iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 1, 2015 11:29:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by chorleyboy on Sept 1, 2015 11:36:02 GMT
Under the AV map, it appears the LD's hold Southport
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 1, 2015 11:36:31 GMT
If you want to do this, you have to factor in that a single vote cast under FPTP isn't the same as a first preference vote under AV.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Sept 1, 2015 11:39:57 GMT
The idea that Labour would somehow come from third to win Southport under AV is preposterous.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 1, 2015 11:41:50 GMT
Under the AV map, it appears the LD's hold Southport Take another look
|
|
|
Post by johnsmith on Sept 1, 2015 14:14:02 GMT
It doesn't seem like too much would have changed - assuming people's first preferences would have been the same as who they actually voted for. But as Davıd Boothroyd reasonably points out, that might well not always have been the case. I know that I voted Labour. But under AV I am pretty sure that my first preference would have been Green, with Labour second. I still doubt whether the result would have been vastly different. A few more Lib Dems, a few more from UKIP, a number of other swings and roundabouts, maybe another Green or two and slightly less SNP seats. But still hardly proportional I think. In the AV referendum, many people recognised it's continuing lack of proportionality, whilst having the added complexity of AV amply pointed out by it's opponents. They thus not unreasonably assumed that they were being asked to vote for much more complexity for very little proportionality, and decided it wasn't worth the candle. More than a few advocates of genuine PR were well aware that the Lib Dems themselves had previously referred to AV as a "miserable little compromise", and - rightly or wrongly - felt that they had sold out on this one. They thus decided to use that referendum to give the Lib Dems a kicking instead, in many cases. I know supporters of PR who voted "no" in the referendum for these reasons. Was almost tempted to do so myself.
|
|
Harry Hayfield
Green
Cavalier Gentleman (as in 17th century Cavalier)
Posts: 2,757
|
Post by Harry Hayfield on Sept 1, 2015 15:06:18 GMT
Indeed, here in Ceredigion I voted Lib Dem, but under AV it would have been Green first preference, Liberal Democrat second preference. A lot of these estimates are done based on polls asking for second and third preferences (but as the polls were wrong anyway, I don't think these can be trusted)
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 1, 2015 15:22:45 GMT
I don' t expect the Greens would have gained any seats under AV but it is possible that UKIP would have pulled of about five. So much depends on what the perception is on the day in the head of each individual. If the principal fear was always about the local seat then there would have been gains; but if that fear was on forming a government (Dave or Ed) then I still doubt the risk would have been taken by enough on the right or left to flirt Green and UKIP enough to aid a win. But we can't know.
|
|
|
Post by greatkingrat on Sept 1, 2015 15:38:38 GMT
It doesn't seem like too much would have changed - assuming people's first preferences would have been the same as who they actually voted for. But as Davıd Boothroyd reasonably points out, that might well not always have been the case. I know that I voted Labour. But under AV I am pretty sure that my first preference would have been Green, with Labour second. But that wouldn't make any difference. Unless the Greens managed to get enough votes to make the final two, your vote would have ended up with Labour anyway.
|
|
|
Post by johnsmith on Sept 1, 2015 15:49:40 GMT
It doesn't seem like too much would have changed - assuming people's first preferences would have been the same as who they actually voted for. But as Davıd Boothroyd reasonably points out, that might well not always have been the case. I know that I voted Labour. But under AV I am pretty sure that my first preference would have been Green, with Labour second. But that wouldn't make any difference. Unless the Greens managed to get enough votes to make the final two, your vote would have ended up with Labour anyway. True enough. Though this serves simply to reinforce my basic point that AV would have changed very little except a handful of different outcomes around the edges. Which is why many true believers in PR voted against AV - a pointless increase in complexity for very little, so better to punish the Lib Dems instead for selling out.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 1, 2015 17:23:58 GMT
Thought I’d give it a go. Constructive criticism welcomed! I will likely be talking out of my arse for large parts of this!
Started with Scotland, looking at seats where Unionists won over 50%: Orkney & Shetland – Hold for Carmichael C,S&ER – Thurso would still be behind after Tory and UKIP transfers, relying on Labour votes. I’d just give this to the SNP Gordon – Don’t see Salmond losing from so far ahead Argyll & Bute – Feel like the SNP would still have squeaked through here, more comfortably if the Tories could have got into second Fife North East – Reckon the SNP’s transfer unfriendliness would make this seat extremely close, but possibly they'd just keep it Dunbartonshire East – Assuming Swinson retained second (likely IMO), reckon transfers would see her through Edinburgh West – Similar to East Dunbartonshire, although closer, think Crockart would just about squeak through Aberdeen South – Think the gap would be too big for Tory transfers to bridge for Labour Stirling – See Aberdeen South Ochil & South Perthshire – See Stirling Renfrewshire East – Murphy would have retained second, Tory transfers winning him the seat Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock – SNP too far ahead Lanark & Hamilton East – Ditto
Edinburgh N&L – Think Tories would not quite be enough to see Lazarowicz through Edinburgh SW – 50/50 on this, erring towards the SNP Edinburgh South – Labour hold East Lothian – Reckon Labour would just miss out
WAnK- LDs might have done it, but can’t see Tories being transfer friendly enough to beat the SNP Dumfries & Galloway – With the Tories in second, I see the SNP winning here D,C&T – Difficult to say: I’d give it to Mundell but not at all sure B,R&S – LD transfers should break the Tories’ way, meaning a gain for them
So: SNP – 52 (-4) LD – 3 (+2) Labour – 2 (+1) Conservative – 2 (+1)
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 1, 2015 18:48:29 GMT
Northern Ireland
Fermanagh & South Tyrone – SDLP transfers would mean a hold for Gildernew East Antrim – Nationalist transfers would probably push APNI above UUP, with UKIP breaking mostly for the DUP, so with APNI v DUP in the last round, DUP should hold comfortably South Antrim – Nationalist and APNI transfer would confirm this as a gain for Danny Kinahan Upper Bann – Assuming the DUP survive the different dynamics of an AV election and APNI transfers to beat out the UUP (likely), it will be them v SF in the last round, and they will take the seat easily Belfast North – Given the SF candidate selection, APNI transfers would see Dodds home Belfast East – Not enough nationalists would preference APNI for Long to get in, while Conservative votes would probably give it to Robinson anyway
So without taking account of Belfast South, that’s SF up one at the expense of the UUP
Belfast South: We can probably assume that first preferences would be pretty much identical to the actual vote UKIP’s elimination would overwhelming help the DUP, putting them in front, with Greens going APNI and SDLP. The elimination of the UUP would help the DUP, while possibly putting APNI ahead of McDonnell. However, SF transfers should make the final round DUP v SDLP, so after all that a hold. This one’s difficult to call though!
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 1, 2015 19:55:35 GMT
North East
Berwick-upon-Tweed – A lot closer than under FPTP, but Trevelyan should probably have enough of a gap Darlington – Labour take it with Green transfers, and scraps from UKIP and LDs Hartlepool – Can’t find much info on the Indy, but he seemed relatively anti-Iain Wright, and as Tory preferences should favour UKIP, I’m giving it to them Redcar – Labour to win through either LD or UKIP transfers Stockton South – Wharton with a big enough gap and I’d think quite transfer friendly for Kippers MS&EC – Would come down to UKIP transfers, Labour probably hold with a decent gap from Greens and LDs
Labour – 25 (-1) Conservative – 3 UKIP – 1 (+1)
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 1, 2015 21:52:44 GMT
Yorkshire & the Humber
Great Grimsby – With the Tories narrowly beating out UKIP to second, transfers would give Labour victory Scunthorpe – Again, UKIP preferences would not favour the Tories enough to beat Labour Keighley – Think UKIP would favour the Tories here, giving them the seat Pudsey – LD and UKIP transfers to get the Tories over the line Leeds NW – Conservative preferences would secure the seat for Mulholland Morley & Outwood – Judging by AC’s comments, UKIP preferences would have saved Balls Wakefield – On the other hand, Creagh could have lost thanks to UKIP Batley & Spen – With an Asian Tory candidate, UKIP preferences should push Labour over 50% Dewsbury – Get the impression that UKIP preferences would favour Labour here, saving Simon Reevell Calder Valley – LD and UKIP preferences enough for the Tories Halifax – Feel like UKIP might give this to the Tories, though not at all sure if I’m honest Rother Valley – I’m going to give this to UKIP on Tory transfers, although I’m not convinced Penistone & Stocksbridge – Think enough UKIP & LD voters would have gone Labour for a hold Sheffield Hallam – Tories and UKIP to save Clegg
Labour – 30 (-3) Conservative – 21 (+2) Lib Dem – 2 UKIP – 1 (+1)
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 2, 2015 13:26:39 GMT
North West
Barrow in Furness – I reckon UKIP transfers would win this for the Tories, with the threat to trident Lancaster & Fleetwood – I’d expect the Tories to benefit more from UKIP, but Labour should take it through Green transfers Burnley – Tough to call, but with the trend here in local elections of the LDs doing much better without Tory and UKIP candidates, I’m giving this to Birtwistle Southport – Very tough to call, with Labour transfers likely breaking in Pugh’s favour, but UKIP to the Tories, but I’d back the LDs to squeak through Wirral West – Another very close seat, I have a feeling that UKIP and LD transfers would marginally favour McVey, allowing her in Bolton West – The Tories would probably do well out of the LDs here, and probably win enough UKIP backing to take the seat Bury North – Think the Kippers would break in Nuttall’s favour, allowing him to hold on Heywood & Middleton – Feel as though Liz McInnes has just enough lead to hold off UKIP OE&S – Lib Dem votes should benefit the Tories in places like Saddleworth, but UKIP transfers should benefit Labour Hazel Grove – Lisa Smart not out of it with Labour and Green transfers, but I’d think the Tories should just hold on Cheadle – Closer on first preferences, but probably more comfortable for the Tories than Hazel Grove Warrington South – LD and UKIP preferences should see the Tories through Weaver Vale – Think UKIP preferences might break slightly in the Tories favour so I’ll give it to them, but very close City of Chester – Again don’t really know, but I feel that preferences may have allowed Mosley to keep his seat
Labour – 47 (-4) Conservative – 25 (+3) Lib Dem – 3 (+1)
|
|
Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,277
Member is Online
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 3, 2015 10:34:23 GMT
Thought I’d give it a go. Constructive criticism welcomed! I will likely be talking out of my arse for large parts of this!
Started with Scotland, looking at seats where Unionists won over 50%: Orkney & Shetland – Hold for Carmichael C,S&ER – Thurso would still be behind after Tory and UKIP transfers, relying on Labour votes. I’d just give this to him over the SNP, but not sure Gordon – Don’t see Salmond losing from so far ahead Argyll & Bute – Feel like the SNP would still have squeaked through here, more comfortably if the Tories could have got into second Fife North East – Reckon the SNP’s transfer unfriendliness would lose them this seat Dunbartonshire East – Assuming Swinson retained second (likely IMO), reckon transfers would see her through Edinburgh West – Similar to East Dunbartonshire, think Crockart would just about squeak through Aberdeen South – Think the gap would be too big for Tory transfers to bridge for Labour Stirling – See Aberdeen South Ochil & South Perthshire – See Stirling Renfrewshire East – Murphy would have retained second, Tory transfers winning him the seat Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock – SNP too far ahead Lanark & Hamilton East – Ditto
Edinburgh N&L – Think Tories would see Lazarowicz through Edinburgh SW – 50/50 on this, erring towards the SNP Edinburgh South – Labour hold East Lothian – Reckon Labour would just get this
WAnK- LDs might have done it, but can’t see Tories being transfer friendly enough to beat the SNP Dumfries & Galloway – With the Tories in second, I see the SNP winning here D,C&T – Difficult to say: I’d give it to Mundell but not at all sure B,R&S – LD transfers should break the Tories’ way, meaning a gain for them
So: SNP – 48 (-8) LD – 5 (+4) Labour – 4 (+3) Conservative – 2 (+1) I think any examination of transfers under STV in the Scottish locals show that votes go every which way but loose, and whilst there are some patterns it is exceedingly rare for any lot of transfers to go overwhelmingly in a single direction. As a general rule, i'd have thought that any seat with more than a 5% majority is highly unlikely to have a different result under AV. I'd certainly question any Labour holds which would be dependent on getting a significant number of Tory transfers. Can't see it in Edinburgh North and Leith - the gap is too big. A few thoughts on an example - Fife NE - Green transfers probably break slightly for the SNP, pushing the lead just above 10%. Labour transfers might then break the other way (but those voters have resisted the LD tactical squeeze vs SNP in FPTP, so lets not assume that they're not more pissed off about the coalition than anything else) , but with votes not transferring or going in other directions, that may only reduce the lead by 1-2%, that's still a lead of 8-9% with 16.0% of Conservative transfers up for grabs. I'd guess several percent of that wouldn't transfer, so the LDs would need the rest to break hugely in their favour, which is possible but unlikely. Probably narrowly goes SNP, although may be very close. East Dunbartonshire could well stay LD, Edinburgh West less likely but possibly in toss a coin territory.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,702
Member is Online
|
Post by iain on Sept 3, 2015 11:08:51 GMT
Upon looking more closely at transfer patterns in local elections (which is difficult, as since the SNP became more dominant and transfer unfriendly, they have tended not to need transfers!) I have come more into line with your thinking.
The two seats I've given to Labour in EN&L and East Lothian do look like they would be a step too far. I do however think that Murphy would've narrowly held on (though there is a question over whether he would've beaten the Tories down into third).
As far as the LDs go, I have taken away CS&ER (which TBH was a bit optimistic anyway!). I have also decided to take away NE Fife, though this is quite difficult to call - there have not been any by-elections post-referendum which are useful. Before it seemed as though ~1/3 of Tories would go Lib Dem, with negligible transfers to the SNP. I reckon that this would've been better for the LDs at the GE, but on the basis that some of these transfers would already be in the LD column under FPTP, I have agreed with an SNP gain,
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Sept 20, 2015 22:28:49 GMT
If AV had passed, then the Lib Dems would probably not have vetoed the boundary review, so the elections would have been fought on those boundaries (far less useful for working out an outcome, but still a more likely outcome). However I have to disagree with carlton here: I don' t expect the Greens would have gained any seats under AV but it is possible that UKIP would have pulled of about five. So much depends on what the perception is on the day in the head of each individual. If the principal fear was always about the local seat then there would have been gains; but if that fear was on forming a government (Dave or Ed) then I still doubt the risk would have been taken by enough on the right or left to flirt Green and UKIP enough to aid a win. But we can't know. I think that, on the actual boundaries, we might have done a lot better in Bristol West, and maybe Norwich South - it would have been a lot easier to persuade people that we could win (which I'm told was by far the biggest reason people there were telling our canvassers they were voting Labour rather than Green), and so we could have taken a substantial number of first preferences off Labour. Which seats do you think UKIP could have gained? Your marmite status is a definite limiting factor under AV.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Sept 20, 2015 22:36:21 GMT
If AV had passed, then the Lib Dems would probably not have vetoed the boundary review, so the elections would have been fought on those boundaries (far less useful for working out an outcome, but still a more likely outcome). However I have to disagree with carlton here: I don' t expect the Greens would have gained any seats under AV but it is possible that UKIP would have pulled of about five. So much depends on what the perception is on the day in the head of each individual. If the principal fear was always about the local seat then there would have been gains; but if that fear was on forming a government (Dave or Ed) then I still doubt the risk would have been taken by enough on the right or left to flirt Green and UKIP enough to aid a win. But we can't know. I think that, on the actual boundaries, we might have done a lot better in Bristol West, and maybe Norwich South - it would have been a lot easier to persuade people that we could win (which I'm told was by far the biggest reason people there were telling our canvassers they were voting Labour rather than Green), and so we could have taken a substantial number of first preferences off Labour. Which seats do you think UKIP could have gained? Your marmite status is a definite limiting factor under AV. I don't see you even reasonably close in Norwich or Bristol under AV. It is more likely that some UKIP prospects might have stuck if it were not for the worry of losing the seat to Labour (or Conservatives). So Thanet, Hartlepool, Boston, Thurrock, Rochester? I have a few others as well.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,271
Member is Online
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 20, 2015 22:36:35 GMT
I suspect a lot of people would only vote for one candidate.
|
|