Rochester and Strood

[carlton43]

Nov 21, 2014 20:16:54 GMT timokane said:

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.

That is to my mind an over-simplistic model. The main point of agreement is in the differential turnout being a benefit to established parties rather than UKIP. Assuming an extra 15-25% turn out in May it will bulk up the Conservative and Labour votes. In a political vacuum where nothing else happened I think that would put the Conservatives back and have Labour contesting second place. However....?

The Constituency will have had time to think again and to adjust on the basis of lots more information about the effect of their last round of voting or not having voted.
1)  Many will now see for first time that it is worth voting UKIP and it can elect someone. It is not a wasted vote. It worked in Clacton and Rochester. Let's try it.
2)  More habitual non-voters may be tempted out into the warmer water. The is semi-celebrity status for the UKIP constituency as being one the media look at.
3)  That all helps a bandwagon effect and draws some onto that bandwagon to become part of a success story.
4)  Incumbency as a UKIP MP will have set in by May and be worth at least a minor margin.
5)  As dinner table, bar room and office chat covers the candidates Reckless will move ahead of Tolhurst inexorably as stories of her brash stridency circulate.
6)  UKIP don't have that many good prospects and only two defences, so they will give far more attention to Rochester than the Conservatives can afford.
7)  The 'lent' votes from LD and Labour will go home to their own candidates at the GE and that alone could make the turnout differential nullity.
8)  The Campaign dynamics will have a new effect in the final weeks and I don't think Rochester will want to slide back to weak Conservative candidate obscurity.
9)  I think the input by UKIP from now to the GE will be greater than that of Conservatives and Labour resulting in more members, more support and more activity.

[keithn]

Well, I've heard the 'you're finished, you'll be wiped out' etc argument every month for 25 years so I think I can be forgiven for such scepticism.

Of course, Lib Dems will take a hit. Many seats and deposits will be lost. But we won't be wiped out as the media hope. And, who knows, back in opposition under a new leader, we may make a revival.

[Tony Otim]

Is there any real evidence that there were significant numbers of "lent votes" from LD and Labour in order to try and defeat UKIP?

[carlton43]

Nov 21, 2014 21:10:02 GMT Tony Otim said:

Is there any real evidence that there were significant numbers of "lent votes" from LD and Labour in order to try and defeat UKIP?

It can only be anecdotal or poll based and both tend to false memory, ambiguity and distortion of truth.....but I have read it here and heard it said on radio and TV today.

[carlton43]

I think this will be a UKIP hold and will be placing a bet in support of my opinion.

[harryjoe]

Congratulations to Mark Reckless for having the guts to resign and stand, UKIP is now giving a voice to people such as myself. People who work hard for everything we own, the main parties have taken us for granted for so long, times are changing. I will be joining UKIP......good luck.

[J.G.Harston]

Nov 21, 2014 16:41:02 GMT Devonian said:

Nov 21, 2014 12:36:50 GMT The Bishop said:

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 a by election.

And Speaker's Convention is to impose the six-month rule as used in other elections, so the deadline passed a couple of weeks ago. With the introduction of fixed-term Parliaments, it could be argued that this is now more than convention but there was nothing specific in the Fixed Term Act.

[Pete Whitehead]

I love that all the highly paid political editors of various TV news outfits are dutifully trotting out the 'Rochester & Strood is the 271st most UKIP friendly seat' line as if it's gospel. Its bollocks of course, but I'm not going to tell them and they wouldn't believe me if I did

[greenchristian]

Nov 21, 2014 21:43:19 GMT harryjoe said:

Congratulations to Mark Reckless for having the guts to resign and stand, UKIP is now giving a voice to people such as myself. People who work hard for everything we own, the main parties have taken us for granted for so long, times are changing. I will be joining UKIP......good luck.

PM AdminSTB to get your party colours and access to the UKIP forum.

[harryjoe]

Nov 21, 2014 22:10:42 GMT Pete Whitehead said:

I love that all the highly paid political editors of various TV news outfits are dutifully trotting out the 'Rochester & Strood is the 271st most UKIP friendly seat' line as if it's gospel. Its bollocks of course, but I'm not going to tell them and they wouldn't believe me if I did

Why is it that Rochester and Strood is not number 273 on the target list

[Robert Waller]

There was a lot of discussion on this on around p 42 of this thread.

It was also a byelection so such calculations should not apply anyway.
ukpollingreport.co.uk/

[Devil Wincarnate]

Nov 21, 2014 20:47:19 GMT keithn said:

Well, I've heard the 'you're finished, you'll be wiped out' etc argument every month for 25 years so I think I can be forgiven for such scepticism.

Of course, Lib Dems will take a hit. Many seats and deposits will be lost. But we won't be wiped out as the media hope. And, who knows, back in opposition under a new leader, we may make a revival.

I might as well take this moment, in light of your point, to clarify to the forum that I will indeed be voting Liberal Democrat at the general election and I will be more than likely to assist them in Winchester.

[johnloony]

One interesting fact I noticed is the unusually large number of candidates with fewer than 100 votes, and the unusually small number of candidates with 200 to 800 votes. Normally in a parliamentary by-election there would be a few independent or minor party candidates with 200 or 300 or 400 votes.

Also, what was so special about the Labour candidate? Labour would have won the by-election if it had been a normal by-election with a conventional swing (from government to opposition) of 11% or more. If Labour's candidate had been particularly brilliant, it would have turned into a 3-way marginal, and Labour would have won after the right-wing vote was split.

[neilm]

Nov 21, 2014 22:14:05 GMT greenchristian said:

PM Kristopher Keane

Now there's an alarming thought

[carlton43]

Nov 22, 2014 2:35:11 GMT johnloony said:

One interesting fact I noticed is the unusually large number of candidates with fewer than 100 votes, and the unusually small number of candidates with 200 to 800 votes. Normally in a parliamentary by-election there would be a few independent or minor party candidates with 200 or 300 or 400 votes.

Also, what was so special about the Labour candidate? Labour would have won the by-election if it had been a normal by-election with a conventional swing (from government to opposition) of 11% or more. If Labour's candidate had been particularly brilliant, it would have turned into a 3-way marginal, and Labour would have won after the right-wing vote was split.

I think she appeared to good effect by being compared and contrasted to the poor choice made by the Conservatives and because she largely refrained from the abrasive, the tribal or the snide. She presented as competent, practical, intelligent and well educated and that is a good firm start.

IMO Labour had written this off in its head and its heart from the start. Odd in that a similar constituency was Labour held and the party was presented with what looked like a clear split on the right. It should have been their perfect opportunity to win it back. Not sensible to choose an Asian background woman for a very white Kentish constituency. It should not matter but just one of many idiocies of the major parties is to deny or confront the bleeding obvious. Good candidate though she was she had an uphill struggle with her ethnicity and indifference by the central Labour Party and the other side of that party the snide Metropolitan view of the priggish Thornberry did not help either.

Labour will have to be careful not to become seen as the party that detests 'White Trash' and constituencies with the 'Wrong sort of People', but embraces 'Black and Asian Trash'. That would be a form of toxicity that could rapidly reduce its size!!

[john07]

Nov 20, 2014 23:29:14 GMT Andrew_S said:

"Dan Ware, the man who’s England flags and white van were photographed by Emily Thornberry, to her cost, has been speaking to the Telegraph. He said that he voted Conservative in 2010, that he did not know there was a byelection on and that he thought Thornberry was a snob."

www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2014/nov/20/rochester-and-strood-byelection-results-live-coverage

The Danifesto:



I think my earlier suspicions were close to the mark!

[maxque]

An English "Joe the Plumber"?

[Pimpernal]

Nov 21, 2014 20:16:54 GMT timokane said:

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.

I might have expected this logic from a Tory but not from Labour.
In GE where the turnout will be 10-15% higher, the main beneficiary of the 'only vote at GEs' used to be Labour - but UKIP have a considerable chunk of that demographic now. I would have thought that anyone desperate to stop UKIP would have voted in this election - that number is not likely to be particularly greater next year than now. Remember - in 2010 Labour made loads of council seat gains whilst losing the GE - all because of the higher turnout. A great chunk of our vote is now also only likely to bother to vote in a GE and we could do better than previously assumed, simply because of that fact.

[Pimpernal]

OK - my verdict on the result...

UKIP - 7/10 (Good but could have been better) - They won. 10 would have been 50%+ 9 46-50% 8- 44%+ no buggering up the managing expectations angle...
Tories - 4/10 (Poor but could have been worse) - They lost a safe seat. 10 would have been a clear win. 8 would have been a narrow win. 6 a narrow loss. Still got future candidate issues and the negativity of the campaign will not have done them favours.
Labour - 3/10 (slightly worse than could have been hoped for) - It's a byelection they would normally have been expected to win. 10 would have been a win even if it was by 32-31-31! 7 would have been getting 25% 5 would have been getting 20%
LibDems - 1/10 - a point out of ten for each % they got seems fair under the circumstances!
Greens - 5/10 - Beat the Libs. 6 would have been a saved deposit. 10 would have been beating Labour - which was talked about at one point.

[Tony Otim]

who talked about the Greens beating Labour here - I must have completely missed that. Doesn't seem like it was ever a remotely likely possibility.