|
|
Post by minionofmidas on May 26, 2023 3:36:51 GMT
i and LD are the top two, and the gap between them grew by 20 points, so that's a 10 point swing away from the Lib Dems.
Or else you just put "swing: not meaningful" and be done with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by yellowperil on May 26, 2023 6:53:06 GMT
randerson 499 46% down from 73%
libdem 281 26% from nowhere
lab 169 16% down from 73%
con 69 6% down from 22%
throne 39 4% from nowhere
grn 19 2% down from 4%
1076
t/o 22% up from 20%
swing 23% Randerson to LibDem
Swing and change fiddly to calculate, as Randerson was previous Labour councillor. Arguably, the "RandLab" vote was 768 / 62%, down from 73%, with swing 23% "RandLab" to LibDem.
or of course the Randlab vote down from73% to 46%, the Nonrandlab vote up from zero to 16%. Are you saying the 4% vote was for Charles III? |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on May 26, 2023 7:15:00 GMT
I'd stick with swing not meaningful as we've had 3 suggestions - one is nonsensical and 2 are wrongly calculated...
|
|
davidh
Forum Regular
Posts: 39 
|
Post by davidh on May 26, 2023 8:55:46 GMT
I'd stick with swing not meaningful as we've had 3 suggestions - one is nonsensical and 2 are wrongly calculated... I agree. Whenever the swing involves parties or independents newly standing, the swing isn't really meaningful. However, to the extent that a swing might be meaningful, I'd suggest it's from the previous winner to the new one given that that is the predominant movement of votes. Including the LDs is plainly the stuff of Focus leaflets. That gives a swing of 52% from Lab to SJP. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesdoyle on May 26, 2023 9:22:15 GMT
I'd say the GWBWI is also pretty meaningless (hush at the back!) in the circumstances, but for what it's worth:
LDm +15
Grn -3
Con -16
Lab -81
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on May 26, 2023 14:03:10 GMT
I'd say the GWBWI is also pretty meaningless (hush at the back!) in the circumstances, but for what it's worth: LDm +15 Grn -3 Con -16 Lab -81 That feels about right - not particularly significant for anybody except Labour, who had what might be called a little local difficulty, which probably doesn't mean much outside this ward. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on May 26, 2023 14:04:16 GMT
randerson 499 46% down from 73%
libdem 281 26% from nowhere
lab 169 16% down from 73%
con 69 6% down from 22%
throne 39 4% from nowhere
grn 19 2% down from 4%
1076
t/o 22% up from 20%
swing 23% Randerson to LibDem
Swing and change fiddly to calculate, as Randerson was previous Labour councillor. Arguably, the "RandLab" vote was 768 / 62%, down from 73%, with swing 23% "RandLab" to LibDem. The "RandLab" vote was down 11 points, so - to the extent it is meaningful, almost certainly not much - that is surely a swing of over 18% from "RandLab" to LibDem. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,901
|
Post by Tony Otim on May 26, 2023 14:07:59 GMT
randerson 499 46% down from 73%
libdem 281 26% from nowhere
lab 169 16% down from 73%
con 69 6% down from 22%
throne 39 4% from nowhere
grn 19 2% down from 4%
1076
t/o 22% up from 20%
swing 23% Randerson to LibDem
Swing and change fiddly to calculate, as Randerson was previous Labour councillor. Arguably, the "RandLab" vote was 768 / 62%, down from 73%, with swing 23% "RandLab" to LibDem. The "RandLab" vote was down 11 points, so - to the extent it is meaningful, almost certainly not much - that is surely a swing of over 18% from "RandLab" to LibDem. Indeed, as I suggested above - two different ways of calculating the swing are suggested here - both are said to be 23%, neither works out at 23%... |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,771
Member is Online
|
Post by J.G.Harston on May 26, 2023 14:41:00 GMT
The "RandLab" vote was down 11 points, so - to the extent it is meaningful, almost certainly not much - that is surely a swing of over 18% from "RandLab" to LibDem. Indeed, as I suggested above - two different ways of calculating the swing are suggested here - both are said to be 23%, neither works out at 23%... The 23% could be super-tired mental arithmetic failure. I think I did a subtraction going in the wrong direction from a 10*. Recalculating according to here gives 26%.
*Something like: 76 minus 44 is... 76 minus 46 is 30, and the extra 2, that's 28.
|
|
|
|
Post by melthamhd94nn on May 26, 2023 17:39:39 GMT
Is this a unique result? Has a No Description candidate ever won a competitive local election before?
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,306
|
Post by maxque on May 26, 2023 17:43:59 GMT
Is this a unique result? Has a No Description candidate ever won a competitive local election before? The Shings in Polegate/Willington in Wealden district are common ND winners. |
|
carlton43
Reform Party
Posts: 50,907
Member is Online
|
Post by carlton43 on May 26, 2023 17:54:26 GMT
Is this a unique result? Has a No Description candidate ever won a competitive local election before? Thousands of times. |
|
|
|
Post by melthamhd94nn on May 26, 2023 18:58:46 GMT
Is this a unique result? Has a No Description candidate ever won a competitive local election before? The Shings in Polegate/Willington in Wealden district are common ND winners. Thanks. But I notice on East Sussex county they are called Independent Democrats. |
|
|
|
Post by carolus on May 26, 2023 19:24:03 GMT
The Shings in Polegate/Willington in Wealden district are common ND winners. Thanks. But I notice on East Sussex county they are called Independent Democrats. They weren't elected under that deacription, however. The County council results show them as Independent (https://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/your-council/local-elections/elections/wealden-elections), but at Wealden district level they certainly stand with no description and indeed did this year (https://www.wealden.gov.uk/voting-and-elections/election-results/) |
|
