Dunfermline

[johnr]

Less misleading than the SNP leaflets which were saying how we are going to take away people's bus passes and end free personal care etc...

[The Bishop]

Oct 21, 2013 14:05:27 GMT AdminSTB said:

SNP 43.0
Lab 42.5
Con 5.5
LD 4.5
UKIP 2.5
Green 1.8
Ind 0.2

You can get decent odds on a Nat hold, you know

And probably on a LibDem lost deposit - and maybe 4th place finish - as well (I also expect them to collapse, but maybe not to *that* extent)

[Deleted]

I'm reluctant to give a detailed prediction for an election where I'm directly involved in the campaign, but I feel like going against the grain here: SNP hold.

On a more confident note, I also predict that we'll do better here than in Aberdeen Donside.

[marksenior]

Lab 49 SNP 29 LD 12 Con 5 Green 2 UKIP 2 Ind 1

[The Bishop]

Oct 21, 2013 15:16:49 GMT @benjamin said:

I'm reluctant to give a detailed prediction for an election where I'm directly involved in the campaign, but I feel like going against the grain here: SNP hold.

On a more confident note, I also predict that we'll do better here than in Aberdeen Donside.

Our host agrees with you - what other backing do you need?

[Deleted]

I see a Labour gain here, probably fairly comfortably although perhaps not as comfortably as Mark S predicts. The fact that there is any kind of confidence in the Labour committee rooms as reported in the earlier activist's blog suggests things must be going well. I used to panic about majorities in safe seats if I was working them.

[The Bishop]

A few other points that may be relevant....

Most recent elections (ie since the 2011 tidal wave) have seen the Nats performing if anything a bit less well "than expected". That was true of Donside earlier this year and also, generally, last year's locals (Glasgow being the best known, but far from only, example) Their performance in local by-elections has also been less than stellar.

None of which means they can't pull off a surprise here, but I think it needs something more concrete than a "feeling".

Also, I don't think anybody should read too much into the fact that the reasons for this byelection (ie the previous incumbent) aren't often brought up on the doorstep. That people rarely mention it to canvassers out of politeness (especially to SNP activists) doesn't mean that they aren't well aware of it, and that it could well be a "sotto voce" factor.

It would be nice to see a poll, mind

[Deleted]

On the other hand, the SNP have been known to pull off some of their most spectacular results when least expected. That the received wisdom for ages has been that this is a shoo-in for Labour is ironically part of what makes me think that the SNP might (just) manage to hold it.

[The Bishop]

True enough. I don't think that Labour have ever seen it as a gimme, though - and that may ultimately prove decisive. Still, not long to go now!

[marksenior]

Oct 21, 2013 16:45:42 GMT @benjamin said:

On the other hand, the SNP have been known to pull off some of their most spectacular results when least expected. That the received wisdom for ages has been that this is a shoo-in for Labour is ironically part of what makes me think that the SNP might (just) manage to hold it.

Which spectacular unexpected SNP results are you referring to , I can't recall any in the last 20 plus years .

[Deleted]

Oct 21, 2013 17:11:09 GMT @boogieeck said:

If you correlate the incidence of English in Scotland you would get the UKIP target wards which under STV is what they should be doing.

Interesting idea. I suspect that that would work rather better in some cases than others. That list would doubtless prominently feature most of central Edinburgh plus the likes of St Andrews and perhaps Hillhead etc., none of which sound like obvious UKIP hotspots.

[Deleted]

Oct 21, 2013 18:30:06 GMT @boogieeck said:

Indeed not, but like the Greens they are not aiming for 20%, they are aiming for 5% and a credible base which if a local activist shows some initiative can be turned into a credible prospect.

They (and we) need to be aiming for 20% in a target ward if the aim is to get a councillor elected, if we're still discussing target wards.

St Andrews University has enough English Hooray Henrys to get a branch up and running if they moved their vote to the flat daddy bought (and maybe Daddy's vote too).

Is this really the UKIP-inclined demographic even south of the border though?

[No Offence Alan]

Oct 21, 2013 17:46:16 GMT marksenior said:

Oct 21, 2013 16:45:42 GMT @benjamin said:

On the other hand, the SNP have been known to pull off some of their most spectacular results when least expected. That the received wisdom for ages has been that this is a shoo-in for Labour is ironically part of what makes me think that the SNP might (just) manage to hold it.

Which spectacular unexpected SNP results are you referring to , I can't recall any in the last 20 plus years .

Glasgow East by-election and the entire 2011 Scottish Parliament elections. Any number of seats had a WTF? factor about them.

[marksenior]

Glasgow East was not a complete surprise . IIRC there was one poll in the constituency some time before polling day which had the SNP in a reasonably close 2nd place .

[libfozzy]

I'd predict the following:

Labour: 34 SNP: 33 LD: 20 Con: 6 UKIP: 7

My hunch is that Labour will pip the SNP to it, but the Labour majority will miniscule. I reckon the Lib Dem vote will hold up - I've heard from people on at least my own and Labour's side that the Lib Dem vote is holding up fairly well (although, time will tell on that), I suspect a slight fall in the Con vote with UKIP taking a little from everyone.

All in all, nothing earth shattering.

[Deleted]

Oct 21, 2013 18:59:53 GMT @benjamin said:

Oct 21, 2013 18:30:06 GMT @boogieeck said:

Indeed not, but like the Greens they are not aiming for 20%, they are aiming for 5% and a credible base which if a local activist shows some initiative can be turned into a credible prospect.

They (and we) need to be aiming for 20% in a target ward if the aim is to get a councillor elected, if we're still discussing target wards.

St Andrews University has enough English Hooray Henrys to get a branch up and running if they moved their vote to the flat daddy bought (and maybe Daddy's vote too).

Is this really the UKIP-inclined demographic even south of the border though?

Its more UKIP than the Scottish average - and enough to boost what would be an otherwise pitiful result.

[Deleted]

St Andrews is hardly the Scottish average by any measure though. Genuinely not convinced that this would be a worthwhile target for UKIP even by Scottish standards. Looking at the few wards where they stood in Edinburgh last year, they did marginally better in Corstorphine/Murrayfield than in Meadows/Morningside -- and looking at the breakdown by polling districts, most of their vote in the former came from the Corstorphine end (read lower-middle-class bungalowland with more Scottish people). This is low numbers, so I'm not reading too much into it, but still.

[Devonian]

Oct 21, 2013 20:04:39 GMT @benjamin said:

St Andrews is hardly the Scottish average by any measure though. Genuinely not convinced that this would be a worthwhile target for UKIP even by Scottish standards. Looking at the few wards where they stood in Edinburgh last year, they did marginally better in Corstorphine/Murrayfield than in Meadows/Morningside -- and looking at the breakdown by polling districts, most of their vote in the former came from the Corstorphine end (read lower-middle-class bungalowland with more Scottish people). This is low numbers, so I'm not reading too much into it, but still.

I had a look at UKIP's 2009 European election results by council area. Overall UKIP got 5.2 in Scotland in that election. A list of their percentage results in Scotland from highest to lowest

Dumfries & Galloway 9.0
Orkney Islands 8.5
Moray 8.0
Scottish Borders 7.4
Shetland Islands 6.8
Highland 6.5
Aberdeenshire 6.2
Argyll & Bute 6.1
Perth & Kinross 6.0
Angus 5.7
Fife 5.7
Falkirk 5.6
North Ayrshire 5.6
South Ayrshire 5.6
Comhairle Nan Eilean Siar 5.2
South Lanarkshire 5.1
West Lothian 5.1
Aberdeen City 5.0
East Renfrewshire 5.0
Midlothian 4.8
Inverclyde 4.8
East Dunbartonshire 4.8
East Ayrshire 4.8
East Lothian 4.7
Clackmannanshire 4.7
West Dunbartonshire 4.5
Stirling 4.5
North Lanarkshire 4.5
Renfrewshire 4.4
Dundee City 4.1
City Of Glasgow 3.8
City Of Edinburgh 3.6

Edinburgh was in fact their worst result in the whole of Great Britain. Now there's some clear geographical patterns there but as I'm about as far from Scotland as its possible to get without crossing the sea I don't know what the significance would be. Any thoughts?

[Deleted]

Must admit the Labour leaflets are crap but not as bad as Glenrothes where they were doing cut and pastes from the local SWP front organisation the CACC.

[Tony Otim]

Oct 21, 2013 17:11:09 GMT @boogieeck said:

Oct 20, 2013 19:07:10 GMT Tony Otim said:

Maybe it's an acknowledgement that they're not going to appeal to people who voted SNP, but can take votes off the other three.

FWIW, I wouldn't be surprised to see UKIP do a bit better than Donside here. They might save their deposit, but I doubt they'll top 7%.

I will bid "wrong" on both counts.

Firstly, look at the transfers in local elections, UKIP transfer more to SNP than to Labour or to Lib Dems.. Mind you the SNP do even better on BNP transfers.

Secondly, UKIP are not going to poll as well in the North Edinburgh Suburb of Dunfermline than they did in the oil suburb of Donside. More English in the latter.

If you correlate the incidence of English in Scotland you would get the UKIP target wards which under STV is what they should be doing.

There might be something in that. However, the other week they did rather better in Govan than Tweedale, which would seem to be counter-intuitive.