Tony Otim
Green
Suffering from Brexistential Despair
Posts: 11,906
|
Post by Tony Otim on Sept 14, 2012 10:50:30 GMT
The CHarnwood result (not posted here yet in full):
Con 538 (48.6)
Lab 516 (46.6)
LD 54 (4.9)
|
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 14, 2012 10:52:00 GMT
Labour said to be in the lead on first preferences in Campsie and Kirkintilloch North: Turnout 30.1%: Any figures or idea of who's in second? Earlier reports said neck and neck between Labour and SNP. |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,948
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 14, 2012 10:55:04 GMT
The CHarnwood result (not posted here yet in full): Con 538 (48.6) Lab 516 (46.6) LD 54 (4.9) A significant drop in turnout since last year - which may indeed be explainable by most students being absent. |
|
ColinJ
Labour
Living in the Past
Posts: 2,126
|
Post by ColinJ on Sept 14, 2012 11:03:37 GMT
Labour said to be in the lead on first preferences in Campsie and Kirkintilloch North: UPDATE: And on the second: Turnout 30.1%: The twitter feed reports Labour ahead after THIRD round and that they're on the final round now. |
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Sept 14, 2012 11:10:42 GMT
The CHarnwood result (not posted here yet in full): Con 538 (48.6) Lab 516 (46.6) LD 54 (4.9) CON +11.4% LAB -3.4% LIB DEM -7.9% |
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,948
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Sept 14, 2012 11:12:00 GMT
Yes, student turnouts are low - but the ones that *do* vote tend not to favour the Tories. That does seem the most plausible explanation of both the sizeable drop in turnout and the surprising result. Did the Tories ensure the contest was held outside term time, I wonder??  |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,036
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 14, 2012 11:15:00 GMT
The LibDems blew a decent shot at a gain by picking a locally controversial candidate. It's also notable that a Labour candidate can polled a fifth of the vote in this division in a seriously contested Con/Lib election; things have clearly changed a lot over the past few years given how prone Labour-ish voters have been to tactical voting in this part of Shropshire since 2001. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Sept 14, 2012 11:19:18 GMT
Yes, student turnouts are low - but the ones that *do* vote tend not to favour the Tories. Anecdotally I have heard that students of Loughborough university tend to be much more Conservative inclined than those from other universities but as the evidence is anecdotal this could be a) exagerrated b) out of date (as I was told this in the 90s) c) complete bollocks |
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Sept 14, 2012 11:34:00 GMT
Labour gain Campsie and Kirkintilloch North.
|
|
|
|
Post by marksenior on Sept 14, 2012 11:43:27 GMT
The LibDems blew a decent shot at a gain by picking a locally controversial candidate. It's also notable that a Labour candidate can polled a fifth of the vote in this division in a seriously contested Con/Lib election; things have clearly changed a lot over the past few years given how prone Labour-ish voters have been to tactical voting in this part of Shropshire since 2001. This is drivel . Labour polled almost exactly the same number of votes here as they did in 2009 when they were at their lowest ebb nationally . All we can say with the lower turnout yesterday compared to 2009 and the absence of Green and Independent candidates is that the Labour core vote of 500 and a fraction above voters turned out as did the Conservative and LD core votes . |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 14, 2012 11:49:40 GMT
The LibDems blew a decent shot at a gain by picking a locally controversial candidate. It's also notable that a Labour candidate can polled a fifth of the vote in this division in a seriously contested Con/Lib election; things have clearly changed a lot over the past few years given how prone Labour-ish voters have been to tactical voting in this part of Shropshire since 2001. This is drivel . Labour polled almost exactly the same number of votes here as they did in 2009 when they were at their lowest ebb nationally . All we can say with the lower turnout yesterday compared to 2009 and the absence of Green and Independent candidates is that the Labour core vote of 500 and a fraction above voters turned out as did the Conservative and LD core votes . This is drivel. You cannot ascribe low turnout to only the 'core vote' turning out, because you have no way of proving that a lesser proportion of the core turned out this time but there were changes in floating support. What you mean is that you believe fervently in the static nature of electoral coalitions. |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 14, 2012 11:52:07 GMT
The Loughborough result is rather odd and I'm not sure that the absence of the students would make that much of a difference - do many of them even bother to vote in local elections? I wonder if the Tory candidate was very popular locally and had a personal vote, maybe for something they have done outside politics? He was well ahead of his running mate in 2011. It's also notable how low the Lib Dem vote was, which may reflect a successful squeeze of their vote (but equally could just be due to them not turning out). And I'd assume it wasn't that helpful for Labour that their candidate was from Shepshed rather than Loughborough. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Sept 14, 2012 11:56:32 GMT
Recently moved to Shepshed as well according to Andrews preview on Britain votes - originally from Leicester (and formerly a councillor there) which may be seen as even more culpable
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,036
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 14, 2012 13:02:58 GMT
All we can say with the lower turnout yesterday compared to 2009 and the absence of Green and Independent candidates is that the Labour core vote of 500 and a fraction above voters turned out as did the Conservative and LD core votes . In addition to what EAL pointed out, that is... er... really, really not how things work in this part of the world. |
|
|
|
Post by marksenior on Sept 14, 2012 13:08:10 GMT
This is drivel . Labour polled almost exactly the same number of votes here as they did in 2009 when they were at their lowest ebb nationally . All we can say with the lower turnout yesterday compared to 2009 and the absence of Green and Independent candidates is that the Labour core vote of 500 and a fraction above voters turned out as did the Conservative and LD core votes . This is drivel. You cannot ascribe low turnout to only the 'core vote' turning out, because you have no way of proving that a lesser proportion of the core turned out this time but there were changes in floating support. What you mean is that you believe fervently in the static nature of electoral coalitions. It is nothing to do with belief or disbelief in electoral coalitions or not . It is simple Maths . In 2009 when Labour were polling mid 20's nationally Labour got just over 500 votes . In 2012 with Labour polling in the low 40's nationally and with the absence of Green and Independent candidates they got just over 500 votes .How Sibboleth can describe that as a notable performance is as I said drivel . |
|
|
|
Post by markgoodair on Sept 14, 2012 13:17:33 GMT
Labour gain Campsie and Kirkintilloch North. Is there a link to the vote transfers? |
|
|
|
Post by East Anglian Lefty on Sept 14, 2012 13:58:43 GMT
This is drivel. You cannot ascribe low turnout to only the 'core vote' turning out, because you have no way of proving that a lesser proportion of the core turned out this time but there were changes in floating support. What you mean is that you believe fervently in the static nature of electoral coalitions. It is nothing to do with belief or disbelief in electoral coalitions or not . It is simple Maths . In 2009 when Labour were polling mid 20's nationally Labour got just over 500 votes . In 2012 with Labour polling in the low 40's nationally and with the absence of Green and Independent candidates they got just over 500 votes .How Sibboleth can describe that as a notable performance is as I said drivel . It is exactly to do with belief in the static nature of electoral coalitions, because you refuse to entertain the possibility that a party can get roughly equal numbers of votes in two separate elections and yet have got those votes from different sets of voters. |
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 16,036
|
Post by Sibboleth on Sept 14, 2012 15:11:34 GMT
^^^
Moreover, the Green vote in the division is very Stretton-based (and votes LibDem in General Elections) and the Independent from last time was an incumbent Tory district councillor from Stretton. Not many of these voters were likely to head in Labour's direction. 20% is, under most circumstances, probably pretty close to Labour's ceiling in the division. But what's significant is that the massive pressure to vote tactically did not produce much in the way of tactical voting. In South Shropshire, this is news.
|
|
|
|
Post by marksenior on Sept 14, 2012 15:27:11 GMT
Here is the background to the by-election in the Huntingdon East ward of Huntingdon Town Council in Huntingdonshire District. Huntingdon Town Council comprises 19 members elected from three wards – Huntingdon East (8), Huntingdon North (4) and Huntingdon West (7). The council strengths were: Elections on 3 May 2007: Con 13, Lib Dem 3 (under previous electoral arrangements with only 16 seats) Elections on 5 May 2011: Con 17, Lab 2 Following Huntingdon East by-election on 3 May 2012: Con 16, Lab 2, Lib Dem 1 The result of the election in Huntingdon East on 3 May 2007 (8 seats) was: Con 1121/1108/1107/1097/1072/1022/994/973, Lib Dem 1003/962/932/877/866/856/691, Lab 300/274/253/251 Elected: Con 7, Lib Dem 1 The result of the election in Huntingdon East on 5 May 2011 (8 seats) was: Con 1425/1245/1178/1129/1095/1053/1017/998 Lib Dem 972/885/878/856/816/808/805/794 Lab 469/467/467/429/417/401/396/382 No Description 173 Elected: Con 8 The result of the by-election on 3 May 2012 (caused by the resignation of Nigel Pauley (Con), previously leader of the Conservative Group on the Town Council, because of ill-health and other commitments) was: Lib Dem 909, Con 887, Lab 385 Lib Dem gain from Con The present by-election is caused by the tragic death of John Skerry (Con) in a diving accident in Scotland on 8 May. He was due to be married on 19 May. The candidates are Con, UKIP, Lab and Lib Dem. The result of this byelection was a LD gain from Conservative LD 526 Con 508 Lab 226 UKIP 213 |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew_S on Sept 14, 2012 15:45:48 GMT
|
|
