Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 30, 2022 13:37:03 GMT
Redman 32.7
SNP 29.1
LD 14.7
Con 10.7
Grn 9.7
Lab 3.0
|
|
|
|
Post by batman on Sept 30, 2022 13:45:37 GMT
The 1992 version of Kingswood was a very different animal and on those boundaries it would probably be a Labour seat now, conversely Kingswood on current boundaries would have been Tory in 1992 Cheers. What's the closest successor to Pembroke? Preseli Pembrokeshire bears a closer resemblance (although significantly smaller) to the former Pembroke than does W Carmarthen & S Pembrokeshire, which was effectively a completely new constituency when formed in 1997. It's interesting that when those 2 seats were formed, the latter was slightly stronger for Labour & weaker for the Tories, but since 2017 the opposite has been the case. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 30, 2022 13:51:21 GMT
Redman 32.7 SNP 29.1 LD 14.7 Con 10.7 Grn 9.7 Lab 3.0 Compared to May: Redman +16.3 SNP -0.8 LD -1.7 Con +1.1 Grn from nowhere +9.7 Lab -1.2 No McAlpine (23.5%) |
|
|
|
Post by middleenglander on Sept 30, 2022 14:04:13 GMT
Argyll & Bute: Kintyre & The Islands - Independent win therefore retaining seat based on first preference votes| Party | 2022 B votes | 2022 B share | since 2022 | since 2017 | since 2012 | | Independent Redman * | 591 | 32.7% | +16.3% | from nowhere | from nowhere | | SNP | 525 | 29.1% | -0.8% | -0.3% | +5.6% | | Liberal Democrat | 265 | 14.7% | -1.7% | -7.7% | -6.1% | | Conservative | 194 | 10.7% | +1.2% | -12.4% | -10.5% | | Green | 176 | 9.7% | from nowhere | +5.0% | +6.9% | | Labour | 55 | 3.0% | -1.2% | -2.7% | -5.6% | | Independent McAlpine |
|
| -23.5% | -14.7% | -22.4% | | Independent Mcfarlane |
|
|
|
| -0.7% | | Total votes | 1,806 |
| 63% | 65% | 69% |
* stood as Conservative in 2017 (elected) and 2012 (not elected) Swing: not meaningful Council now: 12 SNP, 10 Conservative, 7 Independent, 5 Liberal Democrat, 1 Labour, 1 Green Harborough: Market Harborough Logan - Liberal Democrat hold | Party | 2022 votes | 2022 share | since 2019 "top" | since 2019 "average" | | Liberal Democrat | 582 | 45.7% | +10.3% | +12.5% | | Conservative | 382 | 30.0% | +3.2% | +2.3% | | Labour | 250 | 19.6% | +10.6% | +10.3% | | Independent | 60 | 4.7% | -6.3% | -6.7% | | Green |
|
| -17.8% | -18.3% | | Total votes | 1,274 |
| 58% | 60% |
Swing: Conservative to Liberal Democrat 3½% / 5% since 2019 Council now: 22 Conservative, 11 Liberal Democrat, 1 Labour Newark & Sherwood: Edwinstone & Clipstone - Labour gain from Conservative| Party | 2022 votes | 2022 share | since 2019 "top" | since 2019 "average" | since 2015 "top" | since 2015 "average" | | Labour | 804 | 59.8% | +10.0% | +10.2% | +11.6% | +9.4% | | Conservative | 540 | 40.2% | -10.0% | -10.2% | +5.3% | +6.0% | | Independent |
|
|
|
| -16.9% | -15.4% | | Total votes | 1,344 |
| 68% | 70% | 28% | 30% |
Swing: Conservative to Labour 10% / 10¼% since 2019 and 3¼% / 1¾% since 2015
Council now: 29 Conservative, 7 Labour, 2 Liberal Democrat, 1 Independent Oxford: Hinksey Park - Labour hold | Party | 2022 B votes | 2022 B share | since 2022 | since 2021 "top" | since 2021 "average" | | Labour | 801 | 51.3% | -10.6% | -4.7% | -4.7% | | Green | 305 | 19.5% | -0.9% | +5.9% | +7.0% | | Independent | 270 | 17.3% | from nowhere | +3.2% | +1.4% | | Liberal Democrat | 118 | 7.6% | -4.1% | -3.2% | -1.9% | | Conservative | 60 | 3.8% | -2.2% | -1.8% | -2.4% | | TUSC | 8 | 0.5% | from nowhere | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Total votes | 1,562 |
| 86% | 69% | 77% |
Swing: Labour to Green 4¾% since May and 5¼% / 5¾% since 2021 Council now: 32 Labour, 9 Liberal Democrat, 6 Green, 1 Independent Rhondda Cynon Taf: Ynysybwl - Plaid Cymru hold | Party | 2022 B votes | 2022 B share | since 2022 "top" | since 2022 "average" | | Plaid Cymru | 435 | 59.0% | +6.7% | +6.8% | | Labour | 246 | 33.4% | +0.8% | +0.4% | | Conservative | 34 | 4.6% | -1.2% | -1.4% | | Welsh Independence | 14 | 1.9% | -7.4% | -6.9% | | Green | 8 | 1.1% | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Total votes | 737 |
| 61% | 64% |
Swing: Labour to Plaid Cymru 3% /3¼% since May Council now: 59 Labour, 8 Plaid Cymru, 6 Independent, 2 Conservative
Rossendale: Facit & Shawforth - Conservative hold | Party | 2022 votes | 2022 share | since 2021 | since 2019 | since 2016 | Conservative
| 337 | 43.5% | +12.2% | -11.6% | +9.2% | | Independent | 214 | 27.6% | from nowhere | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Labour | 203 | 26.2% | +0.5% | -18.6% | -16.8% | | Green | 20 | 2.6% | from nowhere | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Independent Whitehead |
|
| -42.9% |
|
| | UKIP |
|
|
|
| -22.6% | | Total votes | 774 |
| 78% | 100% | Row 8 column 6 |
Swing: not particularly meaningful Council now: 19 Labour, 11 Conservative, 3 Independent, 2 Community First, 1 Green Rossendale: Helmshore - Conservative hold | Party | 2022 B votes | 2022 B share | since 2022 | since 2021 | since 2019 | since 2018 | | Conservative | 736 | 50.6% | +4.0% | -1.2% | -11.3% | -6.0% | | Labour | 540 | 37.1% | +0.5% | +4.9% | -1.0% | -6.3% | | Green | 74 | 5.1% | -6.4% | from nowhere | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Liberal Democrat | 62 | 4.3% | from nowhere | from nowhere | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Independent Stansfield | 42 | 2.9% | -2.4% | -13.1% | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Total votes | 1,454 |
| 76% | 70% | 81% | 69% |
Swing: Labour to Conservative 1¾% since May and small since 2018 but Conservative to Labour 3% since 2021 and 5¼% since 2019 Council now: 19 Labour, 11 Conservative, 3 Independent, 2 Community First, 1 Green Warrington: Grappenhall - 2 Liberal Democrat Holds | Party | 2022 votes | 2022 votes
average | 2022 share
average | since 2021 "top" | since 2021 "average" | since 2016 "top" | since 2016 "average" | | Liberal Democrat | 1,073 & 1,047 | 1,060 | 56.4% | +9.4% | +8.5% | -1.7% | -1.8% | | Conservative | 524 & 462 | 493 | 26.2% | -10.8% | -8.2% | +1.1% | +2.6% | | Labour | 193 | 193 | 10.3% | +1.1% | +0.1% | -6.6% | -8.0% | | Green | 135 | 135 | 7.2% | +0.4% | -0.4% | from nowhere | from nowhere | | Total votes | 1,925 & 1,509 | 1,881 |
| 66% | 72% | 84% | 90% |
Swing: Conservative to Liberal Democrat 10% / 8½% since 2021 but Liberal Democrat to Conservative 1½% / 2¼% since 2016 Council now: 37 Labour, 10 Conservative, 8 Liberal Democrat, 3 Independent
|
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Sept 30, 2022 14:08:15 GMT
Redman 591 SNP 525 LD 265 Con 194 Grn 176 Lab 55 Website gives only 1st prefs. at present, plus statement that candidate was elected at "stage 6", which is not logically possible. Still using faulty software, it seems. |
|
listener
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,247
Member is Online
|
Post by listener on Sept 30, 2022 14:22:20 GMT
Under STV, the Returning Officer is not able to declare someone elected, until they have reached the electoral quota. The electoral quota is 904, being 50% of the valid votes cast plus 1.
I have not yet seen the detailed voting at each stage. If at the end of stage 5, with only Redman and SNP left in the race, Redman had still not reached the electoral quota, because of a large number of non-transferable votes, then the Returning Officer is required to proceed to stage 6, eliminating SNP and recording his votes either for Redman or as non-transferable.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on Sept 30, 2022 14:38:11 GMT
GWBWI
LDm +172
Lab +72
PC +51
Con +13
Grn -2
SNP -18
ASV
LDm +2.2
Lab +1.2
PC +0.9
Con +0.2
Grn -0.0
SNP -0.3
|
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Sept 30, 2022 14:43:39 GMT
Under STV, the Returning Officer is not able to declare someone elected, until they have reached the electoral quota. The electoral quota is 904, being 50% of the valid votes cast plus 1. I have not yet seen the detailed voting at each stage. If at the end of stage 5, with only Redman and SNP left in the race, Redman had still not reached the electoral quota, because of a large number of non-transferable votes, then the Returning Officer is required to proceed to stage 6, eliminating SNP and recording his votes either for Redman or as non-transferable. Not true. Rule 53 makes it clear that where the number of remaining candidates equals the number of vacancies still to be filled, then the count is over, irrespective of whether remaining candidates have reached the quota. Indeed, the Rule is specifically designed to deal with the eventuality where they have not. But eCounting completely ignores Rule 53. Transferring runner-ups next preferences is logical nonsense. What would happen if Redman still had not reached the quota after "stage 6"? |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 30, 2022 14:55:50 GMT
Under STV, the Returning Officer is not able to declare someone elected, until they have reached the electoral quota. The electoral quota is 904, being 50% of the valid votes cast plus 1. I have not yet seen the detailed voting at each stage. If at the end of stage 5, with only Redman and SNP left in the race, Redman had still not reached the electoral quota, because of a large number of non-transferable votes, then the Returning Officer is required to proceed to stage 6, eliminating SNP and recording his votes either for Redman or as non-transferable. Not true. Rule 53 makes it clear that where the number of remaining candidates equals the number of vacancies still to be filled, then the count is over, irrespective of whether remaining candidates have reached the quota. Indeed, the Rule is specifically designed to deal with the eventuality where they have not. But eCounting completely ignores Rule 53. Transferring runner-ups next preferences is logical nonsense. What would happen if Redman still had not reached the quota after "stage 6"? You answer your own question here - at stage 5, the number of remaining candidates is 2 with 1 seat to be filled, so the runner-up needs to be eliminated at stage 6 at which point the remaining candidate is elected whether or not quota has been reached - it may be a logically unnecessary step, but is consistent with rules as written. |
|
|
|
Post by La Fontaine on Sept 30, 2022 15:17:02 GMT
Not true. Rule 53 makes it clear that where the number of remaining candidates equals the number of vacancies still to be filled, then the count is over, irrespective of whether remaining candidates have reached the quota. Indeed, the Rule is specifically designed to deal with the eventuality where they have not. But eCounting completely ignores Rule 53. Transferring runner-ups next preferences is logical nonsense. What would happen if Redman still had not reached the quota after "stage 6"? You answer your own question here - at stage 5, the number of remaining candidates is 2 with 1 seat to be filled, so the runner-up needs to be eliminated at stage 6 at which point the remaining candidate is elected whether or not quota has been reached - it may be a logically unnecessary step, but is consistent with rules as written. At stage the number of remaining candidates is one. |
|
|
|
Post by rockefeller on Sept 30, 2022 15:23:42 GMT
Redman 591 SNP 525 LD 265 Con 194 Grn 176 Lab 55 Wasn't Redman the Tories' 2015 Argyll & Bute candidate? |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 30, 2022 15:29:21 GMT
You answer your own question here - at stage 5, the number of remaining candidates is 2 with 1 seat to be filled, so the runner-up needs to be eliminated at stage 6 at which point the remaining candidate is elected whether or not quota has been reached - it may be a logically unnecessary step, but is consistent with rules as written. At stage the number of remaining candidates is one. No - it isn't: Stage 1 - 1st preferences Stage 2 - elimination of Labour and redistribution to 5 remaining candidates Stage 3 - elimination of Green and redistribution to 4 remaining candidates Stage 4 - elimination of Con and redistribution to 3 remaining candidates Stage 5 - elimination of LD and redistribution to 2 remaining candidates. |
|
|
|
Post by lackeroftalent on Sept 30, 2022 16:55:09 GMT
Argyll & Bute: Kintyre & The Islands | Party | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | Stage 3 | Stage 4 | Stage 5 | Stage 6 | | Ind Redman | 591 | 597 | 618 | 701 | 826 | 1029 | | SNP | 525 | 536 | 623 | 626 | 694 | eliminated | | Lib Dems | 265 | 283 | 313 | 375 | eliminated |
| | Con | 194 | 200 | 207 | eliminated |
| | | Green | 176 | 179 | eliminated |
| | | | Labour | 55 | eliminated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Sept 30, 2022 16:58:45 GMT
First preferences: Redman 591 SNP 525 LD 265 C 194 Grn 176 Lab 55
After Lab eliminated: Redman 597 SNP 536 LD 283 C 200 Grn 179
After Grn eliminated: SNP 623 Redman 618 LD 313 C 207
After LD and C eliminated: Redman 826 SNP 694
If these votes had been cast in an ordinary three-seat election, the seats would have gone to Redman, the SNP and the Lib Dems.
|
|
|
|
Post by spirit on Sept 30, 2022 17:30:42 GMT
Oxford. Hinksey Park Lab 801 Green 305 Ind 270 LD 118 Con 60 TUSC 8 Quite an achievement by Tusc as they’d have needed ten signatories on the nomination paper. Though I am aware it happens more often than you may expect. Whereas the same number of votes for the Greens in Ynysybwl doesn't trigger the same considerations. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,306 
|
Post by maxque on Sept 30, 2022 17:41:58 GMT
Quite an achievement by Tusc as they’d have needed ten signatories on the nomination paper. Though I am aware it happens more often than you may expect. Whereas the same number of votes for the Greens in Ynysybwl doesn't trigger the same considerations. There is no signature requirement in Wales anymore. |
|
listener
Non-Aligned
Posts: 2,247
Member is Online
|
Post by listener on Sept 30, 2022 18:10:13 GMT
If I understand the table supplied above by lackeroftalent, Redman and MacQuarie (SNP) made it through to Stage 5, but neither had achieved the electoral quota of 904.
Redman had 826, MacQuarie had 694 and there were 286 non-transferable votes.
So MacQuarie was eliminated and at stage 6, his votes were redistributed 203 to Redman and 491 non-transferable.
So at stage 6, Redman reached 1,029 votes and achieved the electoral quota.
|
|
graham
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,345
|
Post by graham on Sept 30, 2022 18:20:08 GMT
The 1992 version of Kingswood was a very different animal and on those boundaries it would probably be a Labour seat now, conversely Kingswood on current boundaries would have been Tory in 1992 It was; we were a Tory target seat in 1992 (to the extent of them having a full time worker in the constituency) and got some helpful publicity when Kingswood’s Conservative incumbent wrote to George asking if he would be his Pair in the new Parliament. IIRC Roger Berry had a 5% swing to gain the seat by 2000-ish, but it was recorded by the BBC as a Labour win in 97 so presumably the boundary changes made it notionally Conservative. By Pembroke I assume you mean Pembrokeshire as there hasn’t been a Pembroke since 1885, if so it was split between the current Preseli Pembrokeshire and Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire. Pembrokeshire existed as a single constituency until 1983 when the northern areas were combined with Cardiganshire to create the Ceredigion & Pembroke North seat. The rest of Pembrokeshire - circa 75% of the county - formed the new Pembroke seat. In 1997 the boundaries changed again with Ceredigion reverting to a seat on its own. Pembrokeshire then was split between Preseli Pembrokeshire - which comprised North, Mid & West Pembroke - and South Pembrokeshire & West Carmarthenshire which also included Carmarthen town. |
|
|
|
Post by robert1 on Sept 30, 2022 18:25:57 GMT
Can I please ask again (see up thread) that this inaccuracy re 'Kingswood's Conservative incumbent' be not repeated since it is (and was) patently untrue.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Sept 30, 2022 20:10:27 GMT
Not true. Rule 53 makes it clear that where the number of remaining candidates equals the number of vacancies still to be filled, then the count is over, irrespective of whether remaining candidates have reached the quota. Indeed, the Rule is specifically designed to deal with the eventuality where they have not. But eCounting completely ignores Rule 53. Transferring runner-ups next preferences is logical nonsense. What would happen if Redman still had not reached the quota after "stage 6"? You answer your own question here - at stage 5, the number of remaining candidates is 2 with 1 seat to be filled, so the runner-up needs to be eliminated at stage 6 at which point the remaining candidate is elected whether or not quota has been reached - it may be a logically unnecessary step, but is consistent with rules as written. I think you may have misunderstood the rules here. It is a common misunderstanding about STV rules that eliminating a candidate necessarily entails transferring their votes. In a case where there are 2 remaining candidates competing for 1 remaining place, and where both candidates are below the original quota (due to the number of non-transferrable votes from the other candidates), it is necessary to declare elected the top candidate, and "eliminate" the bottom candidate. But that does not mean that you have to transfer the bottom candidate's votes to the top candidate or to the non-transferrable pile. Effectively, at each stage of an STV count, you have to recalculate the quota in order to take account of the number of non-transferable votes (thus producing what I call the "small quota"). The "small quota" is the quota for the purpose of determining whether a candidate has been elected (or not), but not for the purpose of calculating the surplus. The problem is that this bit of recalculation is not explained in the rules as clearly as it should be, and is therefore not used properly by the computerised version of the count (or by the people who are supposed to be administering it). |
|
