|
|
Post by owainsutton on Sept 7, 2024 20:37:23 GMT
I'd agree. Didsbury = Jesmond Withington = Heston Chorlton = Ouseburn Sale = Gosforth Urmston = Kenton I don't think comparisons with anywhere in London work. London is too big. I'm learning about a city I've never visited. Please do Hale, now!! |
|
|
|
Post by where2travel on Sept 7, 2024 21:29:19 GMT
I'd agree. Didsbury = Jesmond Withington = Heston Chorlton = Ouseburn Sale = Gosforth Urmston = Kenton I don't think comparisons with anywhere in London work. London is too big. I agree with the London point. I was trying to compare Didsbury (or at least it's different parts) with the different parts of Dulwich, but it somehow didn't work. Didsbury hasn't really needed to gentrify and is more 'old money' (always seen as quite posh) which is similar to Dulwich Village (and possibly West Dulwich), but Dulwich Village feels much more upmarket and affluent than Didsbury, and West Dulwich doesn't really have a centre. East Dulwich has seen significant gentrification and change, and it may look like some bits of Didsbury in terms of feel and housing, but perhaps East Dulwich is more like some of the surrounding areas to Didsbury? |
|
|
|
Post by where2travel on Sept 7, 2024 21:34:55 GMT
I'd agree. Didsbury = Jesmond Withington = Heston Chorlton = Ouseburn Sale = Gosforth Urmston = Kenton I don't think comparisons with anywhere in London work. London is too big. I'm learning about a city I've never visited. Please do Hale, now!! I think that's probably difficult, but you may need to get just outside the Newcastle border, or is that cheating? Footballer territory (like Hale) is out in Ponteland (just by the airport, so another link), and you may use Darras Hall as the nearby comparison for Hale Barns (or Bowdon)? |
|
|
|
Post by sanders on Sept 7, 2024 21:40:19 GMT
I'd agree. Didsbury = Jesmond Withington = Heston Chorlton = Ouseburn Sale = Gosforth Urmston = Kenton I don't think comparisons with anywhere in London work. London is too big. I agree with the London point. I was trying to compare Didsbury (or at least it's different parts) with the different parts of Dulwich, but it somehow didn't work. Didsbury hasn't really needed to gentrify and is more 'old money' (always seen as quite posh) which is similar to Dulwich Village (and possibly West Dulwich), but Dulwich Village feels much more upmarket and affluent than Didsbury, and West Dulwich doesn't really have a centre. East Dulwich has seen significant gentrification and change, and it make look like some bits of Didsbury in terms of feel and housing, but perhaps East Dulwich is more like some of the surrounding areas to Didsbury? It doesn't really work because of the stratospheric wealth connected with the City of London. Withington is more artsy, media types than bankers so comparisons to Hampstead, Highgate, Dulwich Village etc struggle a bit, but the old money core argument has purchase (no pun intended) so Dulwich or Highgate may work. |
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Sept 8, 2024 2:58:15 GMT
I'd agree. Didsbury = Jesmond Withington = Heston Chorlton = Ouseburn Sale = Gosforth Urmston = Kenton I don't think comparisons with anywhere in London work. London is too big. I'm learning about a city I've never visited. Please do Hale, now!! That one's hard. We don't really have a posh outer-urban but well connected area like Hale. Newcastle is ultimately smaller than Manchester, and Gosforth is the closest thing to a smaller mix of Hale, Sale, Altrincham etc. I'd say Gosforth, on average, is nicer than Sale, I did it a bit of a disservice there, but on average not as up market as Hale. Hale is further out too. Darras Hall is not dissimilar to a slightly more rural Hale Barns / Bowden. There's more countryside larping in Darras - it's a couple of miles removed from the suburbs unlike Hale Barns and Bowden So Hale is an imaginary posh suburb between gosforth and Darras Hall where the airport is. |
|
|
|
Post by sanders on Sept 8, 2024 6:05:44 GMT
I'm learning about a city I've never visited. Please do Hale, now!! That one's hard. We don't really have a posh outer-urban but well connected area like Hale. Newcastle is ultimately smaller than Manchester, and Gosforth is the closest thing to a smaller mix of Hale, Sale, Altrincham etc. I'd say Gosforth, on average, is nicer than Sale, I did it a bit of a disservice there, but on average not as up market as Hale. Hale is further out too. Darras Hall is not dissimilar to a slightly more rural Hale Barns / Bowden. There's more countryside larping in Darras - it's a couple of miles removed from the suburbs unlike Hale Barns and Bowden So Hale is an imaginary posh suburb between gosforth and Darras Hall where the airport is. But Gosforth can still elect a Tory - what happened there? |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 8, 2024 11:21:32 GMT
I'd agree. Didsbury = Jesmond Withington = HestonChorlton = Ouseburn Sale = Gosforth Urmston = Kenton I don't think comparisons with anywhere in London work. London is too big. Heh, one presumes you mean Heaton? Unless there is now a bit of outer W London attached to Newcastle  |
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 15,774 
|
Post by john07 on Sept 8, 2024 11:41:25 GMT
I'm learning about a city I've never visited. Please do Hale, now!! That one's hard. We don't really have a posh outer-urban but well connected area like Hale. Newcastle is ultimately smaller than Manchester, and Gosforth is the closest thing to a smaller mix of Hale, Sale, Altrincham etc. I'd say Gosforth, on average, is nicer than Sale, I did it a bit of a disservice there, but on average not as up market as Hale. Hale is further out too. Darras Hall is not dissimilar to a slightly more rural Hale Barns / Bowden. There's more countryside larping in Darras - it's a couple of miles removed from the suburbs unlike Hale Barns and Bowden So Hale is an imaginary posh suburb between gosforth and Darras Hall where the airport is. Ponteland? |
|
ColinJ
Labour
Living in the Past
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by ColinJ on Sept 8, 2024 12:09:30 GMT
I'd agree. Didsbury = Jesmond Withington = Heston Chorlton = Ouseburn Sale = Gosforth Urmston = KentonI don't think comparisons with anywhere in London work. London is too big. I had to laugh when you compared Urmston with a district of Harrow in Greater London and immediately stated comparisons with London don't work! But .... then I imagined the po-faced BBC announcer intoning: "Other Kentons are available". |
|
|
|
Post by sanders on Sept 8, 2024 12:21:38 GMT
Didsbury = Highgate
Withington = Crouch End
Chorlton Park = Muswelll Hill
Chorlton = Hornsey
Someone I knew of lived in Chorltonville and the Hornsey & Wood Green / Hornsey & Friern Barnet comparison works.
|
|
|
|
Post by aargauer on Sept 8, 2024 16:08:25 GMT
That one's hard. We don't really have a posh outer-urban but well connected area like Hale. Newcastle is ultimately smaller than Manchester, and Gosforth is the closest thing to a smaller mix of Hale, Sale, Altrincham etc. I'd say Gosforth, on average, is nicer than Sale, I did it a bit of a disservice there, but on average not as up market as Hale. Hale is further out too. Darras Hall is not dissimilar to a slightly more rural Hale Barns / Bowden. There's more countryside larping in Darras - it's a couple of miles removed from the suburbs unlike Hale Barns and Bowden So Hale is an imaginary posh suburb between gosforth and Darras Hall where the airport is. Ponteland? Ponteland ex Darras is a perfectly respectable but unremarkable middle class Tory commuter village. Id guess Manchester has a few of those. But it's both downmarket and less urban vs Hale, in my view. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Sept 8, 2024 18:17:22 GMT
Didsbury = Highgate Withington = Crouch End Chorlton Park = Muswelll Hill Chorlton = Hornsey Someone I knew of lived in Chorltonville and the Hornsey & Wood Green / Hornsey & Friern Barnet comparison works. I wouldn't really consider Chorlton Park to be a real area, despite the ward of that name. It's arguably more like Barlow Moor, but that's one of a number of areas of Manchester whose old names have vanished. The Ville however has a slightly mythical status, as the locals (including my own grandparents) all used to aspire to live there- it has fewer than 300 houses on it but they are beautiful. : CatholicLeft is probably a good pundit on these things. I'm not sure about Withington as Crouch End, but then I don't know Crouch End beyond reputation. West Didsbury maybe, which was always classed as Withington when I was a kid (much of it was built on the old Withington workhouse). Parts of Withington are grim and depressed and merge seamlessly into the bottom of Moss Side. |
|
|
|
Post by sanders on Sept 8, 2024 18:24:50 GMT
Didsbury = Highgate Withington = Crouch End Chorlton Park = Muswelll Hill Chorlton = Hornsey Someone I knew of lived in Chorltonville and the Hornsey & Wood Green / Hornsey & Friern Barnet comparison works. I wouldn't really consider Chorlton Park to be a real area, despite the ward of that name. It's arguably more like Barlow Moor, but that's one of a number of areas of Manchester whose old names have vanished. The Ville however has a slightly mythical status, as the locals (including my own grandparents) all used to aspire to live there- it has fewer than 300 houses on it but they are beautiful. : CatholicLeft is probably a good pundit on these things. I'm not sure about Withington as Crouch End, but then I don't know Crouch End beyond reputation. West Didsbury maybe, which was always classed as Withington when I was a kid (much of it was built on the old Withington workhouse). Parts of Withington are grim and depressed and merge seamlessly into the bottom of Moss Side. Really useful stuff thanks mate. |
|
|
|
Post by phil156 on Sept 9, 2024 5:32:36 GMT
Does anyone know the turnout figure for the Manchester by-election Baguley Ward?
The council is most uncooperative do not think they know what one is, just keep on quoting how many votes were cast
Thankyou to anyone who can solve the question - much appreciated
|
|
|
|
Post by robert1 on Sept 9, 2024 7:25:22 GMT
Does anyone know the turnout figure for the Manchester by-election Baguley Ward? The council is most uncooperative do not think they know what one is, just keep on quoting how many votes were cast Thankyou to anyone who can solve the question - much appreciated Sorry Somewhat abnormally CCHQ figures don't provide turnout for Baguley. All the other results include turnout percentage. |
|
ColinJ
Labour
Living in the Past
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by ColinJ on Sept 9, 2024 7:49:30 GMT
Does anyone know the turnout figure for the Manchester by-election Baguley Ward? The council is most uncooperative do not think they know what one is, just keep on quoting how many votes were cast Thankyou to anyone who can solve the question - much appreciated I think the problem goes back to the presentation of data on this page: www.manchester.gov.uk/directory_record/469592/baguley_ward_local_by-election_-_2024Near the top of the page we see: Total number of ballot papers in ward: 1343
Turnout: 1329Clearly the Manchester elections office should say Valid ballot papers: 1329 (because there were 14 spoilt ballot papers) and not Turnout: 1329. There seem to be a misunderstanding at the council as to what most people (psephologists and non-psephologists alike) mean by "turnout", which is of course "% turnout". My advice would be to simply ask the elections office for the "number of electors" or "electorate" at the by-election (hopefully that would flush them out). Davıd Boothroyd has already given you ballpark figures for the electorate, so these can be used to check whether any further answer from the office is credible. Then you could do a simple "% turnout" calculation, either on the basis of valid votes or ballot papers issued. Added in edit: While writing this, andrewp has already calculated the turnout for you on the basis of one of David's figures, i.e. 11,571, which will not be the exact electorate figure. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Sept 9, 2024 7:58:34 GMT
Does anyone know the turnout figure for the Manchester by-election Baguley Ward? The council is most uncooperative do not think they know what one is, just keep on quoting how many votes were cast Thankyou to anyone who can solve the question - much appreciated I think the problem goes back to the presentation of data on this page: www.manchester.gov.uk/directory_record/469592/baguley_ward_local_by-election_-_2024Near the top of the page we see: Total number of ballot papers in ward: 1343
Turnout: 1329Clearly the Manchester elections office should say Valid ballot papers: 1329 (because there were 14 spoilt ballot papers) and not Turnout: 1329. There seem to be a misunderstanding at the council as to what most people (psephologists and non-psephologists alike) mean by "turnout", which is of course "% turnout". My advice would be to simply ask the elections office for the "number of electors" or "electorate" at the by-election (hopefully that would flush them out). Davıd Boothroyd has already given you ballpark figures for the electorate, so these can be used to check whether any further answer from the office is credible. Then you could do a simple "% turnout" calculation, either on the basis of valid votes or ballot papers issued. Added in edit: While writing this, andrewp has already calculated the turnout for you on the basis of one of David's figures, i.e. 11,571, which will not be the exact electorate figure. Yes, if you use 1329/11571, it’s 11.5%. When we are given turnout figures at local by elections, those are after the validation stage. When we get turnout figures I assume therefore that those are turnout of all votes, including spoilt/ want of an official mark etc. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,889
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 9, 2024 10:19:27 GMT
Is it? I'm pretty sure that at GEs only valid votes are counted towards the "official" turnout figure, with various "spoiled" papers being listed separately.
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 9, 2024 13:21:24 GMT
There isn't any "official" turnout because the level of the turnout does not matter for any legal purposes.
The quick turnout figures given on the night are the total verified ballots divided by the electorate, so include spoiled ballots.
The turnout figures usually printed in the press and reference books are the total valid vote, excluding spoiled ballots, divided by the electorate.
|
|
cathyc
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,092
|
Post by cathyc on Sept 9, 2024 13:55:08 GMT
There isn't any "official" turnout because the level of the turnout does not matter for any legal purposes. The quick turnout figures given on the night are the total verified ballots divided by the electorate, so include spoiled ballots. The turnout figures usually printed in the press and reference books are the total valid vote, excluding spoiled ballots, divided by the electorate. Are spoiled papers taken into account when deciding whether a candidate has lost their deposit? |
|
