|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Oct 4, 2014 22:03:39 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. I never cease to be amazed how many "unpopular" people get elected with big majorities. |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 4, 2014 22:28:06 GMT
Bob Marshall-Andrews's highest majority was 12.0%, and that was when his electors did not know what sort of an MP he would turn out to be.
But yes, there isn't much evidence in general that individual popularity of the MP has a significant effect on their electoral performance.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Oct 4, 2014 22:46:05 GMT
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Oct 4, 2014 23:30:44 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. As Labour MPs go I quite liked him but he never struck me as the type who would have been the most assiduous constituency MP. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Oct 4, 2014 23:36:17 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 Obviously we can never be exact with these things but Anthony Wells put the notional 2005 Tory majority at 1,501 so while not massive not trivial either. |
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Oct 5, 2014 3:27:34 GMT
Well, one of them is a parish councillor and a Medway council candidate, so not a councillor. In what sense is a parish councillor not a councillor? |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Oct 5, 2014 7:14:44 GMT
In the sense of not being a principal local authority councillor.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Oct 5, 2014 8:24:02 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 Obviously we can never be exact with these things but Anthony Wells put the notional 2005 Tory majority at 1,501 so while not massive not trivial either. Still only a Tory lead of about 3% instead of a Labour one of 0.5% or a turnaround of fewer than a thousand votes. It appears significant only because it happens to have changed the party which was in the lead in 2005. Again it wouldn't have done in 1997 or 2001. It isn't the kind of boundary change which fundamentally alters the character and electoral balance in a constituency of the kind which occurred in for example Harrow West. That change didbn't alter the winning party so may be less significant in your terms, but was more so because it more or less killed off the chances of the Tories ever winning the seat. To be sure Rochester & Strood is a seat which would be Tory in an 'even year' but then (at least on the basis of the 2005 result) Medway was too. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,807
|
Post by right on Oct 5, 2014 8:43:57 GMT
Bob Marshall-Andrews's highest majority was 12.0%, and that was when his electors did not know what sort of an MP he would turn out to be. But yes, there isn't much evidence in general that individual popularity of the MP has a significant effect on their electoral performance. Well there is the tenacity of Liberals who won by-elections. I know it's not direct evidence but some of these areas were naturally rib rocked Tory or Labour areas and yet David Steel, Cyril Smith, David Alton or Simon Hughes would keep popping up as elected MPs. I realise that these areas often stay winnable (but by no means safe) Liberal seats for years after the MP retires due to a good Liberal machine, but the personal vote must be a factor. |
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,807
|
Post by right on Oct 5, 2014 8:59:36 GMT
Am sure it'll be quoted as two 'top' tories, regardless of the positions they hold Fair point. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Oct 5, 2014 9:25:12 GMT
That poll suggests a very competitive race. Whereas in seats like Eastleigh UKIP rose because of a bandwagon effect, here and in Clacton they're starting with maximum momentum. There haven't been any polls out of Clacton since the Ashcroft one made it clear what the lay of the land was, but my hunch is that if another one came out today then both Labour and especially the Tories would have recovered to some degree, due to reconvincing former supporters. If I'm right and the same thing happens in Rochester, it could be very close.
Then again, I have no actual evidence for my theory as yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Oct 5, 2014 9:33:40 GMT
Bob Marshall-Andrews's highest majority was 12.0%, and that was when his electors did not know what sort of an MP he would turn out to be. But yes, there isn't much evidence in general that individual popularity of the MP has a significant effect on their electoral performance. Well there is the tenacity of Liberals who won by-elections. I know it's not direct evidence but some of these areas were naturally rib rocked Tory or Labour areas and yet David Steel, Cyril Smith, David Alton or Simon Hughes would keep popping up as elected MPs. I realise that these areas often stay winnable (but by no means safe) Liberal seats for years after the MP retires due to a good Liberal machine, but the personal vote must be a factor. The granddaddy of them all would be Lloyd George who won Caernarfon boroughs from the Tories at a by election in 1890 and was still there fifty five years later. When he was ennobled just before the 1945 election the Liberals held the by election against Plaid Cymru, but lost it in a three way split just a few months later to the Tories...So one of the longest serving Liberal MPs was followed by one of the shortest serving Liberal MPs. |
|
Pimpernal
Forum Regular
A left-wing agenda within a right-wing framework...
Posts: 2,873 
|
Post by Pimpernal on Oct 5, 2014 9:35:40 GMT
given it's likely to be a fairly long contest, it may come down to which party has the stamina to keep going. This is where the Tory campaign motivated by initial indignancy may peter out... and the UKIP campaign will grind on a lot better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Devonian on Oct 5, 2014 12:00:49 GMT
given it's likely to be a fairly long contest, it may come down to which party has the stamina to keep going. This is where the Tory campaign motivated by initial indignancy may peter out... and the UKIP campaign will grind on a lot better. I think the Tories will want to push this by election hard, this will possibly be the most important by election for them this Parliament, if they lose it it will be extremely demoralising for them and do serious damage to their 2015 campaign. Like Newark this is a must win for them and I would expect them to campaign as hard in Rochester as they did in Newark. I think UKIP really need to throw the k!tchen sink at this campaign because the Tories certainly will be. |
|
|
|
Post by thirdchill on Oct 5, 2014 15:04:35 GMT
given it's likely to be a fairly long contest, it may come down to which party has the stamina to keep going. This is where the Tory campaign motivated by initial indignancy may peter out... and the UKIP campaign will grind on a lot better. The UKIP campaign may be more dependent on keeping the publicity going locally and nationally. If they can't do this then some support could taper off and the initial enthusiasm could wane. It may be best for UKIP to have a short campaign. I'm still going to stick my neck out and say conservatives will win, but it's gut feeling with no hard evidence. So I could be totally and utterly wrong. |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Oct 5, 2014 16:53:35 GMT
Obviously we can never be exact with these things but Anthony Wells put the notional 2005 Tory majority at 1,501 so while not massive not trivial either. Still only a Tory lead of about 3% instead of a Labour one of 0.5% or a turnaround of fewer than a thousand votes. It appears significant only because it happens to have changed the party which was in the lead in 2005. Again it wouldn't have done in 1997 or 2001. It isn't the kind of boundary change which fundamentally alters the character and electoral balance in a constituency of the kind which occurred in for example Harrow West. That change didbn't alter the winning party so may be less significant in your terms, but was more so because it more or less killed off the chances of the Tories ever winning the seat. To be sure Rochester & Strood is a seat which would be Tory in an 'even year' but then (at least on the basis of the 2005 result) Medway was too. I think our only disagreement here is on the definition of a few words that are quite clearly subjective. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2014 12:38:59 GMT
Conservative Party confirm that an American-style "open primary" will be used to select their candidate All voters in Rochester and Strood are to have a say in who will be the Conservative candidate at the forthcoming by-election under plans to select the candidate through a postal primary. Source - www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/by-election-update-all-voters-will-24512/ |
|
|
|
Post by keithn on Oct 7, 2014 14:29:38 GMT
Apologies if this has been mentioned.
The Lib Dems have selected Geoff Juby, a well known local councillor who was the candidate in 2010.
|
|
Andrew_S
Top Poster
Posts: 28,232
Member is Online
|
Post by Andrew_S on Oct 7, 2014 17:24:56 GMT
|
|
neilm
Non-Aligned
Posts: 25,023
|
Post by neilm on Oct 10, 2014 14:44:47 GMT
I've just seen a trailer for something called 'Homes By The Coast' and saw someone who looked very much like Bob Marshall-Andrews. Does he own a particularly amazing house?
|
|
