Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2013 14:17:04 GMT
I'm not a member of any party but have supported SNP recently. Would identify myself as a green socialist though. You and I are going to get on perfectly.  Oh stop flirting, he's new. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 21, 2013 14:23:58 GMT
You were the future once doktorb  |
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Jun 21, 2013 15:21:56 GMT
I thought it was a pretty good result for UKIP. In one of their weakest areas in the UK they still managed to almost reach 5%. I have to say I agree with this. Looking at this table of results from the 2009 European elections www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/table/2009/jun/09/european-elections-elections-2009North East Scotland appears to be their worst area apart from Central Belt Scotland and Gibraltar. Also notice that they got approximately the same percentage in 2009 in Aberdeen City and Inverclyde, 5.0% and 4.8% respectively. In the 2011 Inverclyde by-election they got 1.0% of the vote and no one even noticed they lost their deposit as that was a good result for them in Scotland at the time. Together with last night's local by-elections it indicates their support in Scotland is growing (from a very low base). Having said that they'll have to improve their performance in Scotland quite a bit (e.g. not making gaffes about 'Stirling by-election' etc) if they want to start getting elected representatives in Scotland and it remains to be seen if they can do this. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Jun 21, 2013 17:39:55 GMT
how far down the list of parties do you go ? I don't know it was just a thought.. Would it make a difference? Only a minority of people watch TV hustings - it's much more relevant how many doormats you can get your leaflets to. The TV coverage the Greens got didn't seem to do them much good. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 21, 2013 18:15:51 GMT
I thought it was a pretty good result for UKIP. In one of their weakest areas in the UK they still managed to almost reach 5%. I have to say I agree with this. Looking at this table of results from the 2009 European elections www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/table/2009/jun/09/european-elections-elections-2009North East Scotland appears to be their worst area apart from Central Belt Scotland and Gibraltar. Also notice that they got approximately the same percentage in 2009 in Aberdeen City and Inverclyde, 5.0% and 4.8% respectively. In the 2011 Inverclyde by-election they got 1.0% of the vote and no one even noticed they lost their deposit as that was a good result for them in Scotland at the time. Together with last night's local by-elections it indicates their support in Scotland is growing (from a very low base). Having said that they'll have to improve their performance in Scotland quite a bit (e.g. not making gaffes about 'Stirling by-election' etc) if they want to start getting elected representatives in Scotland and it remains to be seen if they can do this. Maybe that is pushing it slightly - they couldn't even beat the LibDems  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2013 19:00:07 GMT
You should tell that to the CyberNats on the Grauniad thread who are shrieking that this result means a Yes landslide next year is guaranteed No they need all the encouraging possible so the end result will be even more amsuing. I bet its between 2:1 and 3:1 for staying in. 69-31 would be my prediction. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Jun 21, 2013 19:12:09 GMT
Worryingly for Labour their vote is still lower than the 2007 notional. It is usually a good guide as to who has performed badly in a by-election by noting which is the first party to start comparing apples and oranges in the post-count TV post-mortem. That was the SNP who brought the 2012 local election results into play. |
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Jun 21, 2013 19:21:11 GMT
I have to say I agree with this. Looking at this table of results from the 2009 European elections www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/table/2009/jun/09/european-elections-elections-2009North East Scotland appears to be their worst area apart from Central Belt Scotland and Gibraltar. Also notice that they got approximately the same percentage in 2009 in Aberdeen City and Inverclyde, 5.0% and 4.8% respectively. In the 2011 Inverclyde by-election they got 1.0% of the vote and no one even noticed they lost their deposit as that was a good result for them in Scotland at the time. Together with last night's local by-elections it indicates their support in Scotland is growing (from a very low base). Having said that they'll have to improve their performance in Scotland quite a bit (e.g. not making gaffes about 'Stirling by-election' etc) if they want to start getting elected representatives in Scotland and it remains to be seen if they can do this. Maybe that is pushing it slightly - they couldn't even beat the LibDems I take your point. What I meant was in terms of the abysmally bad results UKIP got in Scotland that was a good result. These are UKIP's results in the Scottish Westminster by elections since they formed 20 years ago 1994 Monklands East - No candidate 1995 Perth & Kinross - 1.2% 6th place behind the OMRLP 1997 Paisley South - No candidate 1999 Hamilton South - 0.3% 10th place 2000 Falkirk West - No candidate 2000 Glasgow Anniesland - No candidate 2005 Livingstone - 0.4% 7th place 2006 Dunfermline and West Fife 0.6% 8th place 2008 Glasgow East - No candidate 2008 Glenrothes - 0.3% 7th place 2009 Glasgow NE - No candidate 2011 Inverclyde - 1.0% 5th place (bottom of poll) They have also contested 3 of the 7 Scottish parliament by elections 2000 Aye - 0.4% 8th place 2005 Glasgow Cathcart - 0.4% 9th place (bottom of poll) 2013 Aberdeen Donside - 4.8% 5th place So in 2011 1.0% was a good result for them. 4.8% yesterday therefore represents a huge improvement from a very low base. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Jun 21, 2013 19:30:45 GMT
The Scottish Green Party are yet to match the 3.8% they achieved in the Glasgow Central by-election in 1989, at either a Westminster or Holyrood by-election.
|
|
|
|
Post by AdminSTB on Jun 21, 2013 19:53:21 GMT
Was it even the "Scottish Green Party" at that point? If I remember correctly, they only split to form a separate party from the English and Welsh Greens in 1990 after the success in the European elections the year before.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 21, 2013 20:03:10 GMT
The Scottish Green Party are yet to match the 3.8% they achieved in the Glasgow Central by-election in 1989, at either a Westminster or Holyrood by-election Didn't know that - it hasn't helped that they have left so many uncontested, tbh. (of course, that 3.8% was hardly a stratospheric score - but it exceeded both the LibDems and "continuing" SDP combined) |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jun 21, 2013 20:22:49 GMT
I have to say I agree with this. Looking at this table of results from the 2009 European elections www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/table/2009/jun/09/european-elections-elections-2009North East Scotland appears to be their worst area apart from Central Belt Scotland and Gibraltar. Also notice that they got approximately the same percentage in 2009 in Aberdeen City and Inverclyde, 5.0% and 4.8% respectively. In the 2011 Inverclyde by-election they got 1.0% of the vote and no one even noticed they lost their deposit as that was a good result for them in Scotland at the time. Together with last night's local by-elections it indicates their support in Scotland is growing (from a very low base). Having said that they'll have to improve their performance in Scotland quite a bit (e.g. not making gaffes about 'Stirling by-election' etc) if they want to start getting elected representatives in Scotland and it remains to be seen if they can do this. Maybe that is pushing it slightly - they couldn't even beat the LibDems Are you joking? This is a seat which includes part of the Gordon constituency which as you know has been LD (or predecessor) for more than 30 years. The fact that UKIP were only a few hundred votes behind the LDs proves what a good result it was for them, in the circumstances. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2013 20:24:38 GMT
Lets face it, the story here is the SNP have bottled it again, half way through a campaign leading towards a vote on Independence they once more refuse to discuss it. A referendum they called. They could have used this by election as a platform for the Yes campaign but went for local issues that were overlooked by a Scottish Press who have ignored the whole thing. Why? We have the referendum and the Yes/No campaigns are underway. This was a by-election, a chance for the opposition and electorate to have a pop at the current government. The SNP has got through this pretty much unscathed despite being in government for six years. Doesn't work that way. The SNP are failing badly in promoting the concept of Independence, there sole reason for existing. Whether through armed struggle or the Western Democratic process national liberation movements are essentially Bourgeois. To succeed the leaders of the Bourgeois project must gain and hold the support of the Intelligentsia and Proletariat. This is nigh impossible within the civic nationalist course as it fails in the creation of any form of cultural renaissance and in the low tax corporate friendly future promoted by Salmond there is little of attraction to the politically aware economically active working classes. The failure of the SNP to convince the majority that the renunciation of British Citizenship is a progressive move is due to a number of issues the prime one being that they have failed to create the concept of a common identity for the people to unite behind. Salmond (Or the 79 Group), having never been forgiven for losing the potential support of DC Thomson, are too busy trying not to frighten the horses. This by election went by without anyone noticing, it is my proposal that a motorcade through the constituency led by a hundred bare arsed Kilties would maybe lose a percent or two on election day but put the idea of independence on the front pages. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 22, 2013 9:44:14 GMT
Maybe that is pushing it slightly - they couldn't even beat the LibDems Are you joking? This is a seat which includes part of the Gordon constituency which as you know has been LD (or predecessor) for more than 30 years. The fact that UKIP were only a few hundred votes behind the LDs proves what a good result it was for them, in the circumstances. The reference was to the Inverclyde by-election two years ago |
|
johnr
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 1,944 
|
Post by johnr on Jun 22, 2013 12:14:49 GMT
Worryingly for Labour their vote is still lower than the 2007 notional. It is usually a good guide as to who has performed badly in a by-election by noting which is the first party to start comparing apples and oranges in the post-count TV post-mortem. That was the SNP who brought the 2012 local election results into play. Especially when its factually incorrect. Notional 2007 for Labour was 31.7% while Thursdays result was 33.3%. You never talk about actual votes because turnout varies. Its also fanciful to suggest that labour managed to get out all of its 2011 voters, while gaining so few. Its well known that getting our vote to turnout seems much harder than it is for the SNP. |
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,892
|
Post by Tony Otim on Jun 22, 2013 16:04:49 GMT
Ignoring the rather ridiculous UKIP vs Green thing, I'll agree that in the context of previous UKIP results in Scotland, their performance here was pretty good. But it also needs to be put in the context of almost perfect conditions for them - three of the four main parties in government, Labour only just recovering from their worst ever showing in Scotland 2 years ago, a lot of national coverage for the party at the moment and demographics (skewing older) that should be more in their favour than some areas. So yes, it's a big step forward for them, but how much scope is there for them to go much higher in Scotland? They might do better in the Euros next year, but other than that? I could see UKIP having MEPs for every region except Scotland and Northern Ireland next year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Jun 22, 2013 17:29:39 GMT
They might do better in the Euros next year, but other than that? I could see UKIP having MEPs for every region except Scotland and Northern Ireland next year. I would agree with this. UKIP are certainly on an upward trajectory in Scotland but because they're starting from such a low base I think a Scottish UKIP MEP in 2014 would be a tall order. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2013 18:55:43 GMT
Assuming the BBC are consistent, it thus makes sense that in a contest to elect a new MSP, most coverage is given to parties who already have MSPs. I basically agree - those with FPTP MSPs should in normal terms receive greater coverage than those without FPTP MSPs. It might be worth pointing out that the Conservatives won no FPTP seats in 1999, but still won more seats overall and had a higher vote-share then than in 2011. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2013 19:49:59 GMT
Right here goes...... Greens- I agree with Rlmkin I don't know why they stood, im unsure what their message is I think they are unsure what their message is. Candidate we will no doubt see her again more because they don't have many other options however. I would probably agree, locally they suffer as the centre of gravity is in Aberdeenshire with most of the senior people based there, while the majority of the membership is in the city. Not even within the city actually, largely within a triangular area that is Old Aberdeen at the top, down to the harbour and out a wee bit into Fraser's ward. There are a few members in Aberdeen who would make good MSPs, but being sensible they don't want to! Now despite all this I think there is a relatively clear path to 1-3 councillors for the Aberdeen Greens. Aberdeen is not a happy city, there is plenty of anger about public transport, the environment, housing costs and wider issues that Greens could get traction on. People in the Bridge of Don are not naturally inclined to vote Green, but we don't need them to right now. A focus on two of the centre wards is what's needed and with a councillor or two we could eventually drag ourselves into wider relevance Despite 07&11 figures showing us there are enough people who vote Green there has never been a focused campaign to get them out. I'm still bitter that we didn't even run a campaign in George St/Harbour last time. |
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Jun 22, 2013 20:59:32 GMT
Incidently my prediction I sent to Kris was May 29, 2013 at 11:13pm via ProBoards Mobile Quote . My prediction for Donside not to be shown till polls have closed is..... SNP 41 Lab 38 Con 11 Ukip 3 libdem 3 Green 2.5 SCP 0.5 SDA 0.5 NF 0.5 I find it interesting (and impressive) that your analysis of the Lab vs SNP fight to be quite accurate. Probably most of your own overestimate comes down to finding UKIP invisible (and last minute upturn for them) and there must be a bit of Lib Dem invisibility there too. |
|
