|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 16, 2024 10:24:52 GMT
That settles a couple of disputed ones. Beckenham & Penge, Kensington & Bayswater are both notionally Labour, Wimbledon Conservative. Not that it proves anything really, as they have Wolverhampton SE as Labour with an increased majority and we know that to be false. Still this is our new 'truth'. The difficulty with Wolverhampton SE is because of Darlaston being much more Tory than expected, isn't it? The question is whether the difficulties there are caused by Black Country weirdness or whether it's more that we know about them because Wolverhampton and Walsall councils happened to make their results available. Yes it's quite specifically the weirdness of the ward results within Walsall South. As you say we only know about it because of those results. They'll be similar cases elsewhere, especially where as here, the Conservatives can do well in local elections in heavily muslim areas |
|
|
|
Post by parlconst on Jan 16, 2024 10:58:29 GMT
While it's good that Rallings & Thraher's notionals have finally appeared, does anyone know if they are also producing an analysis of the composition of each new seat in terms of the percentage of the electorate coming from its predecessors, as has been contained in the previous editions of the 'Media Guides'? I don’t know if they are, but the House of Commons Library has a useful tool that has that information commonslibrary.parliament.uk/boundary-review-2023-which-seats-will-change/I'm aware of the excellent HoC Library work, but was wondering if the latest analysis was using a different methodology. The HoC Library has based their analysis on residential premises and/or population (allocated to output area centroids), both of which are imperfect proxies for electorate. (Premises do not take account of likely different occupancy rates by type of dwelling, and output areas are not always fine-grained enough to reflect some of the transfers of area.) I was wondering what methodology Rallings and Thrasher used, but can't find the detail in their explanatory notes. |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jan 16, 2024 11:18:12 GMT
The difficulty with Wolverhampton SE is because of Darlaston being much more Tory than expected, isn't it? The question is whether the difficulties there are caused by Black Country weirdness or whether it's more that we know about them because Wolverhampton and Walsall councils happened to make their results available. Yes it's quite specifically the weirdness of the ward results within Walsall South. As you say we only know about it because of those results. They'll be similar cases elsewhere, especially where as here, the Conservatives can do well in local elections in heavily muslim areas It does look like in other areas the Thrasher and Rallings figures are quite good on this. For instance their majority in Dewsbury and Batley (30%) looks very plausible (other estimates including mine have sometimes given unrealistically small majorities there) and hasn't been skewed by some reasonable Conservative local performances recently such as in Batley East. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jan 16, 2024 11:38:32 GMT
While it's good that Rallings & Thraher's notionals have finally appeared, does anyone know if they are also producing an analysis of the composition of each new seat in terms of the percentage of the electorate coming from its predecessors, as has been contained in the previous editions of the 'Media Guides'? I have calculated all these, and put them on the almanac profiles I have done, but I don't have them in an easily copiable form, even if I had a website to post them on (which I don't). |
|
|
|
Post by Ben Walker on Jan 16, 2024 11:44:21 GMT
Average absolute Con+Lab difference between R&T and mine for Eng&Wal: 0.9pts.
... nevertheless, the top three seats with the greatest variation
Dewsbury & Batley
Mine: Con 36 Lab 50
R&T: Con 29 Lab 59
Erith & Thamesmead
Mine: Con 33 Lab 52
R&T: Con 28 Lab 58
Mid Cheshire
Mine: Con 48 Lab 36
R&T: Con 47 Lab 42
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jan 16, 2024 11:54:11 GMT
It was all combined in the same bet, and believe that it if happens that £5 will turn into £19 (£14 plus my orginal £5 back), plus once the election is called I shall place £1 on every Welsh constituency based on what the polls are saying and a bit of common sense. I think he means 2.8/1 |
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,807 
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Jan 16, 2024 12:04:49 GMT
While it's good that Rallings & Thraher's notionals have finally appeared, does anyone know if they are also producing an analysis of the composition of each new seat in terms of the percentage of the electorate coming from its predecessors, as has been contained in the previous editions of the 'Media Guides'? I have calculated all these, and put them on the almanac profiles I have done, but I don't have them in an easily copiable form, even if I had a website to post them on (which I don't). I have just had confirmation of this from Thrasher, no book will be published, for that detail please refer to House of Commons publication published in the middle of last year |
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,341
Member is Online
|
Post by YL on Jan 16, 2024 12:58:00 GMT
Average absolute Con+Lab difference between R&T and mine for Eng&Wal: 0.9pts. ... nevertheless, the top three seats with the greatest variation Dewsbury & Batley Mine: Con 36 Lab 50 R&T: Con 29 Lab 59 Erith & Thamesmead Mine: Con 33 Lab 52 R&T: Con 28 Lab 58 Mid Cheshire Mine: Con 48 Lab 36 R&T: Con 47 Lab 42 Re Dewsbury & Batley, is some of that to do with the Tory performance in Batley East last year? Rallings and Thrasher mostly used 2019, when the Tories didn’t do much in any of the wards (barring Kirkburton) though the Heavy Woollen Independents did. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,061
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jan 16, 2024 12:59:58 GMT
Analysis from Sir John Curtice: ukandeu.ac.uk/what-difference-will-the-new-constituency-boundaries-make/I found these passages interesting about the electoral system bias: However, that does not mean that the electoral system would now have treated the Conservatives and Labour equally at the last election. Rather, the new boundaries maintain and reinforce a substantial bias in the Conservatives’ favour. The bias that existed in 2019 can be seen if we assume there was a 5.85% swing from Conservative to Labour in each and every constituency as compared with the outcome in 2019 (while leaving the shares of the vote won by other parties unchanged). Such a swing would mean that, with 38.9% of the vote each, the Conservatives and Labour would be tied in terms of their share of the vote across Great Britain as a whole. Yet under this scenario the Conservatives would, on the old boundaries, have won 290 seats, 23 more than Labour’s 267. Now, rather than being reduced by the new boundaries, that disparity has increased to as much as 50 seats. This inevitably has implications for the ease with which the Conservatives and Labour can win an overall majority. If the swing from Conservative to Labour were uniform, the Conservatives would on the old boundaries need a lead over Labour of 4.8 points to secure an overall majority. That figure that has now edged down to 3.4 points. Labour, in contrast, would need to be as much as 12.3 points ahead of the Conservatives just to secure an overall Commons majority. Now that figure has risen to as much as 13.7 points. This explains why, despite its large lead in the opinion polls, Labour’s task in winning an overall majority is potentially a formidable one. So why might the electoral system still be heavily biased against Labour at the next election? The explanation lies in the fact that Labour’s vote is less efficiently distributed across constituencies. In particular, if the two parties have the same share of the vote nationally, Labour would win many more seats than the Conservatives by very large majorities. That disadvantage has not been affected by the boundary review, indeed if anything it has been increased somewhat. However, there is no guarantee that the geography of party support will be the same at the next election. Last year’s local elections together with some polling suggests that support for the Conservatives is falling more heavily in constituencies where they did better in 2019. Meanwhile, some voters also appear willing to vote tactically for whichever opposition party is best placed to defeat the Conservatives locally. If such patterns are present in the election later this year, an electoral system that last time worked to the Conservatives’ advantage may not necessarily be so benign this time around. Labour, at least, certainly need to hope that that proves to be the case. |
|
|
|
Post by parlconst on Jan 16, 2024 14:09:42 GMT
I have calculated all these, and put them on the almanac profiles I have done, but I don't have them in an easily copiable form, even if I had a website to post them on (which I don't). I have just had confirmation of this from Thrasher, no book will be published, for that detail please refer to House of Commons publication published in the middle of last year That's a shame, as from R&T's description they have done this on a ward by ward basis, which is likely to be more accurate than the way the HoC Library made their estimates. I have been deriving my estimates for the latest changes from Electoral Calculus data, which I guess I will now continue to use, rather than the 'Media Guide' figures that I have used for previous years. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jan 16, 2024 14:23:52 GMT
It was all combined in the same bet, and believe that it if happens that £5 will turn into £19 (£14 plus my orginal £5 back), plus once the election is called I shall place £1 on every Welsh constituency based on what the polls are saying and a bit of common sense. Did you (will you) place "single" bets or do you know if your bookie (or any bookie) allows accas? I remember I did nicely on an Acca in 2015 (?) but for 2019 the 3 bookies I have accounts with didnt allow an Acca option, so I had to place single bets (which was a pain to work through and you win less for each single bet than you do with an Acca)! |
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,807
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Jan 16, 2024 16:27:16 GMT
It was all combined in the same bet, and believe that it if happens that £5 will turn into £19 (£14 plus my orginal £5 back), plus once the election is called I shall place £1 on every Welsh constituency based on what the polls are saying and a bit of common sense. Did you (will you) place "single" bets or do you know if your bookie (or any bookie) allows accas? I remember I did nicely on an Acca in 2015 (?) but for 2019 the 3 bookies I have accounts with didnt allow an Acca option, so I had to place single bets (which was a pain to work through and you win less for each single bet than you do with an Acca)! It will be 32 £1 bets on each constituency winner (which in 2019 I did online with Ladbrokes as they were the only people doing such a betting market) |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jan 16, 2024 18:07:21 GMT
Thought as much. I suspect football-style accas are gone forever for general election seats  |
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Jan 16, 2024 18:41:18 GMT
Thought as much. I suspect football-style accas are gone forever for general election seats Understandably so, in fairness. The logic of an "acca" bet and the mathematics only work if the events are independent; clearly constituency results in a general election are not. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 16, 2024 19:44:05 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Wisconsin on Jan 16, 2024 20:21:37 GMT
What are the safest Tory and Labour seats?
|
|
andrewp
Non-Aligned
Posts: 8,914
Member is Online
|
Post by andrewp on Jan 16, 2024 20:29:41 GMT
What are the safest Tory and Labour seats? 5 safest Lab seats 1. Liverpool Riverside 2. Birmingham Ladywood 3. Knowsley 4. Bootle 5. Manchester Rusholme 5 safest Con seats 1. South Holland and the Deepings 2. Boston and Skegness 3. Castle Point 4. Maldon 5. Weald of Kent |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jan 16, 2024 20:35:19 GMT
What are the safest Tory and Labour seats? 5 safest Lab seats 1. Liverpool Riverside 2. Birmingham Ladywood 3. Knowsley 4. Bootle 5. Manchester Rusholme 5 safest Con seats 1. South Holland and the Deepings 2. Boston and Skegness 3. Castle Point 4. Maldon 5. Weald of Kent The new Weald of Kent has displaced Clacton from 5th position. Boundary changes have moved Ladywood up the list. |
|
|
|
Post by wysall on Jan 16, 2024 20:37:44 GMT
bjornhattan If it's possible, would you be willing to upload the output area results as you did the constituency results?
|
|
Georg Ebner
Non-Aligned
Roman romantic reactionary Catholic
Posts: 9,243
|
Post by Georg Ebner on Jan 17, 2024 5:59:51 GMT
Are these maps on Your final notionals or those of Rallings&Thrasher? |
|
