressed as often in terms of consolidation behind their primary opponent as in their own underperformance - though both do often run together.
|
|
