|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Jun 1, 2020 23:14:58 GMT
In the 1997 general election, the highest vote for the Natural Law Party by some distance came in Glasgow Maryhill. The constituency, a tough working-class area of North Glasgow, is not perhaps noted for yogic flying, but there it is. But the candidate was called Blair. Could it be that some voters were so keen to vote for Tony Blair that they thought they could directly vote for him? I've heard of something possibly similar. The highest vote by far for the Wessex Regionalists in the 1979 election came in the Westbury constituency, fully 3%. And guess what the candidate was called? He was called Tom Thatcher. The Wessex Regionalists say that voters in Westbury were too intelligent to think they were voting for Margaret Thatcher, and that he was a popular local farmer. But not sure I'm convinced. To be fair, Westbury is a place resonant with Wessex history; if anywhere was going to vote Wessex Reg I don't see why not there.
|
|
bsjmcr
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,393
|
Post by bsjmcr on Jun 1, 2020 23:37:43 GMT
In the 1997 general election, the highest vote for the Natural Law Party by some distance came in Glasgow Maryhill. The constituency, a tough working-class area of North Glasgow, is not perhaps noted for yogic flying, but there it is. But the candidate was called Blair. Could it be that some voters were so keen to vote for Tony Blair that they thought they could directly vote for him? I've heard of something possibly similar. The highest vote by far for the Wessex Regionalists in the 1979 election came in the Westbury constituency, fully 3%. And guess what the candidate was called? He was called Tom Thatcher. The Wessex Regionalists say that voters in Westbury were too intelligent to think they were voting for Margaret Thatcher, and that he was a popular local farmer. But not sure I'm convinced. Fascinating, and the great irony is how at 651 votes is significantly more than what their leader Geoffrey Clements got in Buckingham (against a young Bercow of course) and West Lancashire which I believe was the base of the party and where there is a sizeable (though clearly not enough) TM community and centre, and even a school I believe. I only know this much about the party after reading an interesting blog written by someone who grew up (and was later disillusioned) with the TM community in Skelmersdale, West Lancashire, all about the 1992 election. Moving swiftly on to lost deposits, I believe Labour lost quite a handful in 2019, but probably not any in 2017. Is there a convenient list of major party (i.e. Lab/Con - sorry LDs, it's been countless for you guys since 2015...) lost deposits since, say, '97? Same goes for Tories in Liverpool, etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2020 7:21:28 GMT
The high vote of the Socialist Labour Party candidate against Speaker Martin backs up the theory.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,783
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 2, 2020 10:57:49 GMT
In the 1997 general election, the highest vote for the Natural Law Party by some distance came in Glasgow Maryhill. The constituency, a tough working-class area of North Glasgow, is not perhaps noted for yogic flying, but there it is. But the candidate was called Blair. Could it be that some voters were so keen to vote for Tony Blair that they thought they could directly vote for him? I've heard of something possibly similar. The highest vote by far for the Wessex Regionalists in the 1979 election came in the Westbury constituency, fully 3%. And guess what the candidate was called? He was called Tom Thatcher. The Wessex Regionalists say that voters in Westbury were too intelligent to think they were voting for Margaret Thatcher, and that he was a popular local farmer. But not sure I'm convinced. There are a few other examples of this sort of thing, Dewsbury being the only seat outside the East End of London where the BNP saved their deposit in 1997 for example. (their candidate had the surname Taylor, like the sitting Labour MP) There was also the Bradley v Bradley thing at Manchester Withington in 2005 - Labour said that was a factor in their defeat (though monumental complacency was the main one, aided by some shameless scaremongering by the LibDems of course)
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 2, 2020 11:47:22 GMT
The high vote of the Socialist Labour Party candidate against Speaker Martin backs up the theory. Leckie ? Who were they confusing her with?
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 2, 2020 11:49:27 GMT
In the 1997 general election, the highest vote for the Natural Law Party by some distance came in Glasgow Maryhill. The constituency, a tough working-class area of North Glasgow, is not perhaps noted for yogic flying, but there it is. But the candidate was called Blair. Could it be that some voters were so keen to vote for Tony Blair that they thought they could directly vote for him? I've heard of something possibly similar. The highest vote by far for the Wessex Regionalists in the 1979 election came in the Westbury constituency, fully 3%. And guess what the candidate was called? He was called Tom Thatcher. The Wessex Regionalists say that voters in Westbury were too intelligent to think they were voting for Margaret Thatcher, and that he was a popular local farmer. But not sure I'm convinced. There are a few other examples of this sort of thing, Dewsbury being the only seat outside the East End of London where the BNP saved their deposit in 1997 for example. (their candidate had the surname Taylor, like the sitting Labour MP) Dewsbury was naturally a strong area for the BNP though and they won several of the wards in subsequent local elections. It may have made a small difference at the margins but it seems perfectly plausible that the BNP would get one if their best results there. Rather less so that the Communists would have done in Hertsmere in 1983
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2020 14:05:22 GMT
The high vote of the Socialist Labour Party candidate against Speaker Martin backs up the theory. Leckie ? Who were they confusing her with? Aah no, I was referring to the party label, Kelly in 2005 got by far the highest SLP vote in the country against no official Labour candidate. The result in the by-election was a reduction in vote share by 14 percentage points.
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jun 2, 2020 14:50:00 GMT
There are a few other examples of this sort of thing, Dewsbury being the only seat outside the East End of London where the BNP saved their deposit in 1997 for example. (their candidate had the surname Taylor, like the sitting Labour MP) Dewsbury was naturally a strong area for the BNP though and they won several of the wards in subsequent local elections. It may have made a small difference at the margins but it seems perfectly plausible that the BNP would get one if their best results there. Rather less so that the Communists would have done in Hertsmere in 1983 The R. Parkinson in question in Hertsmere was not an official Communist candidate, but rather an independent running as a "Republican Communist".
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jun 2, 2020 18:38:51 GMT
Of the 53 seats the Tories gained from Labour at the last election 13 of them had higher than average electorates compared to the English average of 75,000.
Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Bury South, Colne Valley, Crewe & Nantwich, Dewsbury, Heywood & Middleton, Ipwich, Leigh, Stockton South, Stroud, Warrington South.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,077
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jun 2, 2020 20:15:08 GMT
Of the 53 seats the Tories gained from Labour at the last election 13 of them had higher than average electorates compared to the English average of 75,000. Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Bury South, Colne Valley, Crewe & Nantwich, Dewsbury, Heywood & Middleton, Ipwich, Leigh, Stockton South, Stroud, Warrington South. Interesting in the sense of how winning seats with lower electorates affects the bias in the electoral system
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Jun 2, 2020 21:59:58 GMT
Of the 53 seats the Tories gained from Labour at the last election 13 of them had higher than average electorates compared to the English average of 75,000. Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Bury South, Colne Valley, Crewe & Nantwich, Dewsbury, Heywood & Middleton, Ipwich, Leigh, Stockton South, Stroud, Warrington South. Interesting in the sense of how winning seats with lower electorates affects the bias in the electoral system It could make it difficult for Labour to win back the other 40 seats if the electorates of those constituencies are increased by including surrounding countryside areas, although that won't apply in every case, for example with Darlington and Sedgefield.
|
|
|
Post by greenhert on Jun 3, 2020 9:47:37 GMT
Interesting in the sense of how winning seats with lower electorates affects the bias in the electoral system It could make it difficult for Labour to win back the other 40 seats if the electorates of those constituencies are increased by including surrounding countryside areas, although that won't apply in every case, for example with Darlington and Sedgefield. Furthermore a few could disappear altogether in practice, or be merged with neighbouring seats; examples include Clwyd South and Workington.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,231
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Jun 3, 2020 10:12:27 GMT
It could make it difficult for Labour to win back the other 40 seats if the electorates of those constituencies are increased by including surrounding countryside areas, although that won't apply in every case, for example with Darlington and Sedgefield. Furthermore a few could disappear altogether in practice, or be merged with neighbouring seats; examples include Clwyd South and Workington. What an awful seat that would be
|
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by pl on Jun 3, 2020 10:15:46 GMT
Furthermore a few could disappear altogether in practice, or be merged with neighbouring seats; examples include Clwyd South and Workington. What an awful seat that would be Who said communities of interest have to be contiguous? Paging johnloony , I'm sure he has a nice plan for some such seats.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,783
|
Post by The Bishop on Jun 3, 2020 10:38:33 GMT
There are a few other examples of this sort of thing, Dewsbury being the only seat outside the East End of London where the BNP saved their deposit in 1997 for example. (their candidate had the surname Taylor, like the sitting Labour MP) Dewsbury was naturally a strong area for the BNP though and they won several of the wards in subsequent local elections. It may have made a small difference at the margins but it seems perfectly plausible that the BNP would get one if their best results there. Rather less so that the Communists would have done in Hertsmere in 1983 Of course I know the BNP had some good results there, but other seats where they subsequently prospered saw them score well under 5% in 1997. Maybe the fact they went back to losing their deposit in 2001 with a different named candidate - whilst Labour under Ann Taylor increased their share - is more of a tell.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Jun 3, 2020 12:10:19 GMT
What an awful seat that would be Who said communities of interest have to be contiguous? Paging johnloony , I'm sure he has a nice plan for some such seats. Get a computer to calculate all the possible combinations of wards in the whole country (in other words, there are 650 empty boxes, and all the wards are allocated to each box in turn. Discard all the combinations in which any box is below 95% or above 105% of the average electorate. Choose whichever combination has the smallest range between the minimum and maximum electorates. Or, list all wards in alphabetical order. Add the wards one by one to the first box until its electorate is within the permitted range. Then start filling the second box. Continue until all boxes are full. Deviate from alphabetical order only if it is not possible to stay within the 95-105% range. Or: the onion ring method. Survey the coastline of the whole country, to draw a definitive precise map of where the coastline is at high tide. Draw a map of all households, with the precise location of a household defined as a single point (for example, it could be defined as the position of the middle of the front door) measured to the nearest centimetre. Calculate the distance, in a straight line, between the household and the nearest point on the coastline. The first constituency is the collection of households closest to the coastline, up to and including the first 1/650th of the electorate. The second constituency is the next ring inwards. The 650th constituency is the clump in the middle, furthest from the sea. Or:get the entire electorate of the country in alphabetical order. Allocate the electors to the 650 constituencies one at a time, until the armadillo explodes...
|
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by pl on Jun 3, 2020 12:50:23 GMT
Who said communities of interest have to be contiguous? Paging johnloony , I'm sure he has a nice plan for some such seats. Get a computer to calculate all the possible combinations of wards in the whole country (in other words, there are 650 empty boxes, and all the wards are allocated to each box in turn. Discard all the combinations in which any box is below 95% or above 105% of the average electorate. Choose whichever combination has the smallest range between the minimum and maximum electorates. Or, list all wards in alphabetical order. Add the wards one by one to the first box until its electorate is within the permitted range. Then start filling the second box. Continue until all boxes are full. Deviate from alphabetical order only if it is not possible to stay within the 95-105% range. Or: the onion ring method. Survey the coastline of the whole country, to draw a definitive precise map of where the coastline is at high tide. Draw a map of all households, with the precise location of a household defined as a single point (for example, it could be defined as the position of the middle of the front door) measured to the nearest centimetre. Calculate the distance, in a straight line, between the household and the nearest point on the coastline. The first constituency is the collection of households closest to the coastline, up to and including the first 1/650th of the electorate. The second constituency is the next ring inwards. The 650th constituency is the clump in the middle, furthest from the sea. Or:get the entire electorate of the country in alphabetical order. Allocate the electors to the 650 constituencies one at a time, until the armadillo explodes... Thank you johnloony - I knew you would oblige! Although I'm not sure this forum can endorse your plans for exploding armadillos...
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Jun 3, 2020 19:21:42 GMT
Get a computer to calculate all the possible combinations of wards in the whole country (in other words, there are 650 empty boxes, and all the wards are allocated to each box in turn. Discard all the combinations in which any box is below 95% or above 105% of the average electorate. Choose whichever combination has the smallest range between the minimum and maximum electorates. Or, list all wards in alphabetical order. Add the wards one by one to the first box until its electorate is within the permitted range. Then start filling the second box. Continue until all boxes are full. Deviate from alphabetical order only if it is not possible to stay within the 95-105% range. Or: the onion ring method. Survey the coastline of the whole country, to draw a definitive precise map of where the coastline is at high tide. Draw a map of all households, with the precise location of a household defined as a single point (for example, it could be defined as the position of the middle of the front door) measured to the nearest centimetre. Calculate the distance, in a straight line, between the household and the nearest point on the coastline. The first constituency is the collection of households closest to the coastline, up to and including the first 1/650th of the electorate. The second constituency is the next ring inwards. The 650th constituency is the clump in the middle, furthest from the sea. Or:get the entire electorate of the country in alphabetical order. Allocate the electors to the 650 constituencies one at a time, until the armadillo explodes... Thank you johnloony - I knew you would oblige! Although I'm not sure this forum can endorse your plans for exploding armadillos... The poor armadillos are getting nearly as oppressed as the pangolins.
|
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,568
|
Post by pl on Jun 3, 2020 20:39:11 GMT
Thank you johnloony - I knew you would oblige! Although I'm not sure this forum can endorse your plans for exploding armadillos... The poor armadillos are getting nearly as oppressed as the pangolins. And if you explode them they're no longer smooth on the inside, crunchy on the outside....
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Jun 4, 2020 12:18:07 GMT
Plotting the Lab lead over Con (x=2019, y=2017) in England & Wales:- The trend line intercepts at 14.4% i.e. Lab 2017 seats with a lead of 14.4% were more likely to remain Lab than change hands. The correlation for Lab leads 2017/2019 is 0.94. Splitting these seats into two groups (Leave > 55%, < 55%) we see different intercepts, which is not a surprise, 17.5% v 7.8%. A blunt tool but a bit of fun! 'Strong' Leave seats Lab did well to hold - Dagenham & Rainham, Halifax, Alyn & Deeside. 'Moderate' Leave/Remain seats Con did well to gain - both Burys, Delyn, Bridgend, Ynys Mon.
|
|