Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

LAB has 9% lead in BBC Projected National Share – politicalbetting.com

1356711

Comments

  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,853
    Whatever, I think the mid point expectation for the next GE is close to the winning line and importantly doesn't rely on roping anyone other than the Lib Dems in to, one way or another, making the requisite numbers.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,662
    Sean_F said:

    Is South Hams the home of pork barrel politics?

    It used to be one of England's most corrupt councils.
    And that's REALLY saying something!

    But how so, specifically? Dubious planning? Crony contracting? Dodgy personnel and/or bookkeeping?
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,073

    Cicero said:

    Lib Dems break over 200 gains.

    The LibDems lost over 400 councillors in 2015.
    They also gained more than 700 in 2019.

    So, these are - by some margin - the best LibDem local election results since before the coalition.

  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,594

    MaxPB said:

    What did Blair get in NEV in 1996?

    16% lead
    Which is the challenge of making sense of a 9% NEV lead. There are plenty of examples of Labour clearly falling short (being 3% ahead in 1991 wasn't enough, neither was being 1% ahead in 2014). And one good example of them clearly being on track for a massive triumph (14% ahead in 1996, according to https://beyondthetopline.substack.com/p/forget-the-party-spin-what-does-history). But there simply aren't the data to model the bit of the graph where Labour are in opposition but heading towards a solid, unspectacular victory, because that's never really happened.

    I'm reminded a bit of that episode of Yes, Minister where Hacker is offered the chance to become a Eurocommissioner, and everyone he asks drives him mad by telling him that he's doing "all right". That's probably an accurate summary of Labour's situation, but it's infuriatingly vague.

    On the other hand, if there wasn't uncertainty about the next election, what would we talk about all day? We couldn't shouldn't spend all our time coming up with puns.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,422
    The obvious problem with this simplistic national vote share is that you have the LibDems on 20%. Which might happen in a GE but isn't borne out by any opinion polling, nor by the LibDems themselves.

    Why? Because many people like me voted for the LibDems at local level. Tactically.

    That will only happen at constituency level when we know there's a real chance of defeating a tory.

    So be wary about this, or at least look at that anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote share which is 55%.

    @MikeSmithson
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,789
    Labour doing well in Brighton at expense of Greens. That’s what running a council will do for you…..
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,073
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    HYUFD said (previous thread):
    House of Commons on today's NEV Labour 312, Conservatives 226, LDs 40, Others 72

    I SUSPECT but don't KNOW that a large part of the 72 are SNP MPs, the swings in the local elections if simply replicated in Scotland would not make a lot of difference. However it appears that there may be a larger SNP to LAB swing per the latest polls so the underlying position for LAB might be better than 312.

    I think Labour may well be looking for an additional 20 MPs from Scotland. Which might just be enough.
    If you asked me to call it, at the moment, I would suggest Labour are going to eke out a small majority with the help of some Scottish gains. 330 - 340 seats or so.

    I could quite easily see that being a tad higher, or indeed lower and getting us into HP territory. What I don't see in the tea leaves right now is Labour cruising for a 80+ seat majority or similar.
    That's pretty much where I am too. Labour in the 330-350 band with a fair bit of help from Scotland.
    That looks quite possible.
  • Options
    londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,226
    HYUFD said:

    Yes at the moment looks like Labour biggest party but no majority, however clearly poor results for us in most places and looks like we are headed to opposition.

    As KJH alluded to in the last thread I narrowly lost a seat to the LDs after a recount, their candidate was Parish chairman, having knocked it on the head at 7pm went over to help in Epping Lindsey which we ended up losing to the LDs by 300 votes. Such is life, will just focus on building up my profile locally over the next year. I did not stand again for Epping Town Council having moved though the LDs did mention my previous history in their usual Focus way. In EFDC we also lost one seat to the Independents in Grange Hill but picked up a seat from the Far Right in Waltham Abbey Paternoster with an excellent local candidate.

    Congratulations to all candidates for their hard work and well done those who did get elected

    Commiserations HYUFD, I am sure you will be back.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,594
    DavidL said:

    Conservative losses currently 666.
    Saying nothing.

    It's been a hellish set of elections for them.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981

    Only 9% in the middle of a cost of living crisis

    I have to genuinely ask the question, without any irony:

    SKS fans, please explain?

    Why are PB Tories ignoring the LDs and Greens? It's like they have an agenda for spin.
    They do not know that the LDs and Greens exist ;) There is only the Tory Party and the Trots...
  • Options
    GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 2,000

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    Admittedly I'm looking rather more at national vote shares.
    I'm also wondering if coalition 2.0 could be on the cards. Perhaps a 2010 scenario, where people are tired of the government but the main opposition party hasn't sealed the deal.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,882
    HYUFD said:

    Yes at the moment looks like Labour biggest party but no majority, however clearly poor results for us in most places and looks like we are headed to opposition.

    As KJH alluded to in the last thread I narrowly lost a seat to the LDs after a recount, their candidate was Parish chairman, having knocked it on the head at 7pm went over to help in Epping Lindsey which we ended up losing to the LDs by 300 votes. Such is life, will just focus on building up my profile locally over the next year. I did not stand again for Epping Town Council having moved though the LDs did mention my previous history in their usual Focus way. In EFDC we also lost one seat to the Independents in Grange Hill but picked up a seat from the Far Right in Waltham Abbey Paternoster with an excellent local candidate.

    Congratulations to all candidates for their hard work and well done those who did get elected

    Well done for putting yourself through the mill again. Better luck next time.
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 725

    MaxPB said:

    What did Blair get in NEV in 1996?

    16% lead

    That wasn't the NEV, though, was it?

    Yes, it was the Rallings/Thrasher NEV. 44% played 28% with LDs on 23%.

    Page 13 of the LE handbook - http://www.electionscentre.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Local-Elections-Handbook-1996-complete.pdf
  • Options
    DriverDriver Posts: 4,522

    We've had 3 Mayoral results. In Mansfield, the Labour candidate won with 45% of the vote over the Conservatives on 26%, so it seems likely we would have had the same result under SV.

    In Leicester, the Labour candidate won with only 39% of the vote, over the Conservative on 30%. That looks a bit more as if SV could have produced a different result, but the bottom 2 candidates were the TUSC and Green, with a total of 11%, so it seems highly likely that their second preferences under SV would have ensured a Labour win.

    So that only leaves Middlesbrough where it seems quite likely SV would have made a difference. Labour won with 40% over an independent on 37%. Another independent and a Conservative both got 11%, with no other candidates. Surely second preferences would have been enough to overcome the Labour lead.

    Assuming the voters for the other independent and the Tory both preferred the runner-up to the Labour candidate and (bigger hurdle) could predict who would come first and second.

    AV is flawed - SV is AV without the good bits. Good riddance.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020
    LDs and Greens have collectively made more gains than Labour.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,491
    Latest - Con lose 35 councils, Lab gain 14, LibDems gain 7 councils
    Con lose 666 (!) councillors, Lab gain 352, LibDems gain 234 councillors
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,839
    HYUFD said:

    Yes at the moment looks like Labour biggest party but no majority, however clearly poor results for us in most places and looks like we are headed to opposition.

    I think Starmer would be comfortable with that as the consensus, as it keeps the focus and discipline more than a runaway majority would.

    I think a Lab working majority personally, perhaps 350 seats.

  • Options
    SelebianSelebian Posts: 7,489
    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    Poole Engage has (among apparently a number of rotating tag lines) "Pride in R Community".

    If they're into R, then they're ok with me :smile:
  • Options
    MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 12,635
    edited May 2023
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Lab lead over Con 1995 - 24% (!)
    Lab lead over Con 1996 - 16%

    Lab lead over Con 2022 - 5%
    Lab lead over Con 2023 - 9%

    I don't see a Labour landslide nor is a Labour majority on the cards at this stage. The Tories are more likely to come back than Labour are to extend their lead.

    Are you taking into account Apples and Pears?

    Like you are happy to compare this one with 2020, or 2018? You think that is a sound point you are making?
    No, it's the election cycle that is important and NEV, we're a year out from a 2024 election just as 1996 was a year out from a 1997 election.

    Were I a Labour supporter I'd be resigning myself for horse trading with the Lib Dems at this point and keeping my fingers crossed that the economy doesn't pick up or inflation stays over 6%.
    Oh goodness there’s a lot to unpack there. Starting with improving economy didn’t help in 97, why would it here. A lot more tactical votes next year as this Everest of LLG coalesce around candidate best placed to be the Tory. The collapse of Sunak’s very own Financial Services Compensation Scheme destroying his and his governments credibility, bad things can happen to economy too not just good things.

    Secondly yes. As polls say Labour get to 346 seats, that’s more wins than Blair got. That ain’t happening. Let’s not set a silly target like that what they got to achieve or else they have failed.

    To rise from 202 seats in 2019 to Downing Street, just by being largest party, would be historical and amazing, you have to concede that,
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    Admittedly I'm looking rather more at national vote shares.
    I'm also wondering if coalition 2.0 could be on the cards. Perhaps a 2010 scenario, where people are tired of the government but the main opposition party hasn't sealed the deal.
    No, it won't be a coalition, partly because the SNP and the LibDems have both left themselves no bargaining chips by ruling out supporting the Tories. Starmer can safely call their bluff.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,073
    I was looking at the historic local election results: you know, how were Labour and the Conservatives doing in the run up to 1992 and 1997 elections.

    And the answer is that Labour and the LibDems are doing better relative to the Conservatives than 1991 (Cons were just three points behind then) but a lot less well than 1995 (when there was a 13 point gap).
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 416
    HYUFD said:

    Yes at the moment looks like Labour biggest party but no majority, however clearly poor results for us in most places and looks like we are headed to opposition.

    As KJH alluded to in the last thread I narrowly lost a seat to the LDs after a recount, their candidate was Parish chairman, having knocked it on the head at 7pm went over to help in Epping Lindsey which we ended up losing to the LDs by 300 votes. Such is life, will just focus on building up my profile locally over the next year. I did not stand again for Epping Town Council having moved though the LDs did mention my previous history in their usual Focus way. In EFDC we also lost one seat to the Independents in Grange Hill but picked up a seat from the Far Right in Waltham Abbey Paternoster with an excellent local candidate.

    Congratulations to all candidates for their hard work and well done those who did get elected

    Bad luck @HYUFD, at least you walked the walk. And Waltham Abbey Pasternoster is an amazing ward name.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,992
    Heathener said:

    The obvious problem with this simplistic national vote share is that you have the LibDems on 20%. Which might happen in a GE but isn't borne out by any opinion polling, nor by the LibDems themselves.

    Why? Because many people like me voted for the LibDems at local level. Tactically.

    That will only happen at constituency level when we know there's a real chance of defeating a tory.

    So be wary about this, or at least look at that anti-tory Lab-LibDem vote share which is 55%.

    @MikeSmithson

    Except that there are people who vote Lib Dem locally, but Conservative at Parliamentary level (in Watford and Bushey, for example). The Labour/Lib Dem vote is not a single bloc.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,098
    edited May 2023
    I personally think the Labour vote is going to be very efficient in the next GE. With a majority of anti-Keir Corbynista votes going elsewhere in safe urban Labour seats.
  • Options
    RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 2,978
    Tories have been utterly routed in Woking, go figure
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,073
    Andy_JS said:

    LDs and Greens have collectively made more gains than Labour.

    It's been a bad night for the Conservatives, an excellent night for the LibDems and Greens, and a disappointing (but not disastrous) one for the Labour Party.
  • Options
    NeilVWNeilVW Posts: 725
    Have we done Stockton-on-Tees? Tories made 11 net gains and became the largest party, but the council remains at NOC.

    https://news.sky.com/story/local-elections-live-tories-lose-labour-and-lib-dems-gain-12593360?postid=5872894#liveblog-body
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,028
    Mid-Suffolk is apparently the first Green controlled local authority *ever* in the northern hemisphere! Brighton came close but was always NOC.

    Quite an achievement.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,098
    I also think that there will be no Labour/Lib Dem informal arrangements as the next election will feature Lib Dem NIMBYism v Labour “build on the Green belt” quite prominently.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    NeilVW said:

    MaxPB said:

    What did Blair get in NEV in 1996?

    16% lead

    That wasn't the NEV, though, was it?

    Yes, it was the Rallings/Thrasher NEV. 44% played 28% with LDs on 23%.

    Page 13 of the LE handbook - http://www.electionscentre.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Local-Elections-Handbook-1996-complete.pdf

    Cheers!

  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,839
    Driver said:

    We've had 3 Mayoral results. In Mansfield, the Labour candidate won with 45% of the vote over the Conservatives on 26%, so it seems likely we would have had the same result under SV.

    In Leicester, the Labour candidate won with only 39% of the vote, over the Conservative on 30%. That looks a bit more as if SV could have produced a different result, but the bottom 2 candidates were the TUSC and Green, with a total of 11%, so it seems highly likely that their second preferences under SV would have ensured a Labour win.

    So that only leaves Middlesbrough where it seems quite likely SV would have made a difference. Labour won with 40% over an independent on 37%. Another independent and a Conservative both got 11%, with no other candidates. Surely second preferences would have been enough to overcome the Labour lead.

    Assuming the voters for the other independent and the Tory both preferred the runner-up to the Labour candidate and (bigger hurdle) could predict who would come first and second.

    AV is flawed - SV is AV without the good bits. Good riddance.
    I think the TUSC and Green vote quite anti Soulsby in Leicester, and I think many would have either abstained second vote, or even gone Tory (as the Tory is pledged to abolish the mayor, so a defacto plebiscite on continuing a city mayor in Leicester).
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,992

    Sean_F said:

    Is South Hams the home of pork barrel politics?

    It used to be one of England's most corrupt councils.
    And that's REALLY saying something!

    But how so, specifically? Dubious planning? Crony contracting? Dodgy personnel and/or bookkeeping?
    It was notorious in the locality that planning permission was bought and sold.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,141
    Selebian said:

    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    Poole Engage has (among apparently a number of rotating tag lines) "Pride in R Community".

    If they're into R, then they're ok with me :smile:
    A gay statisticans' pressure group on Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council? Local elections are full of surprises.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,662
    One thing I always wonder, with respect to campaign canvassing and get out the vote (GOTV) efforts?

    How many times (or what % of time) is this really turning out voters who will vote AGAINST you?

    Especially considering that canvassers have tendency to overstate support and underrate opposition (similar to fighter and bomber pilots assessing THEIR successes).

    And particularly when you've clearly got situation, where there may be above-average number of base (in good sense sorta) voters for your party or candidate, who are currently disaffected?

    Reckon in this Year of Somebody's Lord 2023 this could impact more than one party - but perhaps one more than another?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,871
    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    It's tough for small parties out there so think they are both swimming against the tide.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,141
    Tory losses now above 700 and still going strong.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,134

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    Admittedly I'm looking rather more at national vote shares.
    I'm also wondering if coalition 2.0 could be on the cards. Perhaps a 2010 scenario, where people are tired of the government but the main opposition party hasn't sealed the deal.
    No, it won't be a coalition, partly because the SNP and the LibDems have both left themselves no bargaining chips by ruling out supporting the Tories. Starmer can safely call their bluff.
    I doubt that the Lib Dems will ever want to go into coalition again after their last experience. The SNP would never enter government in London for obvious reasons, though FWIW Labour wouldn't touch them with a ten foot bargepole in any case.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,073
    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    There aren't going to be 46 LibDem MPs after the election. But I would be very surprised, now, if there were fewer than 20. Something in the 23 to 28 range looks quite possible for them.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913
    The winner today : The Anti Conservatives
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,171
    DM_Andy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Yes at the moment looks like Labour biggest party but no majority, however clearly poor results for us in most places and looks like we are headed to opposition.

    As KJH alluded to in the last thread I narrowly lost a seat to the LDs after a recount, their candidate was Parish chairman, having knocked it on the head at 7pm went over to help in Epping Lindsey which we ended up losing to the LDs by 300 votes. Such is life, will just focus on building up my profile locally over the next year. I did not stand again for Epping Town Council having moved though the LDs did mention my previous history in their usual Focus way. In EFDC we also lost one seat to the Independents in Grange Hill but picked up a seat from the Far Right in Waltham Abbey Paternoster with an excellent local candidate.

    Congratulations to all candidates for their hard work and well done those who did get elected

    Bad luck @HYUFD, at least you walked the walk. And Waltham Abbey Pasternoster is an amazing ward name.
    Thanks DM and yes it is, I believe it is connected to the monastic heritage of the town
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,171

    HYUFD said:

    Yes at the moment looks like Labour biggest party but no majority, however clearly poor results for us in most places and looks like we are headed to opposition.

    As KJH alluded to in the last thread I narrowly lost a seat to the LDs after a recount, their candidate was Parish chairman, having knocked it on the head at 7pm went over to help in Epping Lindsey which we ended up losing to the LDs by 300 votes. Such is life, will just focus on building up my profile locally over the next year. I did not stand again for Epping Town Council having moved though the LDs did mention my previous history in their usual Focus way. In EFDC we also lost one seat to the Independents in Grange Hill but picked up a seat from the Far Right in Waltham Abbey Paternoster with an excellent local candidate.

    Congratulations to all candidates for their hard work and well done those who did get elected

    Well done for putting yourself through the mill again. Better luck next time.
    Thanks EC
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020
    edited May 2023
    Ghedebrav said:

    Mid-Suffolk is apparently the first Green controlled local authority *ever* in the northern hemisphere! Brighton came close but was always NOC.

    Quite an achievement.

    A lot of those Green voters must be Tories at a general election. Strange combination. Green Tories.
  • Options
    GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 2,000

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    Admittedly I'm looking rather more at national vote shares.
    I'm also wondering if coalition 2.0 could be on the cards. Perhaps a 2010 scenario, where people are tired of the government but the main opposition party hasn't sealed the deal.
    No, it won't be a coalition, partly because the SNP and the LibDems have both left themselves no bargaining chips by ruling out supporting the Tories. Starmer can safely call their bluff.
    So what are the alternatives? Running a minority government for 4-5 years or trying for another election within a year? I suspect Starmer would be quite comfortable doing a deal with the LDs if it allowed him to neutralise the remaining Corbynites.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,871
    Chris said:

    Tory losses now above 700 and still going strong.

    I think someone once predicted they might surprise on the upside. Very prescient.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,171

    HYUFD said:

    Yes at the moment looks like Labour biggest party but no majority, however clearly poor results for us in most places and looks like we are headed to opposition.

    As KJH alluded to in the last thread I narrowly lost a seat to the LDs after a recount, their candidate was Parish chairman, having knocked it on the head at 7pm went over to help in Epping Lindsey which we ended up losing to the LDs by 300 votes. Such is life, will just focus on building up my profile locally over the next year. I did not stand again for Epping Town Council having moved though the LDs did mention my previous history in their usual Focus way. In EFDC we also lost one seat to the Independents in Grange Hill but picked up a seat from the Far Right in Waltham Abbey Paternoster with an excellent local candidate.

    Congratulations to all candidates for their hard work and well done those who did get elected

    Commiserations HYUFD, I am sure you will be back.
    Thanks LondonPubMan
  • Options
    CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 59,789
    Not in Brighton they’re not:

    The Greens are the Brighton and Hove Albion of these elections. Which is appropriate.

    https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1654519671570194434?s=20
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,992

    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    FPT, South Hams is no posher than Torbay, overall. Salcombe and Dartmouth are outliers.

    And Totnes and the Dart Valley are like Summerisle in the Wicker Man.

    What! South Hams is miles posher than Torbay.
    Not inland. Parts of the hinterland are pretty depressed.
    Other than Ivybridge, which I accept isn't all that, and Totnes which is very much posh (albeit Green posh rather than Tory posh) the population does very much tend to be coastal and upmarket small town/village with eye-watering property prices. I'm not saying there isn't a skuzzy village or two inland, but in terms of the average across households in the area as a whole, it's pretty posh.

    Particularly when you compare with Torbay... I mean there are some lovely parts of Paignton and Torquay but they are, er, mixed as you tend to find with larger seaside towns.
    Many of the lovely houses on the sea front are owned as second or third homes. Tourism jobs (and the area is heavily dependent on tourism) don't pay well. My impression is that places like Modbury, Aveton Gifford, Loddiswell, South Brent have somewhat deteriorated over the past 30 years. Modbury used to be full of antique shops. Now it's full of charity shops.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    Admittedly I'm looking rather more at national vote shares.
    I'm also wondering if coalition 2.0 could be on the cards. Perhaps a 2010 scenario, where people are tired of the government but the main opposition party hasn't sealed the deal.
    No, it won't be a coalition, partly because the SNP and the LibDems have both left themselves no bargaining chips by ruling out supporting the Tories. Starmer can safely call their bluff.

    Yep. There is no way on earth that the SNP is going to join the Tories in voting down a minority Labour government - especially if it loses vote share and seats to Labour at the GE. And it's hard to see the LDs doing it either. There will be lots of abstaining, so if Labour win most seats overall it may seem like it is a de facto majority government.

    I think the longer term trajectory of British politics will hinge on who the Tories choose to succeed Sunak if they do lose power. I am struggling to see who could credibly represent the sensible wing at this stage and hope to win.

  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020
    NeilVW said:

    Have we done Stockton-on-Tees? Tories made 11 net gains and became the largest party, but the council remains at NOC.

    https://news.sky.com/story/local-elections-live-tories-lose-labour-and-lib-dems-gain-12593360?postid=5872894#liveblog-body

    There must have been local reasons for this result, not sure what they were.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,662
    edited May 2023

    Tories have been utterly routed in Woking, go figure

    Anti-Woke NOT working in Woking?
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,179
    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    Epic fail from both of them for not calling themselves the Poole Party.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,992
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    There aren't going to be 46 LibDem MPs after the election. But I would be very surprised, now, if there were fewer than 20. Something in the 23 to 28 range looks quite possible for them.
    I'd agree wit that.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 416
    Finally some more results out of Southampton with 11 wards declared now (5 more to come and then there's the cancelled Coxford ward election in a few weeks)

    Labour 23
    Conservative 6
    Lib Dems 3
    Green 1
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    Admittedly I'm looking rather more at national vote shares.
    I'm also wondering if coalition 2.0 could be on the cards. Perhaps a 2010 scenario, where people are tired of the government but the main opposition party hasn't sealed the deal.
    No, it won't be a coalition, partly because the SNP and the LibDems have both left themselves no bargaining chips by ruling out supporting the Tories. Starmer can safely call their bluff.
    So what are the alternatives? Running a minority government for 4-5 years or trying for another election within a year? I suspect Starmer would be quite comfortable doing a deal with the LDs if it allowed him to neutralise the remaining Corbynites.
    Minority government. Why not? It's not as though the LibDems, or indeed the SNP, are going to be voting with the Tories on major votes, and nor are any potential Labour rebels.
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,028
    Andy_JS said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Mid-Suffolk is apparently the first Green controlled local authority *ever* in the northern hemisphere! Brighton came close but was always NOC.

    Quite an achievement.

    A lot of those Green voters must be Tories at a general election. Strange combination. Green Tories.
    Not necessarily - there’s a whole Scruton-esque strain of Toryism which is rather green.
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,853
    edited May 2023
    Andy_JS said:

    NeilVW said:

    Have we done Stockton-on-Tees? Tories made 11 net gains and became the largest party, but the council remains at NOC.

    https://news.sky.com/story/local-elections-live-tories-lose-labour-and-lib-dems-gain-12593360?postid=5872894#liveblog-body

    There must have been local reasons for this result, not sure what they were.
    Looks very much a mirror image of the result Labour got in Stoke-on-Trent.

    Conservatives have routed an Independent bloc, but not laid a finger on Labour.

    Perhaps neither are as spectacular results as they look at first glance.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    From the top man at Survation:

    In terms of post match analysis of today (hung parliament?!) I can't get past that:

    1. The Local Election results today look like our polling figures.
    2. The same polling sample (when expanded to the whole of the UK) points to a substantial Labour Westminster majority.

    https://twitter.com/DamianSurvation/status/1654488227229716480
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,611
    Selebian said:

    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    Poole Engage has (among apparently a number of rotating tag lines) "Pride in R Community".

    If they're into R, then they're ok with me :smile:
    But which R?

    The radius of a circle or sphere?
    The rank of a matrix?
    The set of all real numbers?
    A rational function?
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,134

    I also think that there will be no Labour/Lib Dem informal arrangements as the next election will feature Lib Dem NIMBYism v Labour “build on the Green belt” quite prominently.

    If Labour does well enough to win outright then it'll end up having meaningful numbers of suburban MPs who will lobby against houses. If it falls short then houses will be blocked by the Tories and Lib Dems in an outright bidding war for Nimby votes. Regardless, no houses. The probability of Starmer solving the immense and ever-growing housing shortage is zero.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,662
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Is South Hams the home of pork barrel politics?

    It used to be one of England's most corrupt councils.
    And that's REALLY saying something!

    But how so, specifically? Dubious planning? Crony contracting? Dodgy personnel and/or bookkeeping?
    It was notorious in the locality that planning permission was bought and sold.
    Am NOT liking the corruption! Instead, Sean's courteous, informative reply.

    AND that my initial surmise was correct (for once!)
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 3,882
    I think South Oxfordshire may be heading from NOC to LibDem, although given that it's a LibDem/Green coalition with the two parties standing down in favour of each other, the difference is academic really.
  • Options
    RattersRatters Posts: 803
    edited May 2023
    Almost up to 750 Tory losses. 30% of seats that have been defended so far.

    Will it break the 1,000 mark?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978
    Jonathan said:

    The winner today : The Anti Conservatives

    Yep, the anti-Tory party is back. Big time.

  • Options
    Conservatives gain Wyre Forrest.
  • Options
    SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 6,324
    edited May 2023
    Sean_F said:

    Sean_F said:

    Is South Hams the home of pork barrel politics?

    It used to be one of England's most corrupt councils.
    And that's REALLY saying something!

    But how so, specifically? Dubious planning? Crony contracting? Dodgy personnel and/or bookkeeping?
    It was notorious in the locality that planning permission was bought and sold.
    At officer level or councillor, out of interest?

    There is huge scope for it in some places and I am sure it goes on. Some of it is semi-official - the Chair of Planning at a nearby Council to me was declaring lavish hospitality left, right and centre (miles in excess of any other councillor - I mean VIP Cup Final tickets, a new conservatory and all that jazz compared with someone at some point picking up the bill for a pub lunch for Cllr Bloggs). Ultimately the Council Leader had to take him in hand as it was ridiculous. Technically, I think he was possibly not committing a breach as long as the developer didn't have a plan in at the specific time and didn't actually say "look, councillor, here's the dealio...", but it was mad and corrupt in the ordinary meaning of the term.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,662

    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    It's tough for small parties out there so think they are both swimming against the tide.
    In wave elections, smaller parties risk getting swept aside.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 416
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    There aren't going to be 46 LibDem MPs after the election. But I would be very surprised, now, if there were fewer than 20. Something in the 23 to 28 range looks quite possible for them.
    I'm not going as far as 46 for the Lib Dems, but they have a chance of rebuilding the Yellow Wall through Cornwall, Devon and Somerset that they used to have prior to 2015. It's not outside probability to have 12 seats just in those 3 counties.

  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,134
    Andy_JS said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Mid-Suffolk is apparently the first Green controlled local authority *ever* in the northern hemisphere! Brighton came close but was always NOC.

    Quite an achievement.

    A lot of those Green voters must be Tories at a general election. Strange combination. Green Tories.
    They're all Nimbies. It makes complete sense.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,594
    Andy_JS said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Mid-Suffolk is apparently the first Green controlled local authority *ever* in the northern hemisphere! Brighton came close but was always NOC.

    Quite an achievement.

    A lot of those Green voters must be Tories at a general election. Strange combination. Green Tories.
    Not totally impossible. Think of the Teals in Australia. Keen on a nice local environment and live-and-let-live social liberalism, not keen on some of the shoutier rhetoric from bits of the right. The kind of people Dave wooed with "vote blue go green".
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,141
    Tory losses now above 780 and still going strong.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820


    Yep. There is no way on earth that the SNP is going to join the Tories in voting down a minority Labour government - especially if it loses vote share and seats to Labour at the GE. And it's hard to see the LDs doing it either. There will be lots of abstaining, so if Labour win most seats overall it may seem like it is a de facto majority government.

    I think the longer term trajectory of British politics will hinge on who the Tories choose to succeed Sunak if they do lose power. I am struggling to see who could credibly represent the sensible wing at this stage and hope to win.

    Yes, your second paragraph is spot-on. The big question is whether, having belatedly showed signs of a modicum of sanity in choosing Sunak and tolerating Jeremy Hunt, they continue with that journey back to the real world, or instead double down on dancing with the fairies. Hard to say at the moment.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,364
    DM_Andy said:

    This might just be because I was a mere young lad in 1996 but the difference between the run up to the 1997 election and the 2024/25 one is in 1996 I didn't have the overwhelming feeling that the country was just useless. Right now no public service and very few private services work properly. Chris Philp had it right on the BBC this afternoon that there's no enthusiasm for Labour right now but he didn't complete the logic of the Tory losses - that people just want the people who caused this shambles to exit stage right and they don't really care who replaces them.

    This is exactly right. And it's healthy imo that there's no great enthusiasm for Labour. It shows people are being realistic and grounded rather than succumbing to pipedreams. A weary determination to see the back of the Tories with a punitive element for the shambles of recent years is quite sufficient to drive a Labour majority (and maybe a big one) if the 'anti' vote is efficient.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020
    Chris said:

    Tory losses now above 780 and still going strong.

    Yes, it's going to be very close to 1,000 losses for the Tories. Could drop either side, which doesn't really matter, except it'll look worse for them if it is in four figures.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020
    pigeon said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Ghedebrav said:

    Mid-Suffolk is apparently the first Green controlled local authority *ever* in the northern hemisphere! Brighton came close but was always NOC.

    Quite an achievement.

    A lot of those Green voters must be Tories at a general election. Strange combination. Green Tories.
    They're all Nimbies. It makes complete sense.
    That's one way of looking at it.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,913

    Jonathan said:

    The winner today : The Anti Conservatives

    Yep, the anti-Tory party is back. Big time.

    And not before time. Here’s a fun question…

    Could an EU rejoin referendum be the price the Liberals ask for a coalition or confidence deal?
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020

    Conservatives gain Wyre Forrest.

    Something to do with the demise of the Health Concern outfit I assume?
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,978


    Yep. There is no way on earth that the SNP is going to join the Tories in voting down a minority Labour government - especially if it loses vote share and seats to Labour at the GE. And it's hard to see the LDs doing it either. There will be lots of abstaining, so if Labour win most seats overall it may seem like it is a de facto majority government.

    I think the longer term trajectory of British politics will hinge on who the Tories choose to succeed Sunak if they do lose power. I am struggling to see who could credibly represent the sensible wing at this stage and hope to win.

    Yes, your second paragraph is spot-on. The big question is whether, having belatedly showed signs of a modicum of sanity in choosing Sunak and tolerating Jeremy Hunt, they continue with that journey back to the real world, or instead double down on dancing with the fairies. Hard to say at the moment.

    Who could credibly stand for the leadership from that part of the party? I don't see anyone obvious, but it's not a focus of mine - for obvious reasons?

  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The winner today : The Anti Conservatives

    Yep, the anti-Tory party is back. Big time.

    And not before time. Here’s a fun question…

    Could an EU rejoin referendum be the price the Liberals ask for a coalition or confidence deal?
    No. What they gonna do if Starmer tells them to get stuffed?
  • Options
    Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 4,853


    Yep. There is no way on earth that the SNP is going to join the Tories in voting down a minority Labour government - especially if it loses vote share and seats to Labour at the GE. And it's hard to see the LDs doing it either. There will be lots of abstaining, so if Labour win most seats overall it may seem like it is a de facto majority government.

    I think the longer term trajectory of British politics will hinge on who the Tories choose to succeed Sunak if they do lose power. I am struggling to see who could credibly represent the sensible wing at this stage and hope to win.

    Yes, your second paragraph is spot-on. The big question is whether, having belatedly showed signs of a modicum of sanity in choosing Sunak and tolerating Jeremy Hunt, they continue with that journey back to the real world, or instead double down on dancing with the fairies. Hard to say at the moment.
    I suspect real world depends on something quite unusual in modern politics but not unknown in the past - aka Sunak managing to stay on after an election defeat.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The winner today : The Anti Conservatives

    Yep, the anti-Tory party is back. Big time.

    And not before time. Here’s a fun question…

    Could an EU rejoin referendum be the price the Liberals ask for a coalition or confidence deal?
    It would make more sense to ask for PR.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,957

    Selebian said:

    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    Poole Engage has (among apparently a number of rotating tag lines) "Pride in R Community".

    If they're into R, then they're ok with me :smile:
    But which R?

    The radius of a circle or sphere?
    The rank of a matrix?
    The set of all real numbers?
    A rational function?
    Obvs the R class battleship crews.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,626
    edited May 2023
    Peter Kellner's handy guide to what happens with what lead in the GE. useful.


    https://kellnerpolitics.com/2023/01/27/801/

  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,141

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The winner today : The Anti Conservatives

    Yep, the anti-Tory party is back. Big time.

    And not before time. Here’s a fun question…

    Could an EU rejoin referendum be the price the Liberals ask for a coalition or confidence deal?
    No. What they gonna do if Starmer tells them to get stuffed?
    Form another coalition with the Conservatives? Sir Ed was a Cabinet Minister in Cameron's Conservative Coalition government.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,159
    Looks like the Grand is roughly an even money shot now?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,957

    Only 9% in the middle of a cost of living crisis

    I have to genuinely ask the question, without any irony:

    SKS fans, please explain?

    Why are PB Tories ignoring the LDs and Greens? It's like they have an agenda for spin.
    They do not know that the LDs and Greens exist ;) There is only the Tory Party and the Trots...
    The SNP are Trots? The PBTories spend a lot of time discussing them, no doubt because of their shock and horror at such a party which offends their sense of nationalism.
  • Options
    Carnyx said:

    Selebian said:

    Nigelb said:

    DM_Andy said:

    Does anyone know what the policy differences are between Poole Engage and Poole People, both parties having won seats on BCP Council.

    One has a manifesto, and the other, principles.

    https://pooleengage.org.uk/our-manifesto/
    https://poolepeople.org.uk/principles/

    They ought to Poole their resources.
    Poole Engage has (among apparently a number of rotating tag lines) "Pride in R Community".

    If they're into R, then they're ok with me :smile:
    But which R?

    The radius of a circle or sphere?
    The rank of a matrix?
    The set of all real numbers?
    A rational function?
    Obvs the R class battleship crews.
    Ideal gas constant
  • Options
    GarethoftheVale2GarethoftheVale2 Posts: 2,000

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    Admittedly I'm looking rather more at national vote shares.
    I'm also wondering if coalition 2.0 could be on the cards. Perhaps a 2010 scenario, where people are tired of the government but the main opposition party hasn't sealed the deal.
    No, it won't be a coalition, partly because the SNP and the LibDems have both left themselves no bargaining chips by ruling out supporting the Tories. Starmer can safely call their bluff.
    So what are the alternatives? Running a minority government for 4-5 years or trying for another election within a year? I suspect Starmer would be quite comfortable doing a deal with the LDs if it allowed him to neutralise the remaining Corbynites.
    Minority government. Why not? It's not as though the LibDems, or indeed the SNP, are going to be voting with the Tories on major votes, and nor are any potential Labour rebels.
    Let's consider a scenario along these lines:

    Lab 300, Con 270, SNP 35, LD 20

    Now sure, LD and SNP will vote to make Starmer PM but why should they vote for his budget, particularly the SNP if they are fighting against Lab in Scotland? There's also the issue of England only legislation as in the scenario above Lab may not have a majority in England.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,626
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The winner today : The Anti Conservatives

    Yep, the anti-Tory party is back. Big time.

    And not before time. Here’s a fun question…

    Could an EU rejoin referendum be the price the Liberals ask for a coalition or confidence deal?
    A referendum on EFTA/EEA negotiation would be useful and honour the close Brexit vote.

  • Options
    Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,622
    With exactly 20% of councils left to declare on the BBC website, changes were Lab +427, Con -782, LD +270, Green +179.

    So add a quarter to each figure and you have a rough and ready projected total of Lab +533, Con -977, LD +324, Green +224.

    Those changes in seats are significantly greater than the figures that the same methodology would have produced in early afternoon. So I wonder, by calculating the PNS so early based on partial results which seem since to have got worse for the Conservatives and better for the other 3 parties, has Curtice missed a trick?
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820


    Yep. There is no way on earth that the SNP is going to join the Tories in voting down a minority Labour government - especially if it loses vote share and seats to Labour at the GE. And it's hard to see the LDs doing it either. There will be lots of abstaining, so if Labour win most seats overall it may seem like it is a de facto majority government.

    I think the longer term trajectory of British politics will hinge on who the Tories choose to succeed Sunak if they do lose power. I am struggling to see who could credibly represent the sensible wing at this stage and hope to win.

    Yes, your second paragraph is spot-on. The big question is whether, having belatedly showed signs of a modicum of sanity in choosing Sunak and tolerating Jeremy Hunt, they continue with that journey back to the real world, or instead double down on dancing with the fairies. Hard to say at the moment.

    Who could credibly stand for the leadership from that part of the party? I don't see anyone obvious, but it's not a focus of mine - for obvious reasons?

    I don't know, but in opposition you can sometimes get a relatively unknown figure emerging - such as Cameron in 2005.

    I think more likely is someone like Kemi Badenoch, who I think is fairly sensible, and perhaps could take the party with her back towards the centre, camouflaged with a bit of tactical anti-wokeness to keep them happy. Of course she's still fairly inexperienced, so we'll have to see how she develops.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,839
    edited May 2023

    One thing I always wonder, with respect to campaign canvassing and get out the vote (GOTV) efforts?

    How many times (or what % of time) is this really turning out voters who will vote AGAINST you?

    Especially considering that canvassers have tendency to overstate support and underrate opposition (similar to fighter and bomber pilots assessing THEIR successes).

    And particularly when you've clearly got situation, where there may be above-average number of base (in good sense sorta) voters for your party or candidate, who are currently disaffected?

    Reckon in this Year of Somebody's Lord 2023 this could impact more than one party - but perhaps one more than another?

    I did some Labour canvassing in 1997 and some of my fellow canvassers* were bonkers and some very personable. I think there can be a definite negative effect.

    *one was Citizen Smith, with added CND badges.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 5,422
    Ali Fortescue Sky News:

    In a huge upset for the Tories, Labour has taken control of Dover district council for the first time in 20 years.

    It leaves the Conservatives with no councils in East Kent and is significant for a number of reasons.

    Firstly, whilst local concerns like traffic, bins and the cost of living come up here, one of the biggest issues on the doorstep is immigration.

    People care about small boat arrivals on the Kent coast. The result here was a symbolic test of whether Rishi Sunak’s “Stop the Boats" pledge was cutting through with voters, and it seems it hasn’t.

    Secondly, Labour gaining ground in Kent more broadly is a big worry for the prime minister. This is true blue ground - 16 of the 17 MPs elected here in 2019 were Conservative. Labour making inroads here suggests the political landscape really is changing.

    Perhaps the most important fact is this: the last time Labour won outright control of Dover district council was in 1995, two years before Tony Blair’s historic landslide.

    Comparisons, ahead of a general election, have often been made between Sir Keir Starmer and Neil Kinnock in 1992 (who unexpectedly lost) and Tony Blair in 1997. The result in Dover today feels more 1997 than 1992.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,662
    Want to echo personal congratulations to the winning candidates, and commensurations to the losers, in yesterday's very English local elections.

    Even - or perhaps especially - to those I really don't care for, at least those who respect the democratic process. Including the right of the electors to show you the door. Even if you've knocked on MANY doors and otherwise done your damnedest (in a good way, hopefully).

    In experience eagerly observing and working elections, many examples of candidate who lost yet actually won. Also visa versa!
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Sean_F said:

    Could we see a possible 1997 scenario for the Tories against the Lib Dems but more like 2005 versus Labour?

    I don't see where 46 Lib Dem seats would be coming from. The Lib Dems went into the 1997 election with 800 more councillors, and three times as many councils, as the Conservatives.
    There aren't going to be 46 LibDem MPs after the election. But I would be very surprised, now, if there were fewer than 20. Something in the 23 to 28 range looks quite possible for them.
    If I was the Tories, one of the themes I would be hammering the LDs on over the next 12+ months is where they stand on Labour's idea of VAT on public schools. Only 7%+ of pupils but chances are they make up a (much) higher number in LD target seats. As @Casino_Royale has shown, that is going to be a very touchy subject for many parents and, if Davey doesn't distance himself enough from supporting it, it may lose them the votes of those liberal Tories who might be open to voting LD but won't if they see their family interests at stake.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,020

    Tories have been utterly routed in Woking, go figure

    Paul Weller and The Jam get the result they were hoping for in their home town about 40 years too late.
  • Options

    Tories have been utterly routed in Woking, go figure

    I think you'll find it's been renamed Broking following the Tories' time in office there. Made Thurrock look like a beacon of financial good governance.
  • Options

    With exactly 20% of councils left to declare on the BBC website, changes were Lab +427, Con -782, LD +270, Green +179.

    So add a quarter to each figure and you have a rough and ready projected total of Lab +533, Con -977, LD +324, Green +224.

    Those changes in seats are significantly greater than the figures that the same methodology would have produced in early afternoon. So I wonder, by calculating the PNS so early based on partial results which seem since to have got worse for the Conservatives and better for the other 3 parties, has Curtice missed a trick?

    More rural all-up districts declaring later?
This discussion has been closed.