graham
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,344
|
Post by graham on Jun 13, 2023 19:27:12 GMT
The Guardian are calling this constituency ‘Blue Wall’. Because a constituency that voted twice for Tony Blair and ~58% Leave is Blue Wall. It was a different seat though - different boundaries. |
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 7,053 
|
Post by jamie on Jun 13, 2023 19:29:14 GMT
The Guardian are calling this constituency ‘Blue Wall’. Because a constituency that voted twice for Tony Blair and ~58% Leave is Blue Wall. It was a different seat though - different boundaries. I accounted for the boundaries, thats why I said twice rather than thrice. |
|
|
|
Post by agbutler on Jun 13, 2023 19:29:28 GMT
The Guardian are calling this constituency ‘Blue Wall’. Because a constituency that voted twice for Tony Blair and ~58% Leave is Blue Wall. It was a different seat though - different boundaries. This is still not, under any 'sensible' definition (if such a thing exists), a part of the Blue Wall |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 13, 2023 19:29:53 GMT
The Guardian are calling this constituency ‘Blue Wall’. Because a constituency that voted twice for Tony Blair and ~58% Leave is Blue Wall. It was a different seat though - different boundaries. In no way blue wall though - even under these boundaries, Labour would have won it in 1997 and perhaps held it in 2001. |
|
graham
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,344
|
Post by graham on Jun 13, 2023 19:56:21 GMT
It was a different seat though - different boundaries. I accounted for the boundaries, thats why I said twice rather than thrice. The seat has only existed since 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 13, 2023 20:42:57 GMT
I accounted for the boundaries, thats why I said twice rather than thrice. The seat has only existed since 2010. A constituency named 'Selby and Ainsty' has only existed since 2010 but the current seat is not so strikingly different from the Selby constituency which existed from 1983 to 2010. In the 2010 boundary changes, 76% of the old Selby constituency went into Selby and Ainsty, and 86.6% of the new Selby and Ainsty constituency had been in the old Selby constituency. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 13, 2023 21:11:45 GMT
Is there a chance though that in the Harrogate element of this seat (the ‘Ainsty’) the LDs might be seen as the more likely opposition by virtue of the LDs being more competitive in H&K / the wide Harrogate district, thereby splitting the opposition in the constituency as a whole. I assume this is what happened in the old ‘Vale of’ York in ‘97, another heavily split opposition in a new seat.
|
|
|
|
Post by jakegb on Jun 13, 2023 21:30:39 GMT
The Guardian are calling this constituency ‘Blue Wall’. Because a constituency that voted twice for Tony Blair and ~58% Leave is Blue Wall. Very misleading term blue wall. Used increasingly by opposition parties + the media - but with a very wide scope. For me, classic blue wall seats are typically southern based, with strong conservative support historically, which has steadily eroded following Brexit. These seats tend to have highly-educated voters, with above average incomes and limited deprivation. The sorts of seats that saw a swing against the Tories in 2017 and 19. E.g. much of Surrey, Canterbury, Wokingham, Hitchin and Harpenden, South Cambridgeshire etc. Of the Lib Dem byelection wins this parliament, only Chesham + Amersham closely matches this criteria - the agricultural leave-voting seats of North Shropshire + Tiverton + Honiton are somewhat wide of the mark (but it doesn't stop people applying the term blue wall). |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jun 13, 2023 21:51:52 GMT
Is there a chance though that in the Harrogate element of this seat (the ‘Ainsty’) the LDs might be seen as the more likely opposition by virtue of the LDs being more competitive in H&K / the wide Harrogate district, thereby splitting the opposition in the constituency as a whole. I assume this is what happened in the old ‘Vale of’ York in ‘97, another heavily split opposition in a new seat. It's hard to say, but I doubt it. While Labour will want to get some votes out of that part, realistically it's not very important. It is a small component and probably close to 95% of Labour's potential vote is in the Selby part of the seat. It's also worth noting that, in the most recent local elections, both divisions within the "Ainsty" were Conservative vs Green battlegrounds. You have to go back quite a long way to find any Lib Dem strength. Residents who don't vote Conservative seem quite able to move tactically between the various other parties (as well as independent candidates, and in one case even an old Liberal). |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 13, 2023 22:20:47 GMT
Is there a chance though that in the Harrogate element of this seat (the ‘Ainsty’) the LDs might be seen as the more likely opposition by virtue of the LDs being more competitive in H&K / the wide Harrogate district, thereby splitting the opposition in the constituency as a whole. I assume this is what happened in the old ‘Vale of’ York in ‘97, another heavily split opposition in a new seat. It's hard to say, but I doubt it. While Labour will want to get some votes out of that part, realistically it's not very important. It is a small component and probably close to 95% of Labour's potential vote is in the Selby part of the seat. It's also worth noting that, in the most recent local elections, both divisions within the "Ainsty" were Conservative vs Green battlegrounds. You have to go back quite a long way to find any Lib Dem strength. Residents who don't vote Conservative seem quite able to move tactically between the various other parties (as well as independent candidates, and in one case even an old Liberal). This. |
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,299
|
Post by maxque on Jun 13, 2023 23:38:20 GMT
Is there a chance though that in the Harrogate element of this seat (the ‘Ainsty’) the LDs might be seen as the more likely opposition by virtue of the LDs being more competitive in H&K / the wide Harrogate district, thereby splitting the opposition in the constituency as a whole. I assume this is what happened in the old ‘Vale of’ York in ‘97, another heavily split opposition in a new seat. It's hard to say, but I doubt it. While Labour will want to get some votes out of that part, realistically it's not very important. It is a small component and probably close to 95% of Labour's potential vote is in the Selby part of the seat. It's also worth noting that, in the most recent local elections, both divisions within the "Ainsty" were Conservative vs Green battlegrounds. You have to go back quite a long way to find any Lib Dem strength. Residents who don't vote Conservative seem quite able to move tactically between the various other parties (as well as independent candidates, and in one case even an old Liberal). The last time those areas had LD candidates (2018), Labour was in front of them in two of the (then) three wards and in the third one, it was LD 93 votes, Green 92 votes, Labour 90 votes. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 13, 2023 23:41:03 GMT
Is there a chance though that in the Harrogate element of this seat (the ‘Ainsty’) the LDs might be seen as the more likely opposition by virtue of the LDs being more competitive in H&K / the wide Harrogate district, thereby splitting the opposition in the constituency as a whole. I assume this is what happened in the old ‘Vale of’ York in ‘97, another heavily split opposition in a new seat. It's hard to say, but I doubt it. While Labour will want to get some votes out of that part, realistically it's not very important. It is a small component and probably close to 95% of Labour's potential vote is in the Selby part of the seat.It's also worth noting that, in the most recent local elections, both divisions within the "Ainsty" were Conservative vs Green battlegrounds. You have to go back quite a long way to find any Lib Dem strength. Residents who don't vote Conservative seem quite able to move tactically between the various other parties (as well as independent candidates, and in one case even an old Liberal). Great explanation, thanks. I thought at first it would have been a more considerable component based on the 2010 majority (12,000+) which meant it was safe from its inception, but instead I guess the seat as a whole must have had one of the larger swings of that election (if a notional has been calculated?) rather than it purely being down to the addition of Ainsty bringing in a 12,000 block vote. Of course there was a new Labour candidate too which would have added to this. But compared to other semi-rural seats such as Sherwood (also new Labour candidate in 2010 ) or ‘Amber Valley’ which the Tories only ‘just about’ gained before building substantial majorities, S&A appeared already quite safe. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 14, 2023 10:35:49 GMT
Writ just moved. The Speaker narrowly avoided naming the outgoing MP as Nigel Evans (the Deputy Speaker).
|
|
davidh
Forum Regular
Posts: 38
|
Post by davidh on Jun 14, 2023 13:04:33 GMT
Writ just moved. The Speaker narrowly avoided naming the outgoing MP as Nigel Evans (the Deputy Speaker). Does this mean 20 July, assuming a Thursday? Unless I'm wrong, the minimum duration for a by-election is 23 working days, so 13 July has already gone. Isn't the timetable (with 'day' = 'working day'): Day 0 (today) Writ issued Day 1 (15 June) Writ received - defined as the day after the writ is moved Day 3 (19 June) Publication of Notice of Election - defined as the second day after writ received Day 6-8 (22-26 June; Returning Officer discretion) Deadline for delivery of Nomination Papers - defined as not earlier than the 3rd day after the publication of notice of election and not later than the 7th day after the day the writ is received Day 23-27 (17-21 July) Polling day - defined as not be earlier than the 17th nor later than the 19th day after the last day for delivery of nomination papers. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jun 14, 2023 13:23:53 GMT
Writ just moved. The Speaker narrowly avoided naming the outgoing MP as Nigel Evans (the Deputy Speaker). Does this mean 20 July, assuming a Thursday? Unless I'm wrong, the minimum duration for a by-election is 23 working days, so 13 July has already gone. Isn't the timetable (with 'day' = 'working day'): Day 0 (today) Writ issued Day 1 (15 June) Writ received - defined as the day after the writ is moved Day 3 (19 June) Publication of Notice of Election - defined as the second day after writ received Day 6-8 (22-26 June; Returning Officer discretion) Deadline for delivery of Nomination Papers - defined as not earlier than the 3rd day after the publication of notice of election and not later than the 7th day after the day the writ is received Day 23-27 (17-21 July) Polling day - defined as not be earlier than the 17th nor later than the 19th day after the last day for delivery of nomination papers. See post in the Uxbridge thread. I think the RO has the ability to issue the notice of election on the same day as the writ is received, which would allow the polling day to be on 13 July (I think this was done in South Shields - the shortest byelection in recent years). But in practice it's going to be 20 July. |
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 14, 2023 14:12:54 GMT
Writ just moved. The Speaker narrowly avoided naming the outgoing MP as Nigel Evans (the Deputy Speaker).That’s a shame. I’m sure many members of this forum would be well up for another Ribble Valley by-election… |
|
CatholicLeft
Labour
2032 posts until I was "accidentally" deleted.
Posts: 6,712
|
Post by CatholicLeft on Jun 14, 2023 14:17:23 GMT
Writ just moved. The Speaker narrowly avoided naming the outgoing MP as Nigel Evans (the Deputy Speaker).That’s a shame. I’m sure many members of this forum would be well up for another Ribble Valley by-election… I'd want one on the new boundaries. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jun 14, 2023 14:44:50 GMT
Given the lack of a mid Beds by-election on the same date, you would assume that the LDs would put up a much higher profile campaign here though. Labour are the natural challengers of course - but without the likelihood of any agreement to soft-pedal in exchange for Lab doing so in Mid Beds - LDs are likely to run a strong, "typical Lib Dem" by-election campaign, hoover up quite a few disaffected voters and "boot the Tories but never vote Labour brigade".
I can see the unfortunate scenario of something of a split opposition outcome and - after a few recounts - hearing the RO giving a result which is something like: Con 35%, Lab 34%, LD 22%, Others 9%  |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,025
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Jun 14, 2023 14:47:57 GMT
Who knows what parties will decide to do, but they're not made of money.
|
|
davidh
Forum Regular
Posts: 38
|
Post by davidh on Jun 14, 2023 14:53:27 GMT
Given the lack of a mid Beds by-election on the same date, you would assume that the LDs would put up a much higher profile campaign here though. Labour are the natural challengers of course - but without the likelihood of any agreement to soft-pedal in exchange for Lab doing so in Mid Beds - LDs are likely to run a strong, "typical Lib Dem" by-election campaign, hoover up quite a few disaffected voters and "boot the Tories but never vote Labour brigade".
I can see the unfortunate scenario of something of a split opposition outcome and - after a few recounts - hearing the RO giving a result which is something like: Con 35%, Lab 34%, LD 22%, Others 9% There is only a lack of a Mid Beds by-election so far. We can still reasonably expect one to be called fairly soon. Given the investment the Lib Dems already appear to be making there, it wouldn't make much sense to wind back on that in order to concentrate on a different seat with a much earlier polling day, where they have no great track record and little time to make much impression. On the contrary - it would make sense for them to keep on targeting Mid Beds. |
|
