neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Nov 21, 2014 14:28:09 GMT
Sworn in already. That was quick. Last done on a Friday for Edward du Cann in 1956. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 21, 2014 14:31:12 GMT
I hope Naushabah Khan goes on to do better things for her party; class act. If I had to vote based on the candidate itself and not policy I'd definitely plump for her. Has there ever been a more popular Labour candidate?  Well, there are all those late retirement seats coming up after Christmas..... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 14:40:40 GMT
I think the Tories will regain this at the GE and that the relative narrowness of the result will prevent any more defections. Ukip would probably not want Peter Bone as he will cope even worse than Reckless with the rigours of a by election and Wellingborough is not favourable enough territory. To be more strictly accurate, it lessens the likelihood of more defections until a by-election is no longer feasible...... New year, then? Not at all sure about that. Holding a seat at the GE without an intervening by election would be very tough for ukip. Theres not many places where they have a good chance. Fewer than at a by election. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Nov 21, 2014 14:41:49 GMT
I've hardly seen any of the TV coverage of this by-election so have no view as to how wonderful Ms Khan was as a candidate. I don't know whether there might not be a bit of group think going on here about that. I do observe that she retained just under half of the vote won by Labour in their previous, less than stellar performance in this seat.
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Nov 21, 2014 15:23:12 GMT
Newark was always a nailed on Tory win whereas here was less likely, so more incentive for UKIP dis-liking Labour voters to vote Conservative. I really don't understand that thinking at all. It makes no practical nor political sense. One is a dedicated socialist, supporter in general of Labour and deeply dislike much of the UKIP rhetoric. So, one considers voting Conservative for fear of a UKIP victory in that Conservative seat. The rationality being that UKIP is worst outcome and seemingly more moderate Conservatives are better? Why would that facile view ever gain any purchase at all with an intelligent person? If one is a socialist then one votes Labour unless Labour can't win and then the option could be for a leftish Green, LD or SNP if convinced that person was acceptable and the benefit to the competitor party is not counter-productive for Labour long term. Best to vote Labour surely under all and every circumstance......in solidarity, to encourage others by increasing the local numbers, to maximize the national total vote, etc., etc.? Also in the long term hope of eventual incremental attrition to success. In practical strategic terms why support a Conservative? By doing so one endorses the Government and aids the chances of a Conservative victory in the next GE by showing the nation it is popular enough to hold a seat in the face of a strong UKIP surge and threat. The task is to defeat the Government, to win seats off the Conservatives and to a lesser extent the partner LDs. Why help the Conservatives to hang on in there and do better next year? That is the tactics of madness. Better to have voted UKIP and helped to take yet one more seat off the Government side and one that UKIP might be hoped to 'save' next year and thus to be off the total needed for victory. A UKIP presence in the HOC may be displeasing and rebarbative but it must be a side show to the main event of does Labour or Conservative win? A handful of UKIP seats won from coalition MPs is that number of the figure needed for the coalition to survive. One does not win by conceding any ground to the enemy and one learns to permit other powers to have their victories at the expense of the common 'enemy'. In WW2 would one have said 'Oh! I can't support Soviet Union just to defeat Hitler because I dislike communism'. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,931
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 21, 2014 16:31:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Nov 21, 2014 16:41:02 GMT
I think the Tories will regain this at the GE and that the relative narrowness of the result will prevent any more defections. Ukip would probably not want Peter Bone as he will cope even worse than Reckless with the rigours of a by election and Wellingborough is not favourable enough territory. To be more strictly accurate, it lessens the likelihood of more defections until a by-election is no longer feasible...... New year, then? A number of people have already said that we have already reached that point. The last day on which the writ could have been moved for a by election before Christmas was the day before the Rochester by election. I don't think many people would relish a by election over Christmas and new year to be held less than three months before the dissolution of Parliament. Anyone who defects from today onwards will not call by election. |
|
|
|
Post by gwynthegriff on Nov 21, 2014 17:23:16 GMT
Lib Dems, can you afford to lose 200 deposits? Yes. But not good. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,931
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 21, 2014 17:26:34 GMT
200 is looking a tad optimistic right now, if anything......
|
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Nov 21, 2014 17:42:47 GMT
200 is looking a tad optimistic right now, if anything...... I would agree. Given their polling numbers and by elections results I would be surprised if the Lib Dems kept the majority of their deposits. |
|
|
|
Post by thirdchill on Nov 21, 2014 17:46:09 GMT
200 is looking a tad optimistic right now, if anything...... I would agree. Given their polling numbers and by elections results I would be surprised if the Lib Dems kept the majority of their deposits. It may be that first past the post actually helps them in 2015, or at least doesn't hinder them as much as it used to. Their vote share and percentage of seats will certainly be more in line with each other. They could end up with over 40 seats and over 200 lost deposits. |
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Nov 21, 2014 18:25:46 GMT
I would agree. Given their polling numbers and by elections results I would be surprised if the Lib Dems kept the majority of their deposits. It may be that first past the post actually helps them in 2015, or at least doesn't hinder them as much as it used to. Their vote share and percentage of seats will certainly be more in line with each other. They could end up with over 40 seats and over 200 lost deposits. Well considering that they are presently averaging about 8% in the polls and so no sign of reviving then 200 lost deposits could well be an underestimate. What percentage of the vote do we expect the Lib Dems to get in the seats they already hold. Lets say its 25-30 percent. Now considering that about nearly 10% of voters actually live in Lib Dem constituencies. That would mean that of that of that 8% polling average they are getting somewhere in the region of a third of it might come from respondents who actually live in Lib Dem constituencies. I suspect that their polling average in the seats they don't already hold might well be at or even below 5% already and the trend is downwards. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 19:28:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Nov 21, 2014 20:10:02 GMT
Love him or loathe him, Dennis is good value!
|
|
|
|
Post by timokane on Nov 21, 2014 20:16:54 GMT
The bookies make the Tories odds on to retake the seat at the GE. Why ? Simple maths. Turnout 51% and UKIP win by under 3000 . In the GE the turnout is going to be around 65%. The same third of people who never vote will not vote again. That leaves 14% of the other voters who will cast their vote. If they couldn't be persuaded to vote UKIP in the last few weeks of hectic campaigning they never will. The only way you can assume a UKIP hold is assume the absent voters will split evenly and that just is not going to happen. Mark Reckless political future finishes on May 7th 2015.
|
|
|
|
Post by keithn on Nov 21, 2014 20:24:15 GMT
I would agree. Given their polling numbers and by elections results I would be surprised if the Lib Dems kept the majority of their deposits. It may be that first past the post actually helps them in 2015, or at least doesn't hinder them as much as it used to. Their vote share and percentage of seats will certainly be more in line with each other. They could end up with over 40 seats and over 200 lost deposits. You're all forgetting one thing. During election campaigns the TV media are compelled to give the Lib Dems a fair hearing (which of course they don't between elections - e.g. the BBC jubilation at the Tories copying Lib Dem tax policy). For this reason, Lib Dem poll ratings usually go up 4-5% during the final weeks of a campaign. So 23% last time might be 12-13% this time, about a 50% drop. General elections are completely different to by elections. In Rochester, for example, Lib Dems may well get to 5% from the 16% last time. Yes, dozens of deposits will be lost, but not as many as you are all hoping. Remember Liberal Democrats have been underestimated for 25 years. But not too long before we find out. |
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Nov 21, 2014 20:26:47 GMT
He didn't much like foreign coal though did he? |
|
|
|
Post by timokane on Nov 21, 2014 20:37:18 GMT
He didn't much like foreign coal though did he? He either has a point, or he hasn't. I think he has a point. |
|
|
|
Post by timokane on Nov 21, 2014 20:40:24 GMT
For anyone who hasn't seen it, here is what skinner actually said.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Nov 21, 2014 20:41:27 GMT
It may be that first past the post actually helps them in 2015, or at least doesn't hinder them as much as it used to. Their vote share and percentage of seats will certainly be more in line with each other. They could end up with over 40 seats and over 200 lost deposits. You're all forgetting one thing. During election campaigns the TV media are compelled to give the Lib Dems a fair hearing (which of course they don't between elections - e.g. the BBC jubilation at the Tories copying Lib Dem tax policy). For this reason, Lib Dem poll ratings usually go up 4-5% during the final weeks of a campaign. So 23% last time might be 12-13% this time, about a 50% drop. General elections are completely different to by elections. In Rochester, for example, Lib Dems may well get to 5% from the 16% last time. Yes, dozens of deposits will be lost, but not as many as you are all hoping. Remember Liberal Democrats have been underestimated for 25 years. But not too long before we find out. But this is not going to be a "usual" General Election. Your poll ratings may go up as usual during the final weeks of the campaign, but they may not. Remember that you're not the only party that TV media will be compelled to give a fair hearing to. Labour and the Greens have both had a fairly raw deal from the media in this Parliament, and they account for a very large proportion of the voters you've lost. |
|
