|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Mar 4, 2022 1:07:53 GMT
Birmingham Erdington, by-election result:
LAB: 55.5% (+5.2)
CON: 36.3% (-3.8)
TUSC: 2.1% (+2.1)
REFUK: 1.7% (-2.4)
GRN: 1.4% (-0.4)
LDEM: 1.0% (-2.7)
IND LUT: 0.6% (+0.6)
CPA: 0.5% (+0.5)
IND O'R: 0.4% (+0.4)
MRLP: 0.3% (+0.3)
IND HOLM: 0.1% (+0.1)
MBPE: 0.0% (+0.0)
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 4, 2022 1:09:00 GMT
Swing 4.5% to Labour
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Mar 4, 2022 1:09:03 GMT
Ouch. When did the Lib Dems last come 6th?
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Mar 4, 2022 1:09:28 GMT
In percentage terms this gives:
Labour 55.5%
Conservative 36.3%
TUSC 2.1%
Reform UK 1.7%
Green 1.4%
Liberal Democrats 1.0%
Independent (Lutwyche) 0.6%
CPA 0.5%
Independent (O'Rourke) 0.4%
OMRLP 0.3%
Independent (Holmes) 0.1%
Bus Pass Elvis 0.05%.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Mar 4, 2022 1:10:35 GMT
Ouch. When did the Lib Dems last come 6th? They finished 7th (even worse) in the Hartlepool by-election just last year. |
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765 
|
Post by clyde1998 on Mar 4, 2022 1:12:30 GMT
No significant change since the general election, but a swing of 4.5% to Labour - with the low turnout, I can't be sure how much we should draw from this result.
| Votes | Share | Change | | Lab | 9,413 | 55.5% | +5.2% | | Con | 6,147 | 36.3% | -3.8% | | TUSC | 360 | 2.1% | * | | RUK | 293 | 1.7% | -2.4% | | Grn | 236 | 1.4% | -0.4% | | LDm | 173 | 1.0% | -2.7% | | Lutwyche | 109 | 0.6% | * | | CPA | 79 | 0.5% | * | | O'Rourke | 76 | 0.4% | * | | OMRLP | 49 | 0.3% | * | | Holmes | 14 | 0.1% | * | | Elvis | 8 | 0.0% | * |
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 4, 2022 1:13:00 GMT
That's the first time Dave Nellist has come third in a Westminster election since 1992. It's also his lowest ever vote share in any election he has contested.
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Mar 4, 2022 1:17:02 GMT
That's the first time Dave Nellist has come third in a Westminster election since 1992. It's also his lowest ever vote share in any election he has contested. There's an interesting pattern in the vote shares among the various party descriptions he's used. In local elections, he performed best as a Socialist Alternative candidate and there's been a noticeable drop off in his vote shares since becoming a TUSC candidate. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Mar 4, 2022 1:17:07 GMT
2019 Lab majority 3601
2022 Lab majority 3266
so almost no change on that particular measure
|
|
|
|
Post by timrollpickering on Mar 4, 2022 1:18:15 GMT
That's the first time Dave Nellist has come third in a Westminster election since 1992. It's also his lowest ever vote share in any election he has contested. TUSC - At Least One Step Back for every One Step Forward. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Mar 4, 2022 1:18:59 GMT
2019 Lab majority 3601 2022 Lab majority 3266 so almost no change on that particular measure After that, we now return you to serious discussion about the byelection result. Given the total number of voters in the byelection was lower than the votes for the winner in 2019, you don't look at raw votes, you look at percentages. I think it's worth noting this was a 63% leave voting constituency. |
|
|
|
Post by elinorhelyn on Mar 4, 2022 1:19:02 GMT
2019 Lab majority 3601 2022 Lab majority 3266 so almost no change on that particular measure if you replicate the swing on GE turnout the majority would be much bigger than 3000 |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Mar 4, 2022 1:23:18 GMT
I wonder when was the last time that half of the total number of candidates standing attained <1% of the votes cast.
[If the LD candidate had gained 4 fewer votes it would have been 7 of the 12.]
Also Rejected Ballots beat 3 of the candidates.
|
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Mar 4, 2022 1:24:25 GMT
2019 Lab majority 3601 2022 Lab majority 3266 so almost no change on that particular measure After that, we now return you to serious discussion about the byelection result. Given the total number of voters in the byelection was lower than the votes for the winner in 2019, you don't look at raw votes, you look at percentages. I think it's worth noting this was a 63% leave voting constituency. It's just a stat. I never implied it had any significance. |
|
|
|
Post by independentukip on Mar 4, 2022 1:26:18 GMT
Indeed. The 1st sentence doesn't automatically lead to the 2nd and with deposit loss well on the cards it seems like another fake journalist wants to get a bit of attention. Why is she a “fake journalist”, and if so shouldn’t you do your civic duty and ring West Midlands Police and have her removed from the count? Back in the old world Journalists had something to do with news. The first sentence in her tweet is news. The second sentence is opinion. Back in the old world Editors had something to do with opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Mar 4, 2022 1:27:59 GMT
That's the first time Dave Nellist has come third in a Westminster election since 1992. It's also his lowest ever vote share in any election he has contested. There's an interesting pattern in the vote shares among the various party descriptions he's used. In local elections, he performed best as a Socialist Alternative candidate and there's been a noticeable drop off in his vote shares since becoming a TUSC candidate. He didn't start using TUSC until after he had lost his council seat, which is a much more important factor. Though it is odd that the one election since then when he went back to Socialist Alternative was the only one where he actually gained ground. |
|
|
|
Post by elinorhelyn on Mar 4, 2022 1:28:14 GMT
there has been a noticeable trend in all the by-elections of this parliament in how effectively Labour and the LDs can squeeze one another's vote in seats where one or the other is most likely to win.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
|
Post by Sibboleth on Mar 4, 2022 1:30:32 GMT
There's a tendency for properly low turnouts here to be Bad News for Labour for various structural reasons and I suppose some of the expectation management seen in the evening might have reflected genuine (unnecessary) jitters relating to that rather than pure cynicism. Anyway. Not much of significance to note given the comedy turnout.
|
|
ricmk
Lib Dem
Posts: 2,615
|
Post by ricmk on Mar 4, 2022 1:32:20 GMT
Decent result for Labour I thought, Tories not a total disaster, yet again third and down get smashed in by-elections (George Galloway in Batley and Spen the only exception i can think of). But the minor parties like Reform struggling to get noticed.
Doubt Lib Dems will care much, I’m not aware of any real effort or spend going on and still dining out on North Shropshire.
I thought the Tories leaking that video late told a story (and I didn’t think what she said 7 years ago was anything much anyway) if they thought it was tight they‘d have run it loud and early. Running it late it seemed more about making her less credible once elected.
Finally, if I was Gary Sambrook I would be thinking long and hard tonight if I really thought I could hold my seat under Boris Johnson.
|
|
|
|
Post by independentukip on Mar 4, 2022 1:45:34 GMT
Indeed. The 1st sentence doesn't automatically lead to the 2nd and with deposit loss well on the cards it seems like another fake journalist wants to get a bit of attention. Why is she a “fake journalist”, and if so shouldn’t you do your civic duty and ring West Midlands Police and have her removed from the count? This lady has as much credibility as the Labour Liar who said the weather was terrible and the vote was close. The difference is we know who this person is but not the Labour Liar. The media and journalists lie all day and every day so she should fit in very well with her London colleagues. |
|
