Lib Dems come third in Richmond Park in 2015

[Deleted]

Pretty self-explanatory. What happens in the by-election? Would the Lib Dems still win or would the confusion about who is best placed to win mean that Goldsmith wins against split opposition in 2016? I'm assuming he stands again as a Tory in 2017 and wins as in our timeline, but who comes second in the 2016 by-election if Labour come second in 2015? Probably the Lib Dems based on their number of council seats from 2014.

I think Wolmar was a decent pick but if Labour though they had a genuine chance who would they stand here? David Miliband opportunity? I joke, but there are a lot of rich Labour supporters in Barnes et al and many more ordinary Labour folk in RoT and KoT. Parts of Tudor ward looked like places where Labour could win when I campaigned for Goldsmith in the by-election. I guess we still had the vestiges of the 2015 coalition around then so how places looked were more indicative of a decent TORY vote than nowadays. 

I wonder if the forum's own Richmond upon Thames residents might have sought the nomination. Is there a world where Labour beats Goldsmith in 2016? I guess not. 

[kitesurfer]

You can probably think of Esher & Walton in 2019 when the Lib Dems came from third to a close second and Labour lost their deposit.

I don’t think Labour would ever have had much chance in Richmond Park. The Lib Dems have been competitive in Richmond for many decades - they came a close second in Richmond & Barnes during the previous Tory government.

I sense there is not much of a Labour core vote there.

I believe environmentalism and liberalism are long standing considerations there. The Lib Dems have generally been perceived as more focused on the environment than Labour. I also think in around 2015 anyway that voting Labour would have been too much of a stretch for such a wealthy constituency. It has a lost of economic liberals, in my opinion, and they would not have warmed to Miliband.

Goldsmith was an ideal candidate for the constituency (pre-referendum). He was in many ways a quasi-orange book Lib Dem at the time.

The Brexit referendum completely changed perceptions of Goldsmith as did his what was regarded by many as a xenophobic and dirty mayoral campaign.

When you consider how anti-Brexit the Lib Dems were in 2016 and how dangerous Corbyn would have appeared to what in my opinion is quite a small c conservative, but liberal and environmentally conscious, and certainly highly affluent constituency, there is no way that Labour could possibly have posed a threat in the by-election.

When you consider what I have just said about how perceptions of Golddmith changed in 2016, I guess a bigger question is how he managed to get back in 2017 albeit with a tiny majority.

[The Bishop]

Jun 29, 2024 6:26:19 GMT kitesurfer said:

I guess a bigger question is how he managed to get back in 2017 albeit with a tiny majority

One reason for that is that many LibDems thought they were probably safe there after the byelection, their sending people to Vauxhall in the last 48 hours based on little more than an internet rumour has become the stuff of legend.

[iain]

Jun 29, 2024 8:55:40 GMT The Bishop said:

Jun 29, 2024 6:26:19 GMT kitesurfer said:

I guess a bigger question is how he managed to get back in 2017 albeit with a tiny majority

One reason for that is that many LibDems thought they were probably safe there after the byelection, their sending people to Vauxhall in the last 48 hours based on little more than an internet rumour has become the stuff of legend.

Legend in that it is untrue, yes.

[The Bishop]

Is that really so, it was claimed to be the case on here at the time as well as other sources.

[iain]

Jun 29, 2024 9:22:02 GMT The Bishop said:

Is that really so, it was claimed to be the case on here at the time as well as other sources.

It is certainly true that time was inexplicably wasted in Vauxhall, it isn’t true that people were diverted away from Richmond Park (nor have I seen that reported anywhere). People weren’t diverted away from anywhere we won in 2017 as none of our seats were considered safe.

[londonseal80]

Slightly off topic, if not for the Liberal surge in Southwest since the 70’s, it would be interesting to see what would have happened in 1997.

Carshalton would have likely gone Labour in 1997 but may possibly have gone straight back to the Tories in 2001 following the patterns of Upminster and Romford.

Sutton and Cheam would have stayed Tory with maybe a majority maybe similar to Beckenham was at that time. It has more in common with Croydon South and the nearby Surrey border seats than the other LD areas.

Kingston and Surbiton, Twickenham and Richmond Park have more in common with Wimbledon and Putney which both went Labour in 1997 and 2001 and back to the Tories in 2005. It wouldn’t inconceivable these could have voted Labour that year. All those seats have much left leaning middle class Guardian reader types that could have been swayed by Tony Blair and New Labour if there was no Lib Dem base there. Also in 2004 these areas voted for Labour in the mayorals (like Wimbledon) where as both Sutton seats voted Tory (like Bromley and Havering)

I think only Sutton and Cheam would have been a guaranteed Tory hold in 1997.

[Deleted]

That sounds about right. If we assume (with caution) that the 2004 London mayoral results are a somewhat accurate indicator of how the south west might have gone in a straight fight between Labour and the Tories, then I think New Labour would have taken Carshalton, Kingston & Surbiton, and Twickenham in 1997, and maybe Richmond Park because Labour did win Wimbledon pretty easily that year. I agree about Sutton & Cheam although Labour would have been well ahead in Sutton Central.