The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 19, 2024 12:08:05 GMT
No comment yet on the Warwick result, but Labour will surely be pretty pleased with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 19, 2024 12:53:08 GMT
Lib Dem GAIN RICHMOND UPON THAMES LBC; Hampton North Ward 🔶 BISHOP, Carey, LibDem, 1177, 53.2%, +19.9% 🟢 Grn, 106, 4.8%, -16.2% 🔴 Lab, 159, 7.2%, -1.1% 🔵 Con, 771, 34.8%, +11.2% Congrats🎉 to Cllr. Cary Bishop and her team on an excellent win 🥇. On those vote gains and losses how can it be a seat gain as LDs were ahead last time. |
|
|
|
Post by iainbhx on Jan 19, 2024 12:55:30 GMT
I don’t blame anyone for failing to predict the hugeness of the Lib Dem collapse in Cazenove though. Beware attempting to understand strictly-Orthodox politics! If I remember rightly, the dynasty with the most followers in the ward (and this is certainly not the case elsewhere in Stamford Hill) is the Satmar, which means this point scores double. Satmar and I think Belz. |
|
carolus
Lib Dem
Posts: 5,743
Member is Online
|
Post by carolus on Jan 19, 2024 12:56:27 GMT
Lib Dem GAIN RICHMOND UPON THAMES LBC; Hampton North Ward 🔶 BISHOP, Carey, LibDem, 1177, 53.2%, +19.9% 🟢 Grn, 106, 4.8%, -16.2% 🔴 Lab, 159, 7.2%, -1.1% 🔵 Con, 771, 34.8%, +11.2% Congrats🎉 to Cllr. Cary Bishop and her team on an excellent win 🥇. On those vote gains and losses how can it be a seat gain as LDs were ahead last time. Tories took the third seat in the ward in 2022 - the Lib Dems only stood two candidates, in favour of a Green (who came fifth). |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 19, 2024 13:02:39 GMT
On those vote gains and losses how can it be a seat gain as LDs were ahead last time. Tories took the third seat in the ward in 2022 - the Lib Dems only stood two candidates, in favour of a Green (who came fifth). Thank you. A three seat ward. Split voting! Understand. My supplementary is how are those percentage changes in vote compiled then? In this instance they make no sense at all to me. Can the comparison not be made on the actual vacancy? If not what is the point of the calculations quoted above? They just cause confusion. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Jan 19, 2024 13:11:30 GMT
HACKNEY Cazenove SHARER, Ian (Conservative) 1,623 PASCAL, Laura (Labour) 935 MICNER, Tamara (Green) 387 RAVAL, Dave (Liberal Democrat) 73 A slightly disappopointing result there ...  Yes, I'm aware of the rather special circumstances. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jan 19, 2024 13:13:34 GMT
Tories took the third seat in the ward in 2022 - the Lib Dems only stood two candidates, in favour of a Green (who came fifth). Thank you. A three seat ward. Split voting! Understand. My supplementary is how are those percentage changes in vote compiled then? In this instance they make no sense at all to me. Can the comparison not be made on the actual vacancy? If not what is the point of the calculations quoted above? They just cause confusion. You're correct. The percentages from 2022 are a nonsense. IN effect the Lib Dems and the Green were a single slate and should be treated as such. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Jan 19, 2024 13:31:09 GMT
If one did treat the 2 LDs and 1 Green in Hampton N in 2022 as a single slate, the baseline would be
LD/ Green 42.2%
Con 30%
Ind 17.3%
Lab 10.5%
the changes this time would be
LD +11
Con +4.8
Lab -3.3
No Ind
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,777
|
Post by right on Jan 19, 2024 13:49:43 GMT
This isn't straw clutching, I promise...
It's interesting to see two results where the Anyone But Labour vote has been effectively mobilised
Apart from Hackney* and perhaps Brent I don't remember local election results showing that in the run up to 1997
*Where the Tories have certainly not been firing on all cylinders like they were in the 1990s
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 19, 2024 14:10:37 GMT
If one did treat the 2 LDs and 1 Green in Hampton N in 2022 as a single slate, the baseline would be LD/ Green 42.2% Con 30% Ind 17.3% Lab 10.5% the changes this time would be LD +11 Con +4.8 Lab -3.3 No Ind Now that has a meaning. The previous figures were just utter bollocks. |
|
|
|
Post by sirnorfolkpassmore on Jan 19, 2024 17:49:56 GMT
If one did treat the 2 LDs and 1 Green in Hampton N in 2022 as a single slate, the baseline would be LD/ Green 42.2% Con 30% Ind 17.3% Lab 10.5% the changes this time would be LD +11 Con +4.8 Lab -3.3 No Ind Ah, but there was also a Green candidate in the by-election, on 4.8%. So, while your figures do give a truer picture, not sure it's entirely complete (and not sure it can be realistically). It's also not quite right Lib Dems and Greens ran as a slate in 2022 - there was a nod and a wink but separate campaigns and separate literature, which I don't think ever explicitly advocated LD/LD/Green votes. That's relevant in the particular ward, as the Independent had been elected as a Lib Dem in 2018. So a fair number of people would have seen the "slate" as being LD/Ind (or simply not seen it as a slate at all). |
|
|
|
Post by owainsutton on Jan 19, 2024 18:03:42 GMT
If one did treat the 2 LDs and 1 Green in Hampton N in 2022 as a single slate, the baseline would be LD/ Green 42.2% Con 30% Ind 17.3% Lab 10.5% the changes this time would be LD +11 Con +4.8 Lab -3.3 No Ind Ah, but there was also a Green candidate in the by-election, on 4.8%. So, while your figures do give a truer picture, not sure it's entirely complete (and not sure it can be realistically). It's also not quite right Lib Dems and Greens ran as a slate in 2022 - there was a nod and a wink but separate campaigns and separate literature, which I don't think ever explicitly advocated LD/LD/Green votes. That's relevant in the particular ward, as the Independent had been elected as a Lib Dem in 2018. So a fair number of people would have seen the "slate" as being LD/Ind (or simply not seen it as a slate at all). I'm fairly sure I saw some literature in 2022 that was explicitly joint campaigning for LD/LD/Green votes? Maybe a different ward, but it would still indicate the extent to which local activists were co-ordinating. Maybe some candidates weren't happy with joint literature despite an agreement to mutually under-nominated. (That's speculation.) |
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jan 19, 2024 21:59:28 GMT
No comment yet on the Warwick result, but Labour will surely be pretty pleased with it. I would imagine it contributed quite a bit to James's Labour rating in this week's GWBWI though apart from Hackney none of the results was too bad for Labour. For officially supported Labour candidates they were quite a good set of results although I do accept that perhaps we ought to be doing a bit better than this in Stannington. |
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jan 19, 2024 22:03:11 GMT
If I remember rightly, the dynasty with the most followers in the ward (and this is certainly not the case elsewhere in Stamford Hill) is the Satmar, which means this point scores double. Satmar and I think Belz. goodness I know nothing about Belz. Do they come with whistles? (I imagine they do wear suits albeit invariably black ones.) |
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jan 19, 2024 22:06:39 GMT
Ah, but there was also a Green candidate in the by-election, on 4.8%. So, while your figures do give a truer picture, not sure it's entirely complete (and not sure it can be realistically). It's also not quite right Lib Dems and Greens ran as a slate in 2022 - there was a nod and a wink but separate campaigns and separate literature, which I don't think ever explicitly advocated LD/LD/Green votes. That's relevant in the particular ward, as the Independent had been elected as a Lib Dem in 2018. So a fair number of people would have seen the "slate" as being LD/Ind (or simply not seen it as a slate at all). I'm fairly sure I saw some literature in 2022 that was explicitly joint campaigning for LD/LD/Green votes? Maybe a different ward, but it would still indicate the extent to which local activists were co-ordinating. Maybe some candidates weren't happy with joint literature despite an agreement to mutually under-nominated. (That's speculation.) AFAIK that did happen in some wards, but we weren't aware of the LDs calling for a LD x 2, Green x 1 vote in Mortlake & Barnes Common, for example. (I did quite a bit of work there.) So I think not in all wards, although it was generally appreciated by many voters that the reason why there were only 2 LD candidates was that they wanted people to use their 3rd vote for the Green. |
|
|
|
Post by sirnorfolkpassmore on Jan 19, 2024 22:59:17 GMT
Ah, but there was also a Green candidate in the by-election, on 4.8%. So, while your figures do give a truer picture, not sure it's entirely complete (and not sure it can be realistically). It's also not quite right Lib Dems and Greens ran as a slate in 2022 - there was a nod and a wink but separate campaigns and separate literature, which I don't think ever explicitly advocated LD/LD/Green votes. That's relevant in the particular ward, as the Independent had been elected as a Lib Dem in 2018. So a fair number of people would have seen the "slate" as being LD/Ind (or simply not seen it as a slate at all). I'm fairly sure I saw some literature in 2022 that was explicitly joint campaigning for LD/LD/Green votes? Maybe a different ward, but it would still indicate the extent to which local activists were co-ordinating. Maybe some candidates weren't happy with joint literature despite an agreement to mutually under-nominated. (That's speculation.) No, I'm pretty certain that's not correct and there were no explicit calls for split voting on literature in any of the wards involved. I understand this related to the impact on election expenses. And I am entirely certain there was no "joint literature" at all. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Jan 19, 2024 23:05:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by batman on Jan 20, 2024 4:12:37 GMT
thanks. I’m informed that last year they forbade the women of the sect to drive. |
|
mboy
Liberal
Listen. Think. Speak.
Posts: 23,714
Member is Online
|
Post by mboy on Jan 20, 2024 8:41:09 GMT
On a minor note Dave Raval's agent was Ben Mathis (at the extreme right of the photo?), who was the Lib Dem parliamentary candidate in 2019 until he was suspended from the party mid campaign for past Twitter posts. Looks like he's back in the party (he's moved to Lewisham) unless this was a personal favour to the candidate. Ben's suspension was utterly absurd. The party should be very grateful if he's rejoined. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,925
|
Post by The Bishop on Jan 20, 2024 10:55:37 GMT
This isn't straw clutching, I promise... It's interesting to see two results where the Anyone But Labour vote has been effectively mobilised Apart from Hackney* and perhaps Brent I don't remember local election results showing that in the run up to 1997 *Where the Tories have certainly not been firing on all cylinders like they were in the 1990s Two results, what is the other one? Hackney was very obviously a vote for a person, not a party. He would almost certainly have won as an independent. |
|
