Witney

[Deleted]

Oct 21, 2016 5:27:28 GMT johnloony said:

Oct 21, 2016 4:50:54 GMT AdminSTB said:

I wonder if Goldsmith will think again before throwing his own political career permanently down the toilet.

No he won't - he has repeated his pledge to resign too often and too unambiguously to be able to wriggle out of it. And he is rich enough not to "need" to have an MP's salary anyway.

He may yet find a way. He doesn't want to "do a Carswell" by making a stand only to subsequently look an isolated loon, nor "do a Reckless" by making a stand only to ultimately lose.

[markf]

Does this make it a marginal seat?, good news anyway UKIP had bad night

[Deleted]

Oct 21, 2016 7:09:44 GMT markf said:

Does this make it a marginal seat?, good news anyway UKIP had bad night

No & yes 

[finsobruce]

Oct 21, 2016 7:35:03 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

Oct 21, 2016 5:27:28 GMT johnloony said:

No he won't - he has repeated his pledge to resign too often and too unambiguously to be able to wriggle out of it. And he is rich enough not to "need" to have an MP's salary anyway.

I don't think Zac would want to wriggle out of it and as you all realise. It's a dangerous thing to do, transposing the result of one by election to another in another part of the country

So why are you doing it?

Because that's the sort of thing that people do on an elections forum?

Richmond Park is much better territory for the Lib Dems than Witney - the big variable would be if there was an official Tory as well as Goldsmith standing in any by election. But FWIW I still think the Lib Dems would win.

[mboy]

Oct 21, 2016 2:20:05 GMT iain said:

FWIW, those vote changes in Richmond Park would give:
Con - 43.1%
LD - 42.7%

Game on.

[Deleted]

Tories will ne satisfied, it is a comfortable hold. LD's satisfied that at least they can get their by election game together; albeit caveated with the result is below the percentage received in 2010 (?) and I think they were hoping for 35% so still some fine tuning required. Labour must be relieved that their vote didnt disappear completely- from what I understand their candidate was pretty good.

The only part (ies) to come out of this with no positives are the Greens and UKIP; for the latter it is awful.

[Tony Otim]

Oct 21, 2016 3:56:20 GMT AdminSTB said:

Congratulations to Robert Courts and well done to the Lib Dems on a strong performance. Labour held up better than expected. A disappointing result perhaps for Sanders Senior for the Greens and certainly for UKIP.

I note Winston McKenzie got fewer votes than both the Mad Hatter and Lord Toby Jug.

I would say indifferent rather than outright disappointing for us. I don't think there was ever much sense we were going to do much better than that, especially as the LDs were clearly having a good campaign. It would have been nice to hold our deposit, but I never saw that as very likely. At least we moved up from 5th to 4th - small crumbs of comfort.

[mboy]

Oct 21, 2016 8:15:43 GMT @denktaslovechild said:

LD's satisfied that at least they can get their by election game together; albeit caveated with the result is below the percentage received in 2010 (?) and I think they were hoping for 35% so still some fine tuning required.

Actually this is the second best Lib Dem result in history in this seat, just shy of the 30.8% in 1983. And nearly all of Lib Dems on this forum were "hoping" for 20-30% if you read back the pages. 35% was beyond what anyone I remember suggesting was possible. (Someone care to read the pages back to see if anyone did suggest 35%?). Make no mistake - we are delighted with this result.

[right]

Oct 21, 2016 7:41:24 GMT finsobruce said:

Oct 21, 2016 7:35:03 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

I don't think Zac would want to wriggle out of it and as you all realise. It's a dangerous thing to do, transposing the result of one by election to another in another part of the country

So why are you doing it?

Because that's the sort of thing that people do on an elections forum?

Richmond Park is much better territory for the Lib Dems than Witney - the big variable would be if there was an official Tory as well as Goldsmith standing in any by election. But FWIW I still think the Lib Dems would win.

He's a well regarded constituency MP showing independence over an environmental issue and no longer sporting a blue rosette.  Won't the Lib Dems be bleeding votes to him?

[finsobruce]

Oct 21, 2016 9:16:09 GMT right said:

Oct 21, 2016 7:41:24 GMT finsobruce said:

Because that's the sort of thing that people do on an elections forum?

Richmond Park is much better territory for the Lib Dems than Witney - the big variable would be if there was an official Tory as well as Goldsmith standing in any by election. But FWIW I still think the Lib Dems would win.

He's a well regarded constituency MP showing independence over an environmental issue and no longer sporting a blue rosette.  Won't the Lib Dems be bleeding votes to him?

Well, no, not in my opinion. It would be an unnecessary by-election, the Lib Dem ground game will undoubtedly be better and he has always seemed to be an MP almost under sufferance. As I said the dynamic would be changed if he was an Independent and there was an official Tory, but I would guess they would finish third - mind you if Goldsmith's campaign was anything like his campaign for Mayor that might be in doubt. Anyway, it would be a fascinating contest. Hopefully.

[markf]

I bet Goldsmith finds an excuse not to resign & force a by-election

[Deleted]

Re Mboy

I was taking my cues off social media (I know I know) so in this context a good reault. Well done to the LD's.

[carlton43]

Oct 21, 2016 9:16:09 GMT right said:

Oct 21, 2016 7:41:24 GMT finsobruce said:

Because that's the sort of thing that people do on an elections forum?

Richmond Park is much better territory for the Lib Dems than Witney - the big variable would be if there was an official Tory as well as Goldsmith standing in any by election. But FWIW I still think the Lib Dems would win.

He's a well regarded constituency MP showing independence over an environmental issue and no longer sporting a blue rosette.  Won't the Lib Dems be bleeding votes to him?

This is dependent on imponderables yet to be clarified

1)   Just how unpleasant will the infighting be in the Conservatives, locally as well as nationally?
2)   Will Goldsmith just resign or will he stand again?
3)   If he does stand again will he stand as the official Conservative candidate?
4)   What if he stands against an official conservative candidate?
5)   what is the quality of the LD candidate?

The Conservatives must have bled down every possible LD in 2015? I don't see them picking up any more of the LD vote at all under any possible scenario.

The LDs will do best if Goldsmith does not stand again in any capacity and especially if he were to endorse the LD candidate.

The Conservatives might do best if they had a very good new candidate and Goldsmith does stand as the anti-Heathrow non-party candidate.

The Conservatives have a very large majority but it is not a solid substance like Witney. Much of it has been firm LD until recently.

People feel they have a licence to not vote and to behave quite differently to who they will respond to a GE.

If this seat is lost and it might be, then I assess that event to making a 2017 GE (for which I have voted on another thread) more likely.

[andrew111]

Oct 21, 2016 9:16:09 GMT right said:

Oct 21, 2016 7:41:24 GMT finsobruce said:

Because that's the sort of thing that people do on an elections forum?

Richmond Park is much better territory for the Lib Dems than Witney - the big variable would be if there was an official Tory as well as Goldsmith standing in any by election. But FWIW I still think the Lib Dems would win.

He's a well regarded constituency MP showing independence over an environmental issue and no longer sporting a blue rosette.  Won't the Lib Dems be bleeding votes to him?

Problem for Zac is that Cameron promised no new runway at Heathrow, and even if Zac stands as an Independent, if he has the backing of the local Tory Party and the official Tories do not stand against him, then he is clearly still a Tory. The Lib Dems have always been against Heathrow expansion and that is a consistent policy.

Add to that that Richmond borough was one of the most Remain oriented in the country (2 to 1 in favour) while Zac voted Leave (and his family are strongly associated with Euroscepticism) and the fact that the Lib Dems start in a clear second and had an MP as recently as 2010... There is no doubt that unlike Witney the Labour vote would be strongly squeezed in a by-election.

In a choice between two strongly anti-Heathrow candidates the vote might become more about Europe than Heathrow... And without the Tory phone banks the Goldsmith campaign might be a bit weaker than Witney

[The Bishop]

Oct 21, 2016 7:41:24 GMT finsobruce said:

Oct 21, 2016 7:35:03 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

I don't think Zac would want to wriggle out of it and as you all realise. It's a dangerous thing to do, transposing the result of one by election to another in another part of the country

So why are you doing it?

Because that's the sort of thing that people do on an elections forum?

Richmond Park is much better territory for the Lib Dems than Witney - the big variable would be if there was an official Tory as well as Goldsmith standing in any by election. But FWIW I still think the Lib Dems would win.

I don't see how there couldn't be, tbh?

As far as Goldsmith's possible motivations are concerned, I expect he is none too kindly disposed towards the Tories after they disposed of him like a piece of soiled toilet paper once he had done party HQ's bidding during the Mayoral election. Indeed, he may still have some dirt to dish on that score.......

[finsobruce]

Oct 21, 2016 10:01:57 GMT The Bishop said:

Oct 21, 2016 7:41:24 GMT finsobruce said:

Because that's the sort of thing that people do on an elections forum?

Richmond Park is much better territory for the Lib Dems than Witney - the big variable would be if there was an official Tory as well as Goldsmith standing in any by election. But FWIW I still think the Lib Dems would win.

I don't see how there couldn't be, tbh?

As far as Goldsmith's possible motivations are concerned, I expect he is none too kindly disposed towards the Tories after they disposed of him like a piece of soiled toilet paper once he had done party HQ's bidding during the Mayoral election. Indeed, he may still have some dirt to dish on that score.......

Well, if they've fallen out as much as you think they have and they would want to be seen to defend the decision on Heathrow, it would be distinctly odd if they didn't. But anything is possible.

I suspect that would work both ways. The whole Goldsmith candidacy was predicated on a deal that he would stand and hopefully wrest the seat for the LibDems for them and they would allow him to act the maverick whenever he wanted. The same worked for the Mayoral election too. Both sides got something out of it, so neither really have much grounds for complaint IMHO.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Party	Candidate	Votes	%	±
Conservative	Robert Courts	17,313	45.0	-15.2
Liberal Democrat	Liz Leffman	11,611	30.2	+23.4
Labour	Duncan Enright	5,765	15.0	-2.2
Green	Larry Sanders	1,363	3.5	-1.6
UKIP	Dickie Bird	1,354	3.5	-5.7
National Health Action	Helen Salisbury	433	1.1	±0.0
Independent	Daniel Skidmore	151	0.4	N/A
Monster Raving Loony	Mad Hatter	129	0.3	N/A
Independent	Nicholas Ward	93	0.2	N/A
Bus-Pass Elvis Party	David Bishop	61	0.2	N/A
Eccentric Party	Lord Toby Jug	59	0.2	N/A
English Democrats	Winston McKenzie	52	0.1	N/A
One Love Party	Emilia Arno	44	0.1	N/A
Independent	Adam Knight	27	0.1	N/A
	Majority	5,702	14.8	-28.2
	Turnout	38,455	46.8	-26.5
Conservative Hold		Swing	-19.3

[The Bishop]

Oct 21, 2016 8:19:12 GMT Tony Otim said:

Oct 21, 2016 3:56:20 GMT AdminSTB said:

Congratulations to Robert Courts and well done to the Lib Dems on a strong performance. Labour held up better than expected. A disappointing result perhaps for Sanders Senior for the Greens and certainly for UKIP.

I note Winston McKenzie got fewer votes than both the Mad Hatter and Lord Toby Jug.

I would say indifferent rather than outright disappointing for us. I don't think there was ever much sense we were going to do much better than that, especially as the LDs were clearly having a good campaign. It would have been nice to hold our deposit, but I never saw that as very likely. At least we moved up from 5th to 4th - small crumbs of comfort.

I thought having a relatively "big name" candidate might have been worth a point or two extra, tbh. Still, you beat UKIP which isn't bad at all

[froome]

Oct 21, 2016 7:35:03 GMT ArmchairCritic said:

Oct 21, 2016 5:27:28 GMT johnloony said:

No he won't - he has repeated his pledge to resign too often and too unambiguously to be able to wriggle out of it. And he is rich enough not to "need" to have an MP's salary anyway.

I don't think Zac would want to wriggle out of it and as you all realise. It's a dangerous thing to do, transposing the result of one by election to another in another part of the country

So why are you doing it?

Dangerous seems a particularly inappropriate word here. I don't think anyone is likely to get seriously hurt by predicting an election outcome in Richmond.

[thirdchill]

Oct 21, 2016 11:17:38 GMT The Bishop said:

Oct 21, 2016 8:19:12 GMT Tony Otim said:

I would say indifferent rather than outright disappointing for us. I don't think there was ever much sense we were going to do much better than that, especially as the LDs were clearly having a good campaign. It would have been nice to hold our deposit, but I never saw that as very likely. At least we moved up from 5th to 4th - small crumbs of comfort.

I thought having a relatively "big name" candidate might have been worth a point or two extra, tbh. Still, you beat UKIP which isn't bad at all

Think what did it was the Greens (and Labour to an extent) and prevented both from gaining traction was the lib dem campaign. They were easily the best organised of the opposition to the conservatives in this seat, selecting their candidate early and then campaigning very hard throughout the campaign.

Labour's vote was ok, it could have potentially been squeezed a lot more and certainly has done in the past when the lib dem vote has increased significantly.

UKIP's performance was definitely worse than that of the Greens or Labour.