Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,029
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 4, 2014 17:47:39 GMT
Well, no. The boundary change was pretty small. Labour just polled appallingly in Kent in 2010, much as it did in the 1980s.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,779
|
Post by right on Oct 4, 2014 17:51:29 GMT
From BBC South East News last night If UKIP have any sense they will play this for all it's worth. Oh, they have. The reality is probably messier, but it plays perfectly into the "nasty Tories, plucky UKIP" narrative. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,779
|
Post by right on Oct 4, 2014 17:52:18 GMT
Well, no. The boundary change was pretty small. Labour just polled appallingly in Kent in 2010, much as it did in the 1980s. Perhaps Reckless is a better candidate than the Tories are so confidently telling us. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Oct 4, 2014 18:08:06 GMT
Well, no. The boundary change was pretty small. Labour just polled appallingly in Kent in 2010, much as it did in the 1980s. While the changes were relatively small they were not insignificant. The Tories would have won the seat in 2005 on the current boundaries. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,029
|
Post by Sibboleth on Oct 4, 2014 18:08:13 GMT
Reckless was not the Tory candidate in the other Kent 'marginals'.
|
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873 
|
Post by Pimpernal on Oct 4, 2014 18:15:53 GMT
From BBC South East News last night If UKIP have any sense they will play this for all it's worth. Oh, they have. The reality is probably messier, but it plays perfectly into the "nasty Tories, plucky UKIP" narrative. Gosh - that really reinforces the type of comment we were getting today. Wasn't just one of those one-off sets of coincidences you get canvassing then! |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 4, 2014 18:51:16 GMT
Well, no. The boundary change was pretty small. Labour just polled appallingly in Kent in 2010, much as it did in the 1980s. While the changes were relatively small they were not insignificant. The Tories would have won the seat in 2005 on the current boundaries. Labour won with a majority of 213 in 2005. The boundary changes translated that into a notional Tory majority of 500 so yes that is trival - it amounts to a 'swing' if you could put it like that of less than 1%. Rochester & Strood would clearly have been a Labour seat in 1997 and 2001 |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,779
|
Post by right on Oct 4, 2014 18:58:54 GMT
If UKIP have any sense they will play this for all it's worth. Oh, they have. The reality is probably messier, but it plays perfectly into the "nasty Tories, plucky UKIP" narrative. Gosh - that really reinforces the type of comment we were getting today. Wasn't just one of those one-off sets of coincidences you get canvassing then! I think the Tories are far too confident that the responses of their die hard supporters will be the responses of their squishier voters. It's a mistake that all parties make. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,779
|
Post by right on Oct 4, 2014 19:04:24 GMT
While the changes were relatively small they were not insignificant. The Tories would have won the seat in 2005 on the current boundaries. Labour won with a majority of 213 in 2005. The boundary changes translated that into a notional Tory majority of 500 so yes that is trival - it amounts to a 'swing' if you could put it like that of less than 1%. Rochester & Strood would clearly have been a Labour seat in 1997 and 2001 Didn't Bob Marshall Andrews think that he'd lost and started to lambast Blair for his loss on election night only to find out he'd squeaked home? |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 4, 2014 19:22:48 GMT
Yes - Marshall-Andrews rather succesfully invented a narrative that he had somehow escaped defeat against the odds and that this was due to his unique appeal as a rebel. In fact the swing against Labour in Medway in 2005 was large both by national standards and by the standards of Kent. If it had been replicated across the Thames estuary most of his Labour colleagues would have lost their seats
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,779
|
Post by right on Oct 4, 2014 19:36:16 GMT
Yes - Marshall-Andrews rather succesfully invented a narrative that he had somehow escaped defeat against the odds and that this was due to his unique appeal as a rebel. In fact the swing against Labour in Medway in 2005 was large both by national standards and by the standards of Kent. If it had been replicated across the Thames estuary most of his Labour colleagues would have lost their seats It was 2.5% in 2005 and 2.3% in 2001 (which I believe was also above average). Marshall Andrews didn't give me the impression of being a bad local MP. |
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 4, 2014 19:50:27 GMT
Labour won with a majority of 213 in 2005. The boundary changes translated that into a notional Tory majority of 500 so yes that is trival - it amounts to a 'swing' if you could put it like that of less than 1%. Rochester & Strood would clearly have been a Labour seat in 1997 and 2001 Didn't Bob Marshall Andrews think that he'd lost and started to lambast Blair for his loss on election night only to find out he'd squeaked home? His famous quote was "I am Lazarus!". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 19:52:36 GMT
Survation poll coming out this evening..
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 4, 2014 19:52:51 GMT
I'm not sure Marshall-Andrews was a particularly popular local MP. He wasn't from the constituency, and (as was well known) he has homes in London and in west Wales, not in Rochester. He might have parlayed his rebelliousness into popular support but it strikes me that the typical people who might have voted Labour in this area in 1997-2005 were probably not likely to endorse his rebellions over anti-terror legislation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Oct 4, 2014 20:37:54 GMT
I'm not sure Marshall-Andrews was a particularly popular local MP. He wasn't from the constituency, and (as was well known) he has homes in London and in west Wales, not in Rochester. He might have parlayed his rebelliousness into popular support but it strikes me that the typical people who might have voted Labour in this area in 1997-2005 were probably not likely to endorse his rebellions over anti-terror legislation. He was a bullshitter and a chancer, frankly. I suspect you don't entirely disagree, David! |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,779
|
Post by right on Oct 4, 2014 20:39:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by thirdchill on Oct 4, 2014 20:43:22 GMT
Am sure it'll be quoted as two 'top' tories, regardless of the positions they hold |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 4, 2014 21:17:07 GMT
Well, one of them is a parish councillor and a Medway council candidate, so not a councillor.
The other is described as "a long-serving Medway councillor". In fact he has been Conservative councillor for Strood Rural only since 2011. He was also Independent candidate for Rainham Central in 2007.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2014 21:31:01 GMT
CON 31% (-18), LAB 25% (-3), LD 2% (-14), UKIP 40% (+40), OTHER 1% (-5)
|
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Oct 4, 2014 21:52:01 GMT
I expected UKIP to be ahead but not by as much as this. Would have predicted something like UKIP 36%, Con 32%, Lab 25%.
|
|
