|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 10, 2021 19:04:52 GMT
Norman Lamb must have had a big personal vote in North Norfolk which of course did withstand the 2015 landslide. There are plenty of other examples of Liberal/Lib Dem MPs standing down and their vote more or less collapsing.
As far as Siobhan Macdonagh goes, she has been the MP for that area for the best part of quarter of a century now and had fought the seat in 1987 and 1992. I always thought it was some credit to her that she carried on fighting the same 'marginal' seat rather than moving on to a safe one - even though it became one, that was not obvious before 1997 and while the main driver of it moving that way is demographic change I'd be surprised if she didn't enjoy a high profile and some personal popularity in her constituency. She is quite a high profile figure in London more generally.
|
|
sirbenjamin
IFP
True fame is reading your name written in graffiti, but without the words 'is a wanker' after it.
Posts: 4,979 
|
Post by sirbenjamin on Oct 11, 2021 14:01:25 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 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
Oh she has a very substantial personal vote and is about as constituencyish as a constituency MP can ever be.
I mostly grew up in her seat and she was putting the hours in as a local campaigner years before even becoming the MP.
Just because she has a fairly low profile nationally despite 24 years in parliament doesn't mean that she isn't well-regarded in M&M. Indeed quite the opposite - she devotes all her time and effort into being a hardworking and active local MP.
And I say this as someone who considers her 'the enemy'.
|
|
stb12
Top Poster
Posts: 8,375
|
Post by stb12 on Oct 14, 2021 16:39:34 GMT
The 2019 election with all the MP's standing for another party or as independents showed the limits of a personal vote but that's the reality of a two party dominated system. Some did notably better or worse than others of course, David Gauke's run had a pretty impressive result then on the other hand you had Chris Leslie losing his deposit.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 14, 2021 17:26:58 GMT
The 2019 election with all the MP's standing for another party or as independents showed the limits of a personal vote but that's the reality of a two party dominated system. Some did notably better or worse than others of course, David Gauke's run had a pretty impressive result then on the other hand you had Chris Leslie losing his deposit. Because 2019 was in part an 'issue election' it was a very difficult one for independents and smaller parties generally, unless they were able to exploit that issue as a reason to vote for them, as Gauke was. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Oct 14, 2021 22:07:39 GMT
The 2019 election with all the MP's standing for another party or as independents showed the limits of a personal vote but that's the reality of a two party dominated system. Some did notably better or worse than others of course, David Gauke's run had a pretty impressive result then on the other hand you had Chris Leslie losing his deposit. Because 2019 was in part an 'issue election' it was a very difficult one for independents and smaller parties generally, unless they were able to exploit that issue as a reason to vote for them, as Gauke was. And even Gauke basically took over half his votes in 2019 from previous Labour voters jumping on what they saw as a better tactical bandwagon. He improved on the previous Labour candidate's performance by 0.3 percentage points. It was only a good showing in comparison to the utter electoral humiliation dished out to the likes of Leslie and Soubry up in Nottinghamshire. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Oct 15, 2021 22:10:39 GMT
How would London have voted in 2010 if it had its 1991 demographics? Hampstead and Kilburn would be surprisingly close. Still Labour though. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 16, 2021 4:09:00 GMT
How would London have voted in 2010 if it had its 1991 demographics? Hampstead and Kilburn would be surprisingly close. Still Labour though. Closer than it actually was but still Labour? In other words virtually the same result, so why would that have been surprising? Actually the demographic changes in Hampstead between 1991 and 2001 were a bit more nuanced than many parts of London and obviously nothing like the kind we have seen in the Ilford Norths and Enfield Norths. At that time the area was seen to be trending Conservative - the old Hampstead & Highgate would certainly have voted Conservative in 2010 and would be the only 1992 Labour seat to have done so (while there are numerous 1992 Conservative seats which voted Labour (or Lib Dem) in 2010) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2022 21:09:26 GMT
Hampstead and Kilburn would be surprisingly close. Still Labour though. Closer than it actually was but still Labour? In other words virtually the same result, so why would that have been surprising? Actually the demographic changes in Hampstead between 1991 and 2001 were a bit more nuanced than many parts of London and obviously nothing like the kind we have seen in the Ilford Norths and Enfield Norths. At that time the area was seen to be trending Conservative - the old Hampstead & Highgate would certainly have voted Conservative in 2010 and would be the only 1992 Labour seat to have done so (while there are numerous 1992 Conservative seats which voted Labour (or Lib Dem) in 2010) Would the Tories have held Hampstead & Highgate in 1992 if Geoffrey Finsberg hadn't stood down? |
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Feb 8, 2022 23:04:58 GMT
Closer than it actually was but still Labour? In other words virtually the same result, so why would that have been surprising? Actually the demographic changes in Hampstead between 1991 and 2001 were a bit more nuanced than many parts of London and obviously nothing like the kind we have seen in the Ilford Norths and Enfield Norths. At that time the area was seen to be trending Conservative - the old Hampstead & Highgate would certainly have voted Conservative in 2010 and would be the only 1992 Labour seat to have done so (while there are numerous 1992 Conservative seats which voted Labour (or Lib Dem) in 2010) Would the Tories have held Hampstead & Highgate in 1992 if Geoffrey Finsberg hadn't stood down? I highly doubt it due to tactical voting from Liberal Democrat voters. The same is true re: Hornsey & Wood Green, also gained by Labour in 1992 on the retirement of its Conservative MP (Sir Hugh Rossi). |
|
|
|
Post by jakegb on Feb 9, 2022 19:03:04 GMT
I would add Brentford and Isleworth (Tory until 2015).
And also Dagenham on 2001 demographics would have easily been captured by the Tories in 2019.
Undoubtedly, demographic change has largely benefitted Labour in London, with more spoils perhaps to come e.g. Chipping Barnet and Chingford + Woodford Green.
Yet, the respectable Tory showing in the London mayoral/assembly election showed that the Tories are not a lost cause, especially in the western constituencies of Brent/Harrow + Ealing/Hillingdon (which, by in large, are very diverse).
Yes the turnout was low; yes the issues were different. But I feel the Tories are not completely out of the race in London.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Feb 9, 2022 19:14:24 GMT
Closer than it actually was but still Labour? In other words virtually the same result, so why would that have been surprising? Actually the demographic changes in Hampstead between 1991 and 2001 were a bit more nuanced than many parts of London and obviously nothing like the kind we have seen in the Ilford Norths and Enfield Norths. At that time the area was seen to be trending Conservative - the old Hampstead & Highgate would certainly have voted Conservative in 2010 and would be the only 1992 Labour seat to have done so (while there are numerous 1992 Conservative seats which voted Labour (or Lib Dem) in 2010) Would the Tories have held Hampstead & Highgate in 1992 if Geoffrey Finsberg hadn't stood down? I think I agree with greenhert (whether you want to view it as LD tactical voters, or Labour voters returning home after dallying with the Alliance). There weren;t an awful lot of Tory-Labour switchers there and the Conservative vote was pretty stable in the 30 years from the early 60s to the early 90s (though gradually trending downwards). The Conservative share barely fell in 1992 and it was the large numbers of switchers from the SDP which swung it. I guess he may have got a few more votes, but probably not enough. |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Feb 15, 2022 9:24:36 GMT
I would add Brentford and Isleworth (Tory until 2015). And also Dagenham on 2001 demographics would have easily been captured by the Tories in 2019. Undoubtedly, demographic change has largely benefitted Labour in London, with more spoils perhaps to come e.g. Chipping Barnet and Chingford + Woodford Green. Yet, the respectable Tory showing in the London mayoral/assembly election showed that the Tories are not a lost cause, especially in the western constituencies of Brent/Harrow + Ealing/Hillingdon (which, by in large, are very diverse). Yes the turnout was low; yes the issues were different. But I feel the Tories are not completely out of the race in London. I’m not so sure Brentford would have flipped, I can see us winning Brent North & Feltham when we come back to power in the future (definitely gaining Dagenham). I would also add that Chingford is way to close to Nouveau riche towns in Epping Forest like Chigwell & Loughton to become a safe Labour constituency. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Feb 15, 2022 12:44:07 GMT
Off topic Seats the Tories lost in 1992 where the drop in their share of the vote was sufficient to cause the loss assuming it went to the main opposition party: 1. Barrow & Furness 2. Bath 3. B'ham Yardley 4. Bristol E 5. Cardiff C 6. Cheltenham 7. Cornwall N 8. Darlington 9. Devon N 10.Dulwich 11.Hornsey & Wood Green 12.Ipswich 13.Kingswood 14.Nottingham E 15.Nottingham S 16.Streatham 17.Wallasey 18.Wolv' NE 19.York About half as many as actually transpired, then. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2022 7:19:44 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. Would the Tories have won Barking in 2019 if it had its 2001 demographics? |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Feb 24, 2022 11:36:46 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. Would the Tories have won Barking in 2019 if it had its 2001 demographics? probably Labour by 10% (but not sure) |
|
