CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,660
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Sept 7, 2023 20:46:35 GMT
If the byelection were today, I would guess at: Con 35% Lab 34% LD 23% Oth 8%
Unscientific? Yes, but as valid as much of what I am seeing online - with the difference that I am paying attention.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Sept 7, 2023 21:15:02 GMT
I would have thought the floor-ceiling argument was correct in that sort of seat, but I agree it's irrelevant if the Conservative vote share heads to a floor well below the ceiling of either Labour or Lib Dems. I genuinely have no idea (and haven't been there - yet) and apart from being psephologically fun I think it will be instructive to see how things pan out in a 3-way contest. If I was risking a bet (which I'm not) I'd give some consideration to the historic Lib Dem ability to find a key local issue to hang a by-election campaign on, and Labour's relatively poor record in by-elections. Whereas in a GE in the same constituency, I'd give much more weight to Labour's greater salience in the national media narrative.You may well be right. Whilst chatting with a Lib Dem canvassing down there, he said that Labour's problem was a lack of a local candidate - a position that baffles me as, as has been constantly pointed out, their candidate is born and raised there and left for work. The Lib Dem doesn't live in the constituency, and never has, although she is from Bedfordshire. It really shouldn't matter, but if the Lib Dems go too hard on it, Alistair Strathern's family, friends, former teachers and schoolmates, whom he has posted meeting lots of times on social media (not saying they are all voting for him) may well decide to kick up a fuss. They always say things like that.
When I went to the previous by election in Tamworth (then SE Staffs)the Lib Dem organiser tried to tell me that Brian Jenkins wasn't really local as he'd only lived there since the age of eight or something similar.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,910
|
Post by Khunanup on Sept 7, 2023 21:16:46 GMT
Electoral Calculus just applies the discredited uniform swing method and applies it across all seats within a nation. For what it's worth (not much, I still wouldn't trust their predictions for amongst others the reason Adam gives), I don't think they are just UNS any more, and are instead trying to do something more sophisticated. You may as well just make up numbers, is as valid as the bullshit that is posted on that site.
|
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,660
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Sept 7, 2023 21:20:39 GMT
You may well be right. Whilst chatting with a Lib Dem canvassing down there, he said that Labour's problem was a lack of a local candidate - a position that baffles me as, as has been constantly pointed out, their candidate is born and raised there and left for work. The Lib Dem doesn't live in the constituency, and never has, although she is from Bedfordshire. It really shouldn't matter, but if the Lib Dems go too hard on it, Alistair Strathern's family, friends, former teachers and schoolmates, whom he has posted meeting lots of times on social media (not saying they are all voting for him) may well decide to kick up a fuss. They always say things like that.
When I went to the previous by election in Taworth (then SE Staffs)the Lib Dem organiser tried to tell me that Brian Jenkins wasn't really local as he'd only lived there since the age of eight or something similar. Puts me in mind of the obituary for the centenarian who died in the Highlands - I can't remember the town, but it said that: " He was born in Perth and moved, with his family, into the village at the age of one. Although not a local, he was always well thought of".
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 7, 2023 21:22:25 GMT
I would have thought the floor-ceiling argument was correct in that sort of seat, but I agree it's irrelevant if the Conservative vote share heads to a floor well below the ceiling of either Labour or Lib Dems. I genuinely have no idea (and haven't been there - yet) and apart from being psephologically fun I think it will be instructive to see how things pan out in a 3-way contest. If I was risking a bet (which I'm not) I'd give some consideration to the historic Lib Dem ability to find a key local issue to hang a by-election campaign on, and Labour's relatively poor record in by-elections. Whereas in a GE in the same constituency, I'd give much more weight to Labour's greater salience in the national media narrative.You may well be right. Whilst chatting with a Lib Dem canvassing down there, he said that Labour's problem was a lack of a local candidate - a position that baffles me as, as has been constantly pointed out, their candidate is born and raised there and left for work. The Lib Dem doesn't live in the constituency, and never has, although she is from Bedfordshire. It really shouldn't matter, but if the Lib Dems go too hard on it, Alistair Strathern's family, friends, former teachers and schoolmates, whom he has posted meeting lots of times on social media (not saying they are all voting for him) may well decide to kick up a fuss. On locality of candidates, I think what matters is a sense that the candidate is committed to the constituency and understands it. It's not the only thing, but it is a thing. Obviously they will all swear blind undying loyalty to the place, but if one candidate has never been near it before while another is a local councillor/GP/farmer/small business owner of longstanding the latter obviously has more credibility. It also looks bad if the seat looks a shoe-in for one party and they choose a candidate from outside, since they look like a professional looking for a safe seat - unless they are obviously a high-flier. The Conservatives got burnt quite badly that way in North Shropshire. I don't detect that any of these things are prominent in Md-Beds, but as I say I wouldn't really know. But by local issue, I meant more things like local hospital closure, ambulance service etc. Even someone who has close family ties might not be so good at picking up on that if they've lived a long time outside the area and, more importantly, if their campaign messaging is decided by people from HQ without reference to local party figures. Labour got badly ambushed over ULEZ in Uxbridge and S Ruislip despite having a very defendable position on it (not least that the whole bloody idea was dreamed up by the outgoing Tory MP for that very constituency) - it's that sort of poor footwork that I'm referring to.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 7, 2023 21:28:10 GMT
Electoral Calculus just applies the discredited uniform swing method and applies it across all seats within a nation. For what it's worth (not much, I still wouldn't trust their predictions for amongst others the reason Adam gives), I don't think they are just UNS any more, and are instead trying to do something more sophisticated. They use MRP, but leaving aside the question of whether or not it works, they seem to apply it on the basis of the constituency make-up - so, as I understand it (but others will know better) if they expect a certain swing in a seat with a certain set of demographics, they then apply that swing to all seats with those sort of demographics. But they don't take account of the actual history of the seat, e.g. a candidate having a massive scandal, make-up of the local council etc.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 11,293
|
Post by iain on Sept 7, 2023 22:33:24 GMT
Beyond me how anyone can claim any objective statistical evidence to make much of a recommendation for Mid-Beds - I'd have thought actual voters living in the bloody place were better positioned to make a call. Just as bad is Electoral Calculus, which regularly predicts Labour finishing ahead of Lib Dems (and sometimes winning) in notional Tory seats which are actually Lib Dem held following by-elections, as if no-one in those places is going to work out who the main challenger is. Electoral Calculus just applies the discredited uniform swing method and applies it across all seats within a nation. They used to, which had its issues but at least did a job. Now their method is pure nonsense. Any number you put in for the Lib Dems atm for example leads to a general evening out - increases in no hope seats whilst going backwards anywhere where we are vaguely competitive. Basically the opposite to what any intelligent observer would expect.
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,251
|
Post by maxque on Sept 7, 2023 22:37:31 GMT
You may well be right. Whilst chatting with a Lib Dem canvassing down there, he said that Labour's problem was a lack of a local candidate - a position that baffles me as, as has been constantly pointed out, their candidate is born and raised there and left for work. The Lib Dem doesn't live in the constituency, and never has, although she is from Bedfordshire. It really shouldn't matter, but if the Lib Dems go too hard on it, Alistair Strathern's family, friends, former teachers and schoolmates, whom he has posted meeting lots of times on social media (not saying they are all voting for him) may well decide to kick up a fuss. On locality of candidates, I think what matters is a sense that the candidate is committed to the constituency and understands it. It's not the only thing, but it is a thing. Obviously they will all swear blind undying loyalty to the place, but if one candidate has never been near it before while another is a local councillor/GP/farmer/small business owner of longstanding the latter obviously has more credibility. It also looks bad if the seat looks a shoe-in for one party and they choose a candidate from outside, since they look like a professional looking for a safe seat - unless they are obviously a high-flier. The Conservatives got burnt quite badly that way in North Shropshire. I don't detect that any of these things are prominent in Md-Beds, but as I say I wouldn't really know. But by local issue, I meant more things like local hospital closure, ambulance service etc. Even someone who has close family ties might not be so good at picking up on that if they've lived a long time outside the area and, more importantly, if their campaign messaging is decided by people from HQ without reference to local party figures. Labour got badly ambushed over ULEZ in Uxbridge and S Ruislip despite having a very defendable position on it (not least that the whole bloody idea was dreamed up by the outgoing Tory MP for that very constituency) - it's that sort of poor footwork that I'm referring to. Does this seat even have local issues? This is pretty much the lesser populated areas between Bedford, Luton, Hitchin and Milton Keynes.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 7, 2023 23:08:36 GMT
On locality of candidates, I think what matters is a sense that the candidate is committed to the constituency and understands it. It's not the only thing, but it is a thing. Obviously they will all swear blind undying loyalty to the place, but if one candidate has never been near it before while another is a local councillor/GP/farmer/small business owner of longstanding the latter obviously has more credibility. It also looks bad if the seat looks a shoe-in for one party and they choose a candidate from outside, since they look like a professional looking for a safe seat - unless they are obviously a high-flier. The Conservatives got burnt quite badly that way in North Shropshire. I don't detect that any of these things are prominent in Md-Beds, but as I say I wouldn't really know. But by local issue, I meant more things like local hospital closure, ambulance service etc. Even someone who has close family ties might not be so good at picking up on that if they've lived a long time outside the area and, more importantly, if their campaign messaging is decided by people from HQ without reference to local party figures. Labour got badly ambushed over ULEZ in Uxbridge and S Ruislip despite having a very defendable position on it (not least that the whole bloody idea was dreamed up by the outgoing Tory MP for that very constituency) - it's that sort of poor footwork that I'm referring to. Does this seat even have local issues? This is pretty much the lesser populated areas between Bedford, Luton, Hitchin and Milton Keynes. Everywhere has local issues, and areas with no obvious centre are likely to have more than most.
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 8, 2023 18:59:13 GMT
With the potential for a split vote so high, no wonder the Conservatives have odds as generous (given the circumstances) as 2/1 to hold this seat.
The best Lib Dem odds, meanwhile, are 10/11, and Labour's 9/4. The bookmakers are really hoping for a field day even though odds like that will in practice indicate that the Conservatives are more likely to hold this seat than not.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,074
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 9, 2023 20:04:31 GMT
funny you should say that, since of course Magee became a Labour MP in the London Borough of Waltham Forest in 1974. A Labour Party with many more of his quality and personality would be difficult to oppose or inseat. Tonight Radio 4 includes an excellent documentary about Bryan Magee, who was a distinguished philosopher. I think that was also agreed given its politics not philosophy - David Owen felt its limits were the same.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 9, 2023 20:11:32 GMT
A Labour Party with many more of his quality and personality would be difficult to oppose or inseat. Tonight Radio 4 includes an excellent documentary about Bryan Magee, who was a distinguished philosopher. I think that was also agreed given its politics not philosophy - David Owen felt its limits were the same. Too late old friend. I have missed it. They were quite wonderful programmes.
|
|
Merseymike
Independent
Posts: 40,074
Member is Online
|
Post by Merseymike on Sept 9, 2023 20:15:43 GMT
Tonight Radio 4 includes an excellent documentary about Bryan Magee, who was a distinguished philosopher. I think that was also agreed given its politics not philosophy - David Owen felt its limits were the same. Too late old friend. I have missed it. They were quite wonderful programmes. www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001qdbl
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 12, 2023 13:37:47 GMT
Does this seat even have local issues? This is pretty much the lesser populated areas between Bedford, Luton, Hitchin and Milton Keynes. Everywhere has local issues, and areas with no obvious centre are likely to have more than most. Areas without an obvious centre are less likely to have the same issue throughout the constituency, however.
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Sept 12, 2023 14:26:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Sept 12, 2023 19:43:00 GMT
A tussle via The News Agents podcast
|
|
|
Post by doktorb🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Sept 12, 2023 20:38:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 12, 2023 21:23:26 GMT
Everywhere has local issues, and areas with no obvious centre are likely to have more than most. Areas without an obvious centre are less likely to have the same issue throughout the constituency, however. What I was getting at, is that lack of an obvious centre is a local issue in itself, because there is no central point with decent transport links for centralised services. Chances are that the entire area will suffer from at best dispersed small scale services, usually inadequate once you get to a certain level of seriousness, or at worst no services at all. Alternatively, some small location has to be nominated arbitrarily as a centre, which tends to piss off everyone else. There's also bound to be a reason for lack of a centre, often due to physical geography e.g. hills, which will usually lead to a raft of local issues. Can't think of any such reason for mid-Beds, so maybe it is one of those constituencies that the BCE has to create to make up the numbers? That's also an issue: it means there is a lack of identity and people wonder why they are lumped in with other small places that they never visit instead of whatever large town they actually use. They may find that the authorities in said large town ignores their needs due to them being on the fringe or even outside the local authority altogether. Most areas have a centre with slightly neglected fringes, but a constituency entirely made up of the fringes of several centres risks being all neglected (or at least feeling that way.) I don't know mid-Beds - doubtless Pete Whitehead can give chapter and verse - but it is made up of some bits of the edge of Borough of Bedford and a chunk of Central Bedfordshire UA, itself essentially Beds CC minus the obvious centres of Luton and Bedford. The council offices are divided between Chicksands, which is in the constituency (albeit off in one corner) but must surely be one of the most insignificant places to host a Unitary Authority; and the more obvious Dunstable, which is outside the constituency. The Travel-to-work areas seem to be Bedford, Milton Keynes, Luton and Stevenage, all of which are separate local authorities from Central Beds and whose public transport policies are likely to reflect that. The NHS Clinical Commissioning Group is Bedfordshire, meaning that both the main population centres and areas of highest deprivation in the CCG fall outside of Mid-Beds and again provision of NHS services is likely to reflect those facts. My guess - and it's no more than that - is that across the whole constituency there's likely to be poor access to NHS services, especially at specialist level (I note that the hospital sites are in Bedford and Luton, neither in the constituency) and adequate public transport, which would exacerbate lack of local NHS sites; possibly also to secondary schools and further education. All of which which I'd class as local issues. But I'd make that guess precisely on the basis that there is no obvious centre.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 12, 2023 21:51:06 GMT
Areas without an obvious centre are less likely to have the same issue throughout the constituency, however. What I was getting at, is that lack of an obvious centre is a local issue in itself, because there is no central point with decent transport links for centralised services. Chances are that the entire area will suffer from at best dispersed small scale services, usually inadequate once you get to a certain level of seriousness, or at worst no services at all. Alternatively, some small location has to be nominated arbitrarily as a centre, which tends to piss off everyone else. There's also bound to be a reason for lack of a centre, often due to physical geography e.g. hills, which will usually lead to a raft of local issues. Can't think of any such reason for mid-Beds, so maybe it is one of those constituencies that the BCE has to create to make up the numbers? That's also an issue: it means there is a lack of identity and people wonder why they are lumped in with other small places that they never visit instead of whatever large town they actually use. They may find that the authorities in said large town ignores their needs due to them being on the fringe or even outside the local authority altogether. Most areas have a centre with slightly neglected fringes, but a constituency entirely made up of the fringes of several centres risks being all neglected (or at least feeling that way.) I don't know mid-Beds - doubtless Pete Whitehead can give chapter and verse - but it is made up of some bits of the edge of Borough of Bedford and a chunk of Central Bedfordshire UA, itself essentially Beds CC minus the obvious centres of Luton and Bedford. The council offices are divided between Chicksands, which is in the constituency (albeit off in one corner) but must surely be one of the most insignificant places to host a Unitary Authority; and the more obvious Dunstable, which is outside the constituency. The Travel-to-work areas seem to be Bedford, Milton Keynes, Luton and Stevenage, all of which are separate local authorities from Central Beds and whose public transport policies are likely to reflect that. The NHS Clinical Commissioning Group is Bedfordshire, meaning that both the main population centres and areas of highest deprivation in the CCG fall outside of Mid-Beds and again provision of NHS services is likely to reflect those facts. My guess - and it's no more than that - is that across the whole constituency there's likely to be poor access to NHS services, especially at specialist level (I note that the hospital sites are in Bedford and Luton, neither in the constituency) and adequate public transport, which would exacerbate lack of local NHS sites; possibly also to secondary schools and further education. All of which which I'd class as local issues. But I'd make that guess precisely on the basis that there is no obvious centre. Constituencies are a construct for voting and nothing else at all. There is no reason why they should not be separated by the East Coast Main Line, the M25, the Mersey Estuary or the Pennine Mountains. It doesn't matter how difficult it is to get from one end to the other or how long it takes or the need for 7 changes of bus, nor the need to pass through three other constiuencies on the way from some parts of the seat to other parts of the seat, because the electors are never affected by any of that in their discrete role of being electors . All of those concerns are tendentious bollocks. Not does it matter if there is no centre to the seat, no hospital and no railway station, as they are irrelevent to the process of voting. Nor does it matter if the electorate look to 5-or more centres, all in differnt constituencies, for most of or even all of their services (as with the new Welad of Kent). This is about voting and only about voting. End of forever!
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Sept 12, 2023 23:05:26 GMT
What I was getting at, is that lack of an obvious centre is a local issue in itself, because there is no central point with decent transport links for centralised services. Chances are that the entire area will suffer from at best dispersed small scale services, usually inadequate once you get to a certain level of seriousness, or at worst no services at all. Alternatively, some small location has to be nominated arbitrarily as a centre, which tends to piss off everyone else. There's also bound to be a reason for lack of a centre, often due to physical geography e.g. hills, which will usually lead to a raft of local issues. Can't think of any such reason for mid-Beds, so maybe it is one of those constituencies that the BCE has to create to make up the numbers? That's also an issue: it means there is a lack of identity and people wonder why they are lumped in with other small places that they never visit instead of whatever large town they actually use. They may find that the authorities in said large town ignores their needs due to them being on the fringe or even outside the local authority altogether. Most areas have a centre with slightly neglected fringes, but a constituency entirely made up of the fringes of several centres risks being all neglected (or at least feeling that way.) I don't know mid-Beds - doubtless Pete Whitehead can give chapter and verse - but it is made up of some bits of the edge of Borough of Bedford and a chunk of Central Bedfordshire UA, itself essentially Beds CC minus the obvious centres of Luton and Bedford. The council offices are divided between Chicksands, which is in the constituency (albeit off in one corner) but must surely be one of the most insignificant places to host a Unitary Authority; and the more obvious Dunstable, which is outside the constituency. The Travel-to-work areas seem to be Bedford, Milton Keynes, Luton and Stevenage, all of which are separate local authorities from Central Beds and whose public transport policies are likely to reflect that. The NHS Clinical Commissioning Group is Bedfordshire, meaning that both the main population centres and areas of highest deprivation in the CCG fall outside of Mid-Beds and again provision of NHS services is likely to reflect those facts. My guess - and it's no more than that - is that across the whole constituency there's likely to be poor access to NHS services, especially at specialist level (I note that the hospital sites are in Bedford and Luton, neither in the constituency) and adequate public transport, which would exacerbate lack of local NHS sites; possibly also to secondary schools and further education. All of which which I'd class as local issues. But I'd make that guess precisely on the basis that there is no obvious centre. Constituencies are a construct for voting and nothing else at all. There is no reason why they should not be separated by the East Coast Main Line, the M25, the Mersey Estuary or the Pennine Mountains. It doesn't matter how difficult it is to get from one end to the other or how long it takes or the need for 7 changes of bus, nor the need to pass through three other constiuencies on the way from some parts of the seat to other parts of the seat, because the electors are never affected by any of that in their discrete role of being electors . All of those concerns are tendentious bollocks. Not does it matter if there is no centre to the seat, no hospital and no railway station, as they are irrelevent to the process of voting. Nor does it matter if the electorate look to 5-or more centres, all in differnt constituencies, for most of or even all of their services (as with the new Welad of Kent). This is about voting and only about voting. End of forever! Yes, I know that's your view and while I don't entirely agree I do see your point. Sure, if I (for example) can get everything I need in Stroud and a Dursley resident can get everything they need in Dursley, it makes no odds where or not we can get from Stroud to Dursley, so arguably it doesn't matter whether or not we're in the same constituency. But I'm not talking about whether or not the constituency boundary makes sense, I'm talking about whether or not people in a given area may have difficulty in accessing services if there is no central place for services nearby. If there is no GP in Dursley it matters like hell to people in Dursley. If there's not one in Stroud either, that matters to people in Stroud. Neither Stroud nor Dursley people are going to give a stuff about each others lack of a GP but in that case "lack of GPs" is a local issue for people in the whole constituency and one that should be part of the MPs agenda. It doesn't matter if there's no hospital, station etc in the constituency so long as it's an acceptable journey to one which just happens to lie over the constituency boundary line, but it matters like hell if it does take 7 bus changes to get to one, because that does affect electors all the bloody time. You don't believe me? Fine, that's why our local campaigns are so much more effective than those of most other parties most of the time.
|
|