|
|
Post by Delighted Of Tunbridge Wells on Dec 7, 2021 18:38:15 GMT
Palpable sense the Tories are worried about Old Bracknell, Labour needs a 5.2% swing to win. Someone I know was heavily involved in the Priestwood and Garth campaign last time, says they were poised to win the 2nd seat, but resources were diverted to shore up Cllr Temperton in Great Hollands and try and get right wing Bracknell CLP chair Roy Bailey elected in Old Bracknell. Paul is on Bracknell's left as I recall. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2021 20:26:18 GMT
I think it's a decent enough measurement of how excited/disappointed a local activist from a given party will be at the result on Friday morning. I also find it useful for encouraging me to re-examine my gut reaction to a week's result - a couple of weeks ago I thought initially that we'd had a disaster because of Newcastle and Nuneaton until the numbers from the other results made me realise that it had merely been a mediocre week. Where I'd say it loses out is on giving exact numbers at every stage as opposed to bands or broad categories (e.g. 100-150; -350+; fairly good; terrible etc.) - I'm not sure it adds much but I think trying to be too precise costs some credibility because I'm not sure it's possible to measure that precisely |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Dec 7, 2021 20:36:05 GMT
I think it's inherently subjective and so you can't really measure it (and that's even before you consider the hordes of people who are incredibly interested in by-elections that confirm their priors and not at all in ones that don't.) It's never going to be a crucial or precise thing, but I think it has value as a vague yardstick for testing assumptions, as you say.
|
|
|
|
Post by redvers on Dec 7, 2021 21:16:02 GMT
How did you arrive at the figures for Old Bracknell? Don't look right to me... Yes, as @europeanlefty suggests, Labour have a lower index because of the low overall strength on the council - but higher than the LibDems because of past voting patterns in the ward. None of the scores, even the Cons, are particularly high because of the big Con majority. Does that make sense? Or am I missing what you're driving at? My post was confusion rather than criticism, thank you for clarifying. If you have time, could you explain your methodology as to how exactly you arrive at these figures...unless you can direct me to a post where you explained this already. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on Dec 7, 2021 21:20:52 GMT
Yes, as @europeanlefty suggests, Labour have a lower index because of the low overall strength on the council - but higher than the LibDems because of past voting patterns in the ward. None of the scores, even the Cons, are particularly high because of the big Con majority. Does that make sense? Or am I missing what you're driving at? My post was confusion rather than criticism, thank you for clarifying. If you have time, could you explain your methodology as to how exactly you arrive at these figures...unless you can direct me to a post where you explained this already. This is my initial post on this: vote-2012.proboards.com/post/1178894/thread; there are a few back and forth comments below it. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Dec 8, 2021 12:27:29 GMT
How did you arrive at the figures for Old Bracknell? Don't look right to me... Yes, as @europeanlefty suggests, Labour have a lower index because of the low overall strength on the council - but higher than the LibDems because of past voting patterns in the ward. None of the scores, even the Cons, are particularly high because of the big Con majority. Does that make sense? Or am I missing what you're driving at? I think your Lib Dem score in Anston and Woodsetts is too low. Second last time and have won a couple of by-elections on the SW side of Rotherham lately with help from the Sheffield Lib Dems. On the other hand it does not matter much for Labour in Rotherham if the opposition win seats off each other. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on Dec 8, 2021 15:01:39 GMT
I think your Lib Dem score in Anston and Woodsetts is too low. Second last time and have won a couple of by-elections on the SW side of Rotherham lately with help from the Sheffield Lib Dems. On the other hand it does not matter much for Labour in Rotherham if the opposition win seats off each other. Those are interesting points, but I think that, in the way they are framed, more applicable to a predictive model. Coming second last time (well, fourth if I wand to be pedantic  is included in the model, but how you measure the impact is dependent on what method you use to calculate the party vote (top gives very different to average, etc.), and is also discounted becuase of the wide range of votes for LibDem candidates. By-election wins is interesting. I don't include that in my model, other than indirectly - the number of seats the LibDems have at present is part of the model, and is of course very low compared to Lab and Con. Although I think it might be more of a pointer to how parties perform, rather than how they should rate the importance of a contest, It might be something worth considering, although I wonder how often it would come into play. Thank you for that idea. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on Dec 8, 2021 15:10:48 GMT
I think it's a decent enough measurement of how excited/disappointed a local activist from a given party will be at the result on Friday morning. I also find it useful for encouraging me to re-examine my gut reaction to a week's result - a couple of weeks ago I thought initially that we'd had a disaster because of Newcastle and Nuneaton until the numbers from the other results made me realise that it had merely been a mediocre week. Where I'd say it loses out is on giving exact numbers at every stage as opposed to bands or broad categories (e.g. 100-150; -350+; fairly good; terrible etc.) - I'm not sure it adds much but I think trying to be too precise costs some credibility because I'm not sure it's possible to measure that precisely On the first: thanks, that was part of the aim too! On the second: yes, the exact numbers could be interpreted as some exact measure, rather than a guide; but then again, if I just posted descriptive categories, it would be easy to dismiss it as just another subjective set of ratings. The model is unlikely to be perfect, but it is a first draft of an objective look at the situation. What I am hoping to do (and did after posting my result from version 1.0), is to get a big enough data set that I can see what the bands would be. Once my current play is over, and we're into the drought of by-elections in the run up to next May, I shall add by-elections further back than September (my current starting point) into my model, and that should get me enough data to do just that. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyhill on Dec 8, 2021 19:14:41 GMT
I think that what you are trying to do is interesting, but although you say that it is not a predictive model I don't quite understand how its value can be tested other than by comparing the advance figures with the outcome. So taking your figures for tomorrow's by elections, the Importance Index means that the outcome overall is twice as important for the Conservatives as it is for Labour. My model, which is predictive, has the Conservatives facing a wipeout. Even if that does not quite happen they are still going to have a bad set of results, but how bad they will be seems to be more easily determined by the drop in their vote from the previous election than by comparing your Indices. I do accept, though, that I am, like most psephologists, fixated on electoral statistics as a way of understanding the current and future political landscape, and that perhaps what you are attempting not exactly part of that mindset.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil156 on Dec 8, 2021 19:46:16 GMT
COUNTING For these wards
THURSDAY NIGHT - Bracknell Forest- Old Bracknell Ward
Rotherham - Anston & Woodsetts Ward & Aughton & Swallownest Ward
FRIDAY
TONBRIDGE & MALLING - ALL WARDS
TORRIDGE - Northam Ward
|
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Dec 9, 2021 11:31:09 GMT
|
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,619 
|
Post by ricmk on Dec 9, 2021 11:42:54 GMT
COUNTING For these wards THURSDAY NIGHT - Bracknell Forest- Old Bracknell Ward Rotherham - Anston & Woodsetts Ward & Aughton & Swallownest Ward FRIDAY TONBRIDGE & MALLING - ALL WARDS TORRIDGE - Northam Ward Just a little thing but can I say how much I appreciate your weekly posts on these. Very useful to set the expectations for each Thursday night. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Dec 9, 2021 23:01:34 GMT
There’s a likelihood that the Conservatives will lose most of their 6 defences tonight, there’s a possibility that they might lose them all.
|
|
|
|
Post by redvers on Dec 9, 2021 23:02:31 GMT
Old Bracknell result:
Labour - 434 (61.13%)
Conservatives - 276 (38.87%)
Swing from Con to Lab - 16.25%
Labour gain
17% turnout
|
|
peterl
Green
Congratulations President Trump
Posts: 8,473
|
Post by peterl on Dec 9, 2021 23:03:32 GMT
Old Bracknell result: Labour - 434 (61.13%) Conservatives - (38.87%) Swing from Con to Lab - 16.25% Labour gain Do you have the number of votes for the Tories? |
|
|
|
Post by redvers on Dec 9, 2021 23:04:35 GMT
Old Bracknell result: Labour - 434 (61.13%) Conservatives - (38.87%) Swing from Con to Lab - 16.25% Labour gain Do you have the number of votes for the Tories? Sorry, typo. Added in. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Dec 9, 2021 23:10:07 GMT
There’s a likelihood that the Conservatives will lose most of their 6 defences tonight, there’s a possibility that they might lose them all. I was sorely tempted to predict in the competition that they lost all 6, but gained Northam... As it is I think I've been far too generous to them in my predictions... |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Dec 9, 2021 23:11:34 GMT
There’s a likelihood that the Conservatives will lose most of their 6 defences tonight, there’s a possibility that they might lose them all. I was sorely tempted to predict in the competition that they lost all 6, but gained Northam... As it is I think I've been far too generous to them in my predictions... Yes I think they might hold one of the Tonbridge ones but it wouldn’t surprise me if they lost them all. Losing them all and gaining Northam is Defitnely feasible. I think most of them would have been lost even without this weeks events. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Dec 9, 2021 23:14:05 GMT
I was sorely tempted to predict in the competition that they lost all 6, but gained Northam... As it is I think I've been far too generous to them in my predictions... Yes I think they might hold one of the Tonbridge ones but it wouldn’t surprise me if they lost them all. Losing them all and gaining Northam is Defitnely feasible. Kings Hill is perhaps the most likely hold for them - the independent is an 18 years old who's just left school, so not convinced of his chances. Of course, the Lib Dems might still take that one... |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Dec 9, 2021 23:15:45 GMT
Yes I think they might hold one of the Tonbridge ones but it wouldn’t surprise me if they lost them all. Losing them all and gaining Northam is Defitnely feasible. Kings Hill is perhaps the most likely hold for them - the independent is an 18 years old who's just left school, so not convinced of his chances. Of course, the Lib Dems might still take that one... Agreed. That’s the one I think they might hold. |
|
is included in the model, but how you measure the impact is dependent on what method you use to calculate the party vote (top gives very different to average, etc.), and is also discounted becuase of the wide range of votes for LibDem candidates.
