|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 30, 2012 17:58:13 GMT
Why haven't you included Romford which was entirely within the current GL boundaries and Dartford and Chislehurst which were mostly?
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jun 30, 2012 18:25:39 GMT
And I understand that you ought indeed to lump all the residents groups together, and that they act as one in the Council chamber at (the severely naused-up) Havering. Indeed, are they not all simply different ballot-paper descriptions for the London Residents' Association which stood against Roger Evans in Havering & Redbridge this May? Actually no, the Residents Association of London doesn't have any registered ballot paper descriptions. All the groups above have separate Electoral Commission registrations except for the South Hornchurch Ind Res Gp, which is a registered description of the Rainham Residents Association, and the Collier Row and Mawneys Res Assoc, which appears to have folded. So I'll keep the descriptions as they are.
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Jun 30, 2012 18:38:45 GMT
Why haven't you included Romford which was entirely within the current GL boundaries and Dartford and Chislehurst which were mostly? Because the map I was copying from (as I explained, a 1940 London atlas) did not include the bulk of the Romford, Chislehurst and Dartford divisions. If you have a better map, please put it up here. Indeed, I understand you have a good map of all the 1918 divisions across the United Kingdom, and I wish you would put it up here in full fettle (rather than via your PhotoBucket account which renders everything smudged).
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Jun 30, 2012 18:42:46 GMT
And I understand that you ought indeed to lump all the residents groups together, and that they act as one in the Council chamber at (the severely naused-up) Havering. Indeed, are they not all simply different ballot-paper descriptions for the London Residents' Association which stood against Roger Evans in Havering & Redbridge this May? Actually no, the Residents Association of London doesn't have any registered ballot paper descriptions. All the groups above have separate Electoral Commission registrations except for the South Hornchurch Ind Res Gp, which is a registered description of the Rainham Residents Association, and the Collier Row and Mawneys Res Assoc, which appears to have folded. So I'll keep the descriptions as they are. At the same time, my understanding from Romford sources is that the difference between the South Hornchurch Ind Res Gp and the Collier Row and Mawneys Res Assoc is the difference between s**t and s**te; you may wish to align the votes for these groups in the way that Tory, Simonite Liberal, Nat Lab and other groups are collated for reviews of the 1931 election. Only closer. Much, much, closer.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 30, 2012 20:25:53 GMT
Why haven't you included Romford which was entirely within the current GL boundaries and Dartford and Chislehurst which were mostly? Because the map I was copying from (as I explained, a 1940 London atlas) did not include the bulk of the Romford, Chislehurst and Dartford divisions. If you have a better map, please put it up here. Indeed, I understand you have a good map of all the 1918 divisions across the United Kingdom, and I wish you would put it up here in full fettle (rather than via your PhotoBucket account which renders everything smudged). It does that with jpegs but with recent images I've added I've used png format where that doesnt happen - for example if you right click on the image in my profile and select 'open in new tab' it opens up in good quality. I do have a map of the 1918 boundaries for the whole UK but not particularly good quuality as I basically hand drew it. I also had some maps of old London boundaries with the notional 2010 results which I put up on the old site but I can't find them
|
|
|
Post by stepney on Jun 30, 2012 20:56:58 GMT
It does that with jpegs but with recent images I've added I've used png format where that doesnt happen - for example if you right click on the image in my profile and select 'open in new tab' it opens up in good quality. I do have a map of the 1918 boundaries for the whole UK but not particularly good quuality as I basically hand drew it. IIRC you had a set which exactly overlapped (county for county, of course) with the Boothroyd maps for 1955 on - did you get them from him? - which you used for your own 1918 STV fantasy maps. If you use postimage.org to upload them you get clear PNGs. My own election maps are, I hope, here.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jun 30, 2012 21:18:45 GMT
I can't remember where I got the original outline map - the 2010 one I use is one of his but I had a map of the 1992 boundaries oriiginally which I based earlier maps on. I assume I found some digital version online but this would have been back when I first got online in the mid 90s.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,342
|
Post by Sibboleth on Jul 1, 2012 1:00:46 GMT
Some sort of preview: At some point it will probably be finished in some form or other. On this section boroughs with more than one constituency aren't split yet, for what that's worth.
|
|
|
Post by andrewteale on Jul 1, 2012 23:18:53 GMT
Haringey 2010. Lab 34 (+4) LD 23 (-4). 2010 map: Cartogram of the 2010 results (showing each ward in proportion to its voting power): There was one split ward in 2010, Harringay: 2LD/1Lab.
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jul 2, 2012 8:16:51 GMT
No prizes for guessing where the railway line is in that map.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 2, 2012 14:01:32 GMT
There can be few boroughs with such a starkly divided electoral map as Haringey above. Can anyone think of any? K & C springs to mind, especially in the period 1982-2002 when not one ward changed hands.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 2, 2012 15:08:29 GMT
The problem with that is that South Stanley was always Labour in that period and was physically separate from the wards in the North, so was not a perfect bifurcation. Maps of Oldham have often looked like this but in reverse, with the LDs winning everything in the east and Labour everything in the west
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Jul 2, 2012 17:15:14 GMT
The problem with that is that South Stanley was always Labour in that period and was physically separate from the wards in the North, so was not a perfect bifurcation. Are you saying there was a separate South Stanley ward prior to 2002? In 2002 Stanley looks to have been pretty safely Tory. If we're only referring to areas within wards, Haringey is no different. There are areas in Seven Sisters where the Lib Dems (and indeed the Tories) do well, just as there are areas west of the railway line where Labour tend to lead by a significant margin.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,729
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 2, 2012 17:32:25 GMT
IIRC yes there was, and it usually voted for us. I expect the map on Haringey will look just a bit different two years from now, btw
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Jul 2, 2012 17:40:02 GMT
Are you saying there was a separate South Stanley ward prior to 2002? In 2002 Stanley looks to have been pretty safely Tory. South Stanley ward didn't include any of the current Stanley ward; it was half of the current Cheyne ward. Almost all of the ward was the Worlds End estate and it was basically safe Labour, but it only had enough electors to make a two councillor ward so it had to be merged with Cheyne Walk making a very heterogenous ward. The Conservatives have managed to win it but it's never looked safe.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Jul 2, 2012 17:50:13 GMT
Are you saying there was a separate South Stanley ward prior to 2002? In 2002 Stanley looks to have been pretty safely Tory. South Stanley ward didn't include any of the current Stanley ward; it was half of the current Cheyne ward. Almost all of the ward was the Worlds End estate and it was basically safe Labour, but it only had enough electors to make a two councillor ward so it had to be merged with Cheyne Walk making a very heterogenous ward. The Conservatives have managed to win it but it's never looked safe. You mean Cremorne of course
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Jul 2, 2012 21:30:46 GMT
South Stanley ward didn't include any of the current Stanley ward; it was half of the current Cheyne ward. Almost all of the ward was the Worlds End estate and it was basically safe Labour, but it only had enough electors to make a two councillor ward so it had to be merged with Cheyne Walk making a very heterogenous ward. The Conservatives have managed to win it but it's never looked safe. You mean Cremorne of course Thats what I thought but it is unlike David to get things like that wrong so I was doubting myself.
|
|
Khunanup
Lib Dem
Portsmouth Liberal Democrats
Posts: 11,552
|
Post by Khunanup on Jul 2, 2012 22:30:55 GMT
Portsmouth 2008 was very much like this, as was 2011 (if you lump Labour and the Tories together). This year we got on the mainland though so it doesn't work anymore. Poole is very divided into Lib Dem north and Tory & Poole People south (no split wards between Lib Dem and Tory in 2011).
|
|
|
Post by erlend on Jul 3, 2012 11:17:57 GMT
There can be few boroughs with such a starkly divided electoral map as Haringey above. Can anyone think of any? Memory (rather than looking up) says that Sutton works that way. LD north and Con south. Unlike Portsmouth that cuts across the constituency boundary.
|
|
YL
Non-Aligned
Either Labour leaning or Lib Dem leaning but not sure which
Posts: 4,353
|
Post by YL on Jul 3, 2012 17:29:00 GMT
There can be few boroughs with such a starkly divided electoral map as Haringey above. Can anyone think of any? Sheffield is also very polarised east/west, though Labour have made some inroads in the last couple of years. 2010 is a particularly neat map.
|
|