politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB easily holds Wythenshawe. UKIP beat Tories to second pl

SystemSystem Posts: 11,004
edited February 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » LAB easily holds Wythenshawe. UKIP beat Tories to second place on a share of 17.8pc

politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress
with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    LibDem's worst result since the War (beating Manchester Central 2012)
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Official results page from Manchester Council:

    http://www.manchester.gov.uk/info/362/elections_and_voting/4981/your_next_election
  • Options
    Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014
    Francis Purdue-Horan ‏@Francis19PH 9m

    #wythenshawe The real story from the by-election, if any, is the collapse in the Lib Dem vote from over 10k to 1176, just 4.9%, lost deposit

    Triumph for Clegg!
  • Options
    redcliffe62redcliffe62 Posts: 342
    RodCrosby said:

    LibDem's worst result since the War (beating Manchester Central 2012)

    I thought it was just Scotland that would hammer Libs, even with a strong ground team they have antagonised so many potential core voters they are increasingly obsolete and no longer the third party in England, even if their MP count is a lag indicator which says they were.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,318
    Congratulations to Mike Kane - a very solid result and seems a nice guy: the speech was better than the by-election norm, as the Sky reporter noted. To be fair, UKIP candidate on Sky also making a pleasant impression. Apart from minor incidents on the street, the candidates seem to have fought a pretty mild-mannered campaign.

    It's worth noting that the Tory vote wasn't especially close to 2nd despite tweets to the contrary - total vote share more than halved. Another Twitmyth that was going round is that UKIP nearly won the vote on the day, which would be wrong even if their postal vote was 0 and all 17.95% came on the day. Never trust Twitter!
  • Options
    redcliffe62redcliffe62 Posts: 342
    Mick_Pork said:

    Francis Purdue-Horan ‏@Francis19PH 9m

    #wythenshawe The real story from the by-election, if any, is the collapse in the Lib Dem vote from over 10k to 1176, just 4.9%, lost deposit

    Triumph for Clegg!

    Thry need to stop being Cameron's puppets or they will be irrelevant. perhaps watch a few stand as "independents" as the term LibDem is increasingly toxic.

  • Options
    IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    #LabourGroundGame gives UKIP a kicking.


    Great news for Labour is that this result supports Ashcrofts marginal polling.
  • Options
    IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Also shows that Labour's new anti UKIP literature and campaigning techniques are on the right lines.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2014
    The LDs must have polled hardly any votes in some of the Manchester wards since a couple of the others are not too bad for them, relatively speaking.

    Labour held onto 74% of their 2010 votes compared to 66% in South Shields.
  • Options
    smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited February 2014
    IOS said:

    Also shows that Labour's new anti UKIP literature and campaigning techniques are on the right lines.

    Its a rock solid Labour seat where a popular MP sadly passed away with Labour leading in the polls nationally and not being in the firing line for being in Government and where UKIP by their own admission have barely contested before and yet there was a small swing from Labour to UKIP.


  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Unlike the Tories and UKIP the LDs have won a by-election in this parliament.

    The last time that the Tories retained a seat in a by election while in power was exactly a quarter of century ago when Hague won Richmond
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited February 2014
    Perhaps not enough attention was paid to the fact that Labour has won every seat in Manchester at the last two local elections and the council is on course to be a one-party state in a few months time.
  • Options
    smithersjones2013smithersjones2013 Posts: 740
    edited February 2014
    MikeSmithson said:

    Unlike the Tories and UKIP the LDs have won a by-election in this parliament.

    The last time that the Tories retained a seat in a by election while in power was exactly a quarter of century ago when Hague won Richmond

    It's amazing how quickly the Libdems have lost their enthusiasm for talking about vote share. Still bless 'em they won a by election. I'm sure it is great comfort to them.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited February 2014
    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...
  • Options
    redcliffe62redcliffe62 Posts: 342
    IOS said:

    Also shows that Labour's new anti UKIP literature and campaigning techniques are on the right lines.

    Not sure you can say anti UKIP literature worked when they took 18% from almost a nil base.

    The non immigrant voting support level for UKIP in this by election would therefore have been well above 1 in 5, perhaps above 1 in 4. Perhaps someone knows the answer.

    That is surely the factor of concern, if UKIP get those percentages in areas without a high number of immigrants. I think they will lean UKIP in Euros, as voting Labour to keep Tories out irrelevant in that vote.

  • Options
    IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Redcliffe

    They took that from the Tories. Labour havent shown that they are invincible to UKIP. Just that they are far further down the road than the Tories in working out how to deal with them.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    A bracing fact for the LDs is that their candidate polled less than half the number of votes she received standing in the Northenden ward in May 2010: 1,176 vs 2,503 (albeit with a general election turnout):

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Council_election,_2010#Northenden
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited February 2014
    MikeSmithson said:

    Unlike the Tories and UKIP the LDs have won a by-election in this parliament.

    The last time that the Tories retained a seat in a by election while in power was exactly a quarter of century ago when Hague won Richmond

    I wouldn't get too confident.

    LibDem performance
    Eastleigh -14.4%, result WIN (on the lowest share since 1918)
    Wythenshawe -17.4%, result LOST DEPOSIT

    Which was the fluke result?
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited February 2014
    Swingback analysis.

    As a result of this by-election, the central forecast moves from a Labour lead of 1.6% to one of 2.0%...

    A (small) Tory lead is still within the bounds of the model.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    edited February 2014
    UKIP's worst result since Croydon North? Fraid not. Check out the Aberdeen Donside, the Dunfermline, the Ynys Môn and the Cowdenbeath by-election results.
  • Options
    RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    UKIP's worst result since Croydon North? Fraid not. Check out the Aberdeen Donside, the Dunfermline, the Ynys Mon and the Cowdenbeath by-election results.

    Come-one, you know this is a Westminster by-election, and can only be compared with others from the same stable...
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    redcliffe62 said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    Francis Purdue-Horan ‏@Francis19PH 9m

    #wythenshawe The real story from the by-election, if any, is the collapse in the Lib Dem vote from over 10k to 1176, just 4.9%, lost deposit

    Triumph for Clegg!

    They need to stop being Cameron's puppets or they will be irrelevant. perhaps watch a few stand as "independents" as the term LibDem is increasingly toxic.

    They have done that at local level when the Lib Dem brand became toxic. I expect we'll start to see a lot more of that.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited February 2014
    IOS said:

    Great news for Labour is that this result supports Ashcrofts marginal polling.

    Total nonsense IOS.

    Lord Ashcroft Poll vs. Outturn 
    ===========================================
    Party               Poll    Actual    Diff.
    -------------------------------------------
    Labour               61%     55.3%    -5.7%
    UKIP                 15%     17.9%    +2.9%
    Conservative         14%     14.5%    +0.5%
    Liberal Democrat      5%      4.9%    -0.1%
    Others                4%      7.9%    +3.9%

    Lab Lead over UKIP   46%     37.4%    -8.6%
    -------------------------------------------
    Poll Details:                              
    Sample Size: 1,009                         
    Polling Dates: 3-5 Feb 2014                
    ===========================================
    Lord Ashcroft's poll overestimated both the Labour vote share and majority.

    It underestimated the UKIP, Conservatives and Others vote share.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    RodCrosby said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    UKIP's worst result since Croydon North? Fraid not. Check out the Aberdeen Donside, the Dunfermline, the Ynys Mon and the Cowdenbeath by-election results.

    Come-one, you know this is a Westminster by-election, and can only be compared with others from the same stable...
    Tens of thousands of eligible voters and heavy media coverage in by-elections to national legislatures. Of course they are comparible. UKIP are duds in Scotland, but may become relevant in Wales. But it is only in England that they threaten the status quo.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited February 2014
    RodCrosby said:

    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...

    Sir Roderick

    The swing to Labour only looks good when compared to 2010. When you compare Labour's vote share with its won elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005 then the 55% doesn't impress so much: lower than both 1997 and 2001 and only 3% above 2005.

    Wythenshawe & Sale East
    Vote Shares 
    ================================================================
                               GE      GE      GE      GE      BE   
                              1997    2001    2005    2010    2014  
                               %       %       %       %       %    
    --------------------------------------------------------------  
    Labour                    58.1    60.0    52.2    44.1    55.3  
    Conservative              25.1    24.0    22.3    25.6    14.5  
    Liberal Democrat          12.4    12.3    21.5    22.3     4.9  
    UKIP                                       3.1     3.4    17.9  
    Others                     4.4     3.7     1.0     4.6     7.5  

      Referendum Party         2.3                                  
      Socialist Labour         2.1     1.2                          
      Green                            2.5                     3.1  
      Socialist Alternative                    1.0                  
      BNP                                              3.9     3.2  
      TUSC                                             0.7          
      Monster Raving Loony                                     1.2
    Not where I would want to be a year or so off the General Election if I were Ed Miliband.

    Especially given the low turnout, death of a popular MP causing the by election, and, the general expectation that this was an unlosable seat for Labour.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    AveryLP said:

    IOS said:

    Great news for Labour is that this result supports Ashcrofts marginal polling.

    Total nonsense IOS.

    Lord Ashcroft Poll vs. Outturn 
    ===========================================
    Party               Poll    Actual    Diff.
    -------------------------------------------
    Labour               61%     55.3%    -5.7%
    UKIP                 15%     17.9%    +2.9%
    Conservative         14%     14.5%    +0.5%
    Liberal Democrat      5%      4.9%    -0.1%
    Others                4%      7.9%    +3.9%

    Lab Lead over UKIP   46%     37.4%    -8.6%
    -------------------------------------------
    Poll Details:                              
    Sample Size: 1,009                         
    Polling Dates: 3-5 Feb 2014                
    ===========================================
    Lord Ashcroft's poll overestimated both the Labour vote share and majority.

    It underestimated the UKIP, Conservatives and Others vote share.
    Total nonsense Avery. IoS is spot on. This was a triumph for Lord Ashcroft Polls. Hint: Unionists may like to take peek at his Scottish VI findings again. Or maybe not.
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Some more Wythenshawe Yellow Boxes

    Wythenshawe & Sale East
    UK Parliamentary By Election Results
    13 February 2014 
    ===============================================================
    Candidate            Party                   Votes    %    ±%  
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Mike Kane            Labour                  13,261  55.3 +11.2
    John Bickley         UKIP                     4,301  18.0 +14.5
    Daniel Critchlow     Conservative             3,479  14.5 -11.0
    Mary di Mauro        Liberal Democrat         1,176   4.9 -17.4
    Nigel Woodcock       Green                      748   3.1      
    Eddy O'Sullivan      BNP                        708   3.0  -0.9
    Captain Chap.-Smythe Monster Raving Loony       288   1.2      
                                                 ------------      
                                                 23,961 100.0      
    Spoilt Papers                                    62            
                                                 ------            
                                                 24,024            
    ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Labour majority                               8,960  37.4      
    ===============================================================
    Turnout 
    ================================================================
                               GE      GE      GE      GE      BE   
                              1997    2001    2005    2010    2014  
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Electorate               72,086  72,127  70,744  79,923  85,058 
    Votes                    45,533  35,055  36,184  40,751  24,024 
    Percentage                 63.2    48.6    50.4    54.3   28.24 
    ================================================================
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    AveryLP said:

    RodCrosby said:

    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...

    Sir Roderick

    The swing to Labour only looks good when compared to 2010. When you compare Labour's vote share with its won elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005 then the 55% doesn't impress so much: lower than both 1997 and 2001 and only 3% above 2005.

    Wythenshawe & Sale East
    Vote Shares 
    ================================================================
                               GE      GE      GE      GE      BE   
                              1997    2001    2005    2010    2014  
                               %       %       %       %       %    
    --------------------------------------------------------------  
    Labour                    58.1    60.0    52.2    44.1    55.3  
    Conservative              25.1    24.0    22.3    25.6    14.5  
    Liberal Democrat          12.4    12.3    21.5    22.3     4.9  
    UKIP                                       3.1     3.4    17.9  
    Others                     4.4     3.7     1.0     4.6     7.5  

      Referendum Party         2.3                                  
      Socialist Labour         2.1     1.2                          
      Green                            2.5                     3.1  
      Socialist Alternative                    1.0                  
      BNP                                              3.9     3.2  
      TUSC                                             0.7          
      Monster Raving Loony                                     1.2
    Not where I would want to be a year or so off the General Election if I were Ed Miliband.

    Especially given the low turnout, death of a popular MP causing the by election, and, the general expectation that this was an unlosable seat for Labour.
    Avery, you are spot on. With this kind of result Labour cannot hope to win a majority of 166 !!
  • Options
    AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    surbiton said:

    AveryLP said:

    RodCrosby said:

    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...

    ...

    Avery, you are spot on. With this kind of result Labour cannot hope to win a majority of 166 !!
    You are dreaming, Surby.

    Pinch yourself.

    You need to wake up.
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    This kind of result is the ideal backdrop for a Dan Hodges article: Why winning the General Election is bad for Ed Miliband !
  • Options
    edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,141
    If @rcs1000 is around,

    13UUaGK8ZDLxjY7RYu2bKEabqjww2KDyxD
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    AndyJS said:

    A bracing fact for the LDs is that their candidate polled less than half the number of votes she received standing in the Northenden ward in May 2010: 1,176 vs 2,503.

    :-)

    Where is Mark Senior when you want him?
  • Options
    surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    If the LDs enter any coalition talks after the GE, will retaining FPTP be one of their demands ?
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited February 2014
    Wythenshawe is UKIP's poorest by-election result since Croydon North in November 2012.

    In terms of % vote loss #Wythenshawe is the Lib Dems worst by-election result since 1945.


    16 months vs ~70 years ? - Hmm, I know which result I’d prefer.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    RodCrosby said:

    LibDem's worst result since the War (beating Manchester Central 2012)

    That fact ought to shift prices on some of the individual constituency markets (eg. Inverness).
    But will it?
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    SimonStClare said:

    Wythenshawe is UKIP's poorest by-election result since Croydon North in November 2012.

    In terms of % vote loss #Wythenshawe is the Lib Dems worst by-election result since 1945.

    16 months vs ~70 years ? - Hmm, I know which result I’d prefer.

    Indeed.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    redcliffe62 said:

    RodCrosby said:

    LibDem's worst result since the War (beating Manchester Central 2012)

    I thought it was just Scotland that would hammer Libs, even with a strong ground team they have antagonised so many potential core voters they are increasingly obsolete and no longer the third party in England, even if their MP count is a lag indicator which says they were.
    Without the protection afforded by FPTP their MEP count is not going to be "a lag indicator". This impending Euro election could get bloody for Clegg's team. Very bloody.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Oops-a-daisy. Poor Darling will be choking on his cornflakes this morning.

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/yes-does-not-mean-yes.23438016

    If he could just get the Tories to keep their mouths shut.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,283
    I just love the spin from the BBC on this: "It is normal for lower turn-outs at by-elections."

    28% is on the low side...no UKIP tanks on the green.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    Methinks a bit of range adjustment might be in order.

    If the potential Ukip core is:
    - non-PC Tories
    - everyone in the middle (middle defined as the join between C1 and C2)
    - bitter ex-Labour
    then whatever the size of the available bitter ex-labour segment - which will vary from place to place - they will mostly vote just out of revenge and don't need to be pitched to directly plus doing so will likely annoy the other two segments especially if it has the word "benefits" in it, plus having a different pitch to different audiences is lame anyway.

    So the pitch should be consistently focused on the first two segments imo.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,283
    dr_spyn said:

    I just love the spin from the BBC on this: "It is normal for lower turn-outs at by-elections."

    28% is on the low side...no UKIP tanks on the green.

    26% drop in turnout usual?

  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,915
    Does this result not again suggest that some other post, out of politics, needs to be found for Clegg?
    PDQ too, the way things are going for the Party.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,283
    One of the 10 worst turnouts since 1945.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_by-election_records#Lowest_turnout
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,283
    Wythamshawe and Sale East moves into the bottom ten turnouts - but not just yet...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_by-election_records#Lowest_turnout
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,162
    The one thing I wanted to see was another LibDem lost deposit. It just hammers home what reallynhas been a consistent trend through pretty much every election of the last four year : the LibDems are as popular as a dose of the pox. In explicitly lying to his core voters, Clegg has utterly destroyed his voter base and with it over the last 4 rounds of local elections he's destroyed his councillor base. This has led to lost deposit after lost deposit in Westminster elections and we can look forward to another demolition of their councillors and MEPs in May.

    What does this mean for 2015? A large loss of seats yes, but where it gets interesting is in the Tory/LibDem marginals. In the rest of the country a LibDem vote has become seen as indistinguishable with a Tory vote. In seats where the two coalition parties have been the only ones in play I think we could see all kinds of interesting results where anti- government voters are either going to stay at home in despair or Labour or UKIP are going to come from nowhere and win.

    As for Clegg, you have to wonder if it has been worth it.....
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,283
    Huge number of postal votes relative to vote on the day.

    "Labour win Wythenshawe and Sale East byelection on sharply reduced turnout
    The Guardian ‎- 2 minutes ago
    A total of 10,141 postal votes were cast and only 13,883 on the day. ... the inter-war council estate of Wythenshawe, built to house the overspill ..."
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    RochdalePioneers said:

    The one thing I wanted to see was another LibDem lost deposit. It just hammers home what reallynhas been a consistent trend through pretty much every election of the last four year : the LibDems are as popular as a dose of the pox. In explicitly lying to his core voters, Clegg has utterly destroyed his voter base and with it over the last 4 rounds of local elections he's destroyed his councillor base. This has led to lost deposit after lost deposit in Westminster elections and we can look forward to another demolition of their councillors and MEPs in May.

    What does this mean for 2015? A large loss of seats yes, but where it gets interesting is in the Tory/LibDem marginals. In the rest of the country a LibDem vote has become seen as indistinguishable with a Tory vote. In seats where the two coalition parties have been the only ones in play I think we could see all kinds of interesting results where anti- government voters are either going to stay at home in despair or Labour or UKIP are going to come from nowhere and win.

    As for Clegg, you have to wonder if it has been worth it.....

    I could imagine, that if the LD's perform badly this year, there will be a pledge never to support the Tories in coalition again.
  • Options
    Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    Blue_rog said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The one thing I wanted to see was another LibDem lost deposit. It just hammers home what reallynhas been a consistent trend through pretty much every election of the last four year : the LibDems are as popular as a dose of the pox. In explicitly lying to his core voters, Clegg has utterly destroyed his voter base and with it over the last 4 rounds of local elections he's destroyed his councillor base. This has led to lost deposit after lost deposit in Westminster elections and we can look forward to another demolition of their councillors and MEPs in May.

    What does this mean for 2015? A large loss of seats yes, but where it gets interesting is in the Tory/LibDem marginals. In the rest of the country a LibDem vote has become seen as indistinguishable with a Tory vote. In seats where the two coalition parties have been the only ones in play I think we could see all kinds of interesting results where anti- government voters are either going to stay at home in despair or Labour or UKIP are going to come from nowhere and win.

    As for Clegg, you have to wonder if it has been worth it.....

    I could imagine, that if the LD's perform badly this year, there will be a pledge never to support the Tories in coalition again.
    Supplement - but in the light of previous broken pledges by the LD's will the voters believe it?

  • Options
    Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    Always a squirrel somewhere ... Lab lose to Tory...

    Mike Smithson‏@MSmithsonPB·5 hrs
    CON GAIN Kingstanding in Birmingham
    CON 1571
    LAB 1433
    UKIP 266
    LD 43
    NF 33
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914
    Clearly the voters of Wythenshawe just don't get it.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    RodCrosby said:

    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...

    Massive difference. Kinnock was overturning a Tory majority (remember them) of 144. Labour are currently achieving an 11% swing on top of a hung parliament.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,914
    Given the relentless string of self-inflicted gaffes, disasters and catastrophes being suffered by the No campaign in Scotland, crossover in the referendum polls very soon must be odds on. That link from Stuart below maybe the last straw. Fancy saying that independence negotiations may not run to the timetable set out by the SNP. That is just absurd!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,258
    RodCrosby said:

    Swingback analysis.

    As a result of this by-election, the central forecast moves from a Labour lead of 1.6% to one of 2.0%...

    A (small) Tory lead is still within the bounds of the model.

    For next year's general, you mean? That would put Labour as a strong 1st party in seats, perhaps not far off a majority.

    I thought you had another model as well, that showed a 90%+ chance of the Tories being largest party?
  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    BNP vote held up well against UKIP. Less squeezed than the other parties. They did well in the 2009 Euros and I expected a major drop in their voteshare in May, but maybe not even with the hijinks in their party.

    It looks as if The LDs gained a lot of voteshare between 2001-5: the anti war vote. These now seem to have returned to Labour. These switchers were probably Labour on holiday rather than true believers of the LDs all along, just pee-ed off in 2005/10.
    AveryLP said:

    RodCrosby said:

    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...

    Sir Roderick

    The swing to Labour only looks good when compared to 2010. When you compare Labour's vote share with its won elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005 then the 55% doesn't impress so much: lower than both 1997 and 2001 and only 3% above 2005.

    Wythenshawe & Sale East
    Vote Shares 
    ================================================================
                               GE      GE      GE      GE      BE   
                              1997    2001    2005    2010    2014  
                               %       %       %       %       %    
    --------------------------------------------------------------  
    Labour                    58.1    60.0    52.2    44.1    55.3  
    Conservative              25.1    24.0    22.3    25.6    14.5  
    Liberal Democrat          12.4    12.3    21.5    22.3     4.9  
    UKIP                                       3.1     3.4    17.9  
    Others                     4.4     3.7     1.0     4.6     7.5  

      Referendum Party         2.3                                  
      Socialist Labour         2.1     1.2                          
      Green                            2.5                     3.1  
      Socialist Alternative                    1.0                  
      BNP                                              3.9     3.2  
      TUSC                                             0.7          
      Monster Raving Loony                                     1.2
    Not where I would want to be a year or so off the General Election if I were Ed Miliband.

    Especially given the low turnout, death of a popular MP causing the by election, and, the general expectation that this was an unlosable seat for Labour.
  • Options
    TheLastBoyScoutTheLastBoyScout Posts: 675
    Casino_Royale said:

    RodCrosby said:

    Swingback analysis.

    As a result of this by-election, the central forecast moves from a Labour lead of 1.6% to one of 2.0%...

    A (small) Tory lead is still within the bounds of the model.

    For next year's general, you mean? That would put Labour as a strong 1st party in seats, perhaps not far off a majority.

    I thought you had another model as well, that showed a 90%+ chance of the Tories being largest party?
    Indeed. You could say his Rod is wobbling.
  • Options
    MrsBMrsB Posts: 574
    pitiful turnout. UKIP did far worse than predicted. Of those who could be arsed to vote, a larger proportion picked Labour to make sure UKIP got nowhere.
    MrsB standing in for Mark Senior
  • Options
    RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 27,162
    The better together campaign can assure the people of Scotland that they are fully respected and equal partners in this a United Kingdom and that their views are always Very Important and never maligned. Bear in mind though that if you vote to leave we'll just ignore your childish strop and continue to exercise our right to impose laws you don't want by a governing party you didn't vote for.

    Yes, I can see this putting a rocket up the Yes campaign. Anyone would think the Tories were desperate to bin off Scotland so that they could turn England into a one party state they could rule forever. But that's silly, such a concept has never crossed their minds.....
  • Options
    MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    I think that under the circumstances and in light of all the latest info, the UKIP result of 17.8% in #Wythenshawe was not a bad effort.

    The main lesson for UKIP to learn is to manage expectations better, especially when fighting a snap by-election in a seat long held by Labour or Tory. The postal vote was a killer for UKIP, all the more reason to get as many councillors elected in May as possible.

    It certainly won't put off UKIP supporters from putting even more effort into future battles.

  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,283
    So Ed gains another MP who voted for his brother...
  • Options
    MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    Ukip had a half decent result in a poor seat for them. Nothing more than that really...oh yeah, the Lib Dems lost their deposit
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Is the dramatic impact that postal voting had on this result not slightly questionable? I think Farage has the tiniest smidgen of a good point that if the vote can be largely done and dusted via postal voting before the campaign even really begins then something is not well in the state of Denmark. Frankly it stinks.

    Should postal voting not be a fallback option for those who really can't get their arses into the local primary school?
  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    Millsy said:

    Ukip had a half decent result in a poor seat for them. Nothing more than that really...oh yeah, the Lib Dems lost their deposit

    Perfectly summed up.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    SouthamObserver said:

    Fancy saying that independence negotiations may not run to the timetable set out by the SNP. That is just absurd!

    It's just part of an emerging pattern. Everything the SNP have asserted so far has been false. Including their fantasy timetable.
  • Options
    PolruanPolruan Posts: 2,083
    Good news for the right:

    Parties voters assumed to be left of centre on 1 May 2010: 60.2% (from 2010 GE 66.4%)

    Parties voters assumed to be right of centre on 1 May 2010: 32.4% (from 2010 GE 29.0%)

    Bad news for the right:

    Labour share of left of centre vote: 91.8% (66.4%)

    Conservative share of right of centre vote: 44.8% (88.2%).


    Stick that in yer models...
  • Options
    FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    The Others did remarkably well. Did the Greens take votes from the LDs as some polls indicate, and will the BNP supporters still resist the UKIP allure?
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    I think 17% is perfectly respectable for a party that was in the low single digits just a couple of years ago. The reality is they are showing they're a force to be reckoned with in all sorts of seats. Unlike the Lib Dems, who collapsed.
  • Options
    MillsyMillsy Posts: 900
    Far more interesting is the by-election result in Kingstanding, Con gain from Lab and Ukip got 7% in a "less well off" part of Birmingham. The result of good campaigning from what i've heard
  • Options
    richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    This result must be the biggest surprise of the last century...yawn
  • Options
    MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Note I have refined the chart above to show the shares and the changes
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,035
    MrsB said:

    pitiful turnout. UKIP did far worse than predicted. Of those who could be arsed to vote, a larger proportion picked Labour to make sure UKIP got nowhere.
    MrsB standing in for Mark Senior

    Pitiful LibDem spinning.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,897
    The Lib Dems really should be able to save their deposit in a seat like this. A mediocre result for UKIP, a poor result for the Conservatives - a very good result for Labour. But this result is the worst for the Lib Dems - they will be nowhere in the north if this continues, Greg Mulholland's seat of Leeds NW in particular could be in danger.
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    So no controversy,no UKIP surge.

    That was a seriously underwhelming performance by UKIP after all the bluster.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,897
    As I summised a while back this is simply not UKIP territory - so it proved, yet they came from 3% to 17% and got 2nd. Replacement of the Conservatives in the Labour (Safe) 1st, Con (2nd) seats. Lib Dem annihilation in the north at next GE....
  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    SMukesh said:

    So no controversy,no UKIP surge.

    That was a seriously underwhelming performance by UKIP after all the bluster.

    Grow up and read the result properly.
  • Options
    Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,595
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RodCrosby said:

    LibDem's worst result since the War (beating Manchester Central 2012)

    That fact ought to shift prices on some of the individual constituency markets (eg. Inverness).
    But will it?
    Agree, Bermondsey and Cardiff C are the two with greatest demographic similarities to this seat. Inverness is complicated by the question of who is best based to challenge the LD.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,897
    I also remember predicting with Quincel that the Lib Dem deposit would be on a knife edge - that hunch was correct. Though my only Lib Dem bet was 50p for second. Turns out that extra zero really (33 -> 330-1) should have been on those odds....
  • Options
    SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,650
    nigel4england said:

    SMukesh said:

    So no controversy,no UKIP surge.

    That was a seriously underwhelming performance by UKIP after all the bluster.

    Grow up and read the result properly.
    Wasn`t there talk of them taking the seat at the start?Looks like they struggled into second place.You would have expected them to do better on a low turnout.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    RochdalePioneers said:

    The better together campaign can assure the people of Scotland that they are fully respected and equal partners in this a United Kingdom and that their views are always Very Important and never maligned. Bear in mind though that if you vote to leave we'll just ignore your childish strop and continue to exercise our right to impose laws you don't want by a governing party you didn't vote for.

    Yes, I can see this putting a rocket up the Yes campaign. Anyone would think the Tories were desperate to bin off Scotland so that they could turn England into a one party state they could rule forever. But that's silly, such a concept has never crossed their minds.....

    The evidence is piling up. Some elements in the Conservative Party really are trying to sabotage Cameron and Darling's Betory Together campaign.
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,035
    AveryLP said:

    RodCrosby said:

    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...

    Sir Roderick

    The swing to Labour only looks good when compared to 2010. When you compare Labour's vote share with its won elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005 then the 55% doesn't impress so much: lower than both 1997 and 2001 and only 3% above 2005.

    Wythenshawe & Sale East
    Vote Shares 
    ================================================================
                               GE      GE      GE      GE      BE   
                              1997    2001    2005    2010    2014  
                               %       %       %       %       %    
    --------------------------------------------------------------  
    Labour                    58.1    60.0    52.2    44.1    55.3  
    Conservative              25.1    24.0    22.3    25.6    14.5  
    Liberal Democrat          12.4    12.3    21.5    22.3     4.9  
    UKIP                                       3.1     3.4    17.9  
    Others                     4.4     3.7     1.0     4.6     7.5  

      Referendum Party         2.3                                  
      Socialist Labour         2.1     1.2                          
      Green                            2.5                     3.1  
      Socialist Alternative                    1.0                  
      BNP                                              3.9     3.2  
      TUSC                                             0.7          
      Monster Raving Loony                                     1.2
    Not where I would want to be a year or so off the General Election if I were Ed Miliband.

    Especially given the low turnout, death of a popular MP causing the by election, and, the general expectation that this was an unlosable seat for Labour.
    Another illustration of the failure of the Cameroons targetting urban voters in 2010, a whole 0.5% more than the Conservatives had in 1997.

  • Options
    foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Independence means independence. If the Scots vote to leave then they get no say in how rUK runs itself, including how we run our currency.

    But it seems even the Salmondites do not want real independence just a tartan trewed simulation of it.
    RochdalePioneers said:

    The better together campaign can assure the people of Scotland that they are fully respected and equal partners in this a United Kingdom and that their views are always Very Important and never maligned. Bear in mind though that if you vote to leave we'll just ignore your childish strop and continue to exercise our right to impose laws you don't want by a governing party you didn't vote for.

    Yes, I can see this putting a rocket up the Yes campaign. Anyone would think the Tories were desperate to bin off Scotland so that they could turn England into a one party state they could rule forever. But that's silly, such a concept has never crossed their minds.....

  • Options
    JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    Firstly congratulations to Labour on their by-election win.

    A big raspberry to the other parties especially the LibDems.

    ..................................................................

    Reluctantly I return to an issue that festered overnight and which hopefully may now be put to rest.

    @Mick_Pork indicated that the "putrid stench of hypocrisy" hung over the continuing absence of "tim". I then replied :

    "tim" left of his own volition and OGH has made it clear to the point of tedium that "tim" is not banned and free to return should he wish to do so."

    A further exchange then occurred.

    However the essentials of this sorry story is as I indicated. "tim" left because his publically known personae was given a further airing and the scrutiny that he demanded of others he himself wasn't prepared to undergo on a public forum.

    "tim" is not banned. He is able to return at will and despite my regular spats with "tim" I hope he does return. PB is at its best when we are broad church but the matter is in "tim's" hands.

    Last night we saw the return of both "Ave it" and "SeanT" and other lost souls have returned to the fold recently but one issue is clear - PB will flourish with or without "tim"
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,035
    SMukesh said:

    nigel4england said:

    SMukesh said:

    So no controversy,no UKIP surge.

    That was a seriously underwhelming performance by UKIP after all the bluster.

    Grow up and read the result properly.
    Wasn`t there talk of them taking the seat at the start?
    From whom ?

    Whilst people with a bit of knowledge from the start said they had no chance as it is the wrong sort of seat for UKIP.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,897
    SMukesh said:

    nigel4england said:

    SMukesh said:

    So no controversy,no UKIP surge.

    That was a seriously underwhelming performance by UKIP after all the bluster.

    Grow up and read the result properly.
    Wasn`t there talk of them taking the seat at the start?Looks like they struggled into second place.You would have expected them to do better on a low turnout.
    UKIP were never going to win here. OGH shrewdly traded his UKIP position out on Betfair for a nice profit whereas rcs_1000 took an absolutely ridiculous 7-2 on here for UKIP to win.
  • Options
    Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RodCrosby said:

    LibDem's worst result since the War (beating Manchester Central 2012)

    That fact ought to shift prices on some of the individual constituency markets (eg. Inverness).
    But will it?
    Agree, Bermondsey and Cardiff C are the two with greatest demographic similarities to this seat. Inverness is complicated by the question of who is best based to challenge the LD.
    That may be becoming irrelevant. Danny Alexander may be heading for 3rd or even 4th place unless Willie Rennie can halt the tidal flow of electoral behaviour.

    The message for punters is lay LD rather than back Lab or SNP.
  • Options
    TheLastBoyScoutTheLastBoyScout Posts: 675
    Scott_P said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Fancy saying that independence negotiations may not run to the timetable set out by the SNP. That is just absurd!

    It's just part of an emerging pattern. Everything the SNP have asserted so far has been false. Including their fantasy timetable.
    Are you actually in charge of your critical capacities? I find it absurd that someone like you who purports to be a passionate unionist thinks the way to achieve your aim is to underestimate your opponents and to boosterise your own side. That is not the way to win, but the way to fail.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,897
    @Quincel has done very well in betting terms on this result I believe...
  • Options
    TheLastBoyScoutTheLastBoyScout Posts: 675
    SouthamObserver said:

    Given the relentless string of self-inflicted gaffes, disasters and catastrophes being suffered by the No campaign in Scotland, crossover in the referendum polls very soon must be odds on. That link from Stuart below maybe the last straw. Fancy saying that independence negotiations may not run to the timetable set out by the SNP. That is just absurd!

    Indeed. Pathetic. We are losing this campaign by being relentlessly negative and technocratic. Where is the vision for the Union? Frank Booth's post last night was superb - dig it out at around 9.30pm.
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    edited February 2014
    I see the Guardian is pretty much selling out their integrity for cash:

    Guardian News and Media has signed a seven-figure deal to provide content about sustainability under the brand of household goods giant Unilever. It is the first deal for the new Guardian Labs division – which describes itself as a “branded content and innovation agency which offers brands bold and compelling new ways to tell their stories and engage with influential Guardian audiences”.

    http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/02/13/the-guardian-now-shares-values-with-unilever/
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The better together campaign can assure the people of Scotland that they are fully respected and equal partners in this a United Kingdom and that their views are always Very Important and never maligned. Bear in mind though that if you vote to leave we'll just ignore your childish strop and continue to exercise our right to impose laws you don't want by a governing party you didn't vote for.

    Yes, I can see this putting a rocket up the Yes campaign. Anyone would think the Tories were desperate to bin off Scotland so that they could turn England into a one party state they could rule forever. But that's silly, such a concept has never crossed their minds.....

    The evidence is piling up. Some elements in the Conservative Party really are trying to sabotage Cameron and Darling's Betory Together campaign.
    Sheesh things must be bad in Natistan, It's the Toories ! It's the Toories!

    Bring out the bogeyman and ignore the issues.
  • Options
    TheLastBoyScoutTheLastBoyScout Posts: 675
    MrJones said:

    Methinks a bit of range adjustment might be in order.

    If the potential Ukip core is:
    - non-PC Tories
    - everyone in the middle (middle defined as the join between C1 and C2)
    - bitter ex-Labour
    then whatever the size of the available bitter ex-labour segment - which will vary from place to place - they will mostly vote just out of revenge and don't need to be pitched to directly plus doing so will likely annoy the other two segments especially if it has the word "benefits" in it, plus having a different pitch to different audiences is lame anyway.

    So the pitch should be consistently focused on the first two segments imo.

    What do you mean by "non-PC Tories"? That sounds quite sinister.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,897
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Wulfrun_Phil said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    RodCrosby said:

    LibDem's worst result since the War (beating Manchester Central 2012)

    That fact ought to shift prices on some of the individual constituency markets (eg. Inverness).
    But will it?
    Agree, Bermondsey and Cardiff C are the two with greatest demographic similarities to this seat. Inverness is complicated by the question of who is best based to challenge the LD.
    That may be becoming irrelevant. Danny Alexander may be heading for 3rd or even 4th place unless Willie Rennie can halt the tidal flow of electoral behaviour.

    The message for punters is lay LD rather than back Lab or SNP.
    Based on this result I think Danny Alexander loses Inverness. Still staying out as the Highland and Island seats were a complete fortress for the Lib Dems but he is odds on there and that for me is a terrible bet.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,283
    Socrates said:

    I see the Guardian is pretty much selling out their integrity for cash:

    Guardian News and Media has signed a seven-figure deal to provide content about sustainability under the brand of household goods giant Unilever. It is the first deal for the new Guardian Labs division – which describes itself as a “branded content and innovation agency which offers brands bold and compelling new ways to tell their stories and engage with influential Guardian audiences”.

    http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/02/13/the-guardian-now-shares-values-with-unilever/

    I they have been doing advertorials for George Ferguson's Green Capital stuff in Bristol.

    Written by Will Henley for Guardian Professional, to a brief agreed with Bristol City Council. Funded by Bristol City Council.

    http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/bristol-green-european-capital
  • Options
    MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,201
    Solid result in Wythenshawe for Lab, as always seemed likely. Sorry Tories, it can't be spun any other way. Poor poor result from LD; they will definitely lose most of their Labour battles on this form. Clegg's failure to defend his tuition fees pledge is looking ever more disastrous.

    On Scotland, my head is in my hands over the events of the last couple of days. It shows again how the No campaign basically doesn't get the Scottish psyche. I am convinced Osborne's speech will strengthen Yes - the sight of him lecturing them will alone add 2%.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,964
    Good morning, everyone.

    Not sure what UKIP's particular issue with psotal voting in this contest, but I agree entirely it should be limited to those genuinely unable to make it to a polling station. Being bone idle is not an excuse.
  • Options
    TheLastBoyScoutTheLastBoyScout Posts: 675
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Oops-a-daisy. Poor Darling will be choking on his cornflakes this morning.

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/yes-does-not-mean-yes.23438016

    If he could just get the Tories to keep their mouths shut.

    Stuart - this is utterly pathetic and cowardly by our side. While I don't want Yes to win, you deserve to. The No campaign is an embarrassment - technocratic, relentlessly negative, craven.
  • Options
    TheLastBoyScoutTheLastBoyScout Posts: 675
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Not sure what UKIP's particular issue with psotal voting in this contest, but I agree entirely it should be limited to those genuinely unable to make it to a polling station. Being bone idle is not an excuse.

    Why? Voting should be made as convenient as possible. Difficulties getting to a polling booth of a working day do not equal 'bone idle'. What an odd, grumpy post from you.
  • Options
    TheLastBoyScoutTheLastBoyScout Posts: 675
    Monksfield said:

    Solid result in Wythenshawe for Lab, as always seemed likely. Sorry Tories, it can't be spun any other way. Poor poor result from LD; they will definitely lose most of their Labour battles on this form. Clegg's failure to defend his tuition fees pledge is looking ever more disastrous.

    On Scotland, my head is in my hands over the events of the last couple of days. It shows again how the No campaign basically doesn't get the Scottish psyche. I am convinced Osborne's speech will strengthen Yes - the sight of him lecturing them will alone add 2%.

    It's okay - Scott P thinks we are doing just fine...
  • Options
    SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    TheLastBoyScout said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Oops-a-daisy. Poor Darling will be choking on his cornflakes this morning.

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/yes-does-not-mean-yes.23438016

    If he could just get the Tories to keep their mouths shut.

    Stuart - this is utterly pathetic and cowardly by our side. While I don't want Yes to win, you deserve to. The No campaign is an embarrassment - technocratic, relentlessly negative, craven.
    It's clearly a stupid and irresponsible threat, but so is Salmond's threat to walk away from Scotland's fair share of the debts.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,318
    redcliffe62 said:

    IOS said:

    Also shows that Labour's new anti UKIP literature and campaigning techniques are on the right lines.

    Not sure you can say anti UKIP literature worked when they took 18% from almost a nil base.

    The non immigrant voting support level for UKIP in this by election would therefore have been well above 1 in 5, perhaps above 1 in 4. Perhaps someone knows the answer.

    That is surely the factor of concern, if UKIP get those percentages in areas without a high number of immigrants. I think they will lean UKIP in Euros, as voting Labour to keep Tories out irrelevant in that vote.

    UKIP doesn't do well in areas with a high number of immigrants, as we'll see in the London borough elections shortly. If you live in such an area (as I do), you either like it or get used to it or move out. UKIP often does well in deprived white areas near areas with a lot of immigrants, like Wythenshawe, which is one reason the result may disappoint them. That said, to be fair they are not in general basing their appeal on open racism, and people who really are racists will always prefer the BNP - that's why the BNP vote didn't disappear. I shouldn't think most BNP voters know or care about the internal quarrels - they simply want to register a racist vote.
    OldKingCole said:

    Does this result not again suggest that some other post, out of politics, needs to be found for Clegg?
    PDQ too, the way things are going for the Party.

    Clegg isn't necessarily the problem. Being junior partners in a coalition is the problem, and alternative leader X will become as unpopular swiftly if he or she follows the same policy. Differentiation at the current level isn't enough - it's like someone who keeps grumbling about their spouse but doesn't leave and the couple continue to go to social engagements together, smiling benignly. After a while, friends get bored and irritated by the grumbles and sympathy evaporates.

    That's a general problem of coalitions, not just this one, and it will be a problem if there's a Lab-Lib coalition too. But it's reinforced by the fact that most members and many supporters regard themselves as left of centre, so it's like an unhappy spouse who sticks with the partner even though the friends really dislike the spouse.

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,817
    foxinsoxuk said:

    BNP vote held up well against UKIP. Less squeezed than the other parties. They did well in the 2009 Euros and I expected a major drop in their voteshare in May, but maybe not even with the hijinks in their party.

    It looks as if The LDs gained a lot of voteshare between 2001-5: the anti war vote. These now seem to have returned to Labour. These switchers were probably Labour on holiday rather than true believers of the LDs all along, just pee-ed off in 2005/10.

    AveryLP said:

    RodCrosby said:

    An 11% swing is a solid result for Labour, but never forget Kinnock secured 11% and 15% swings 1983-1987, and 11%, 12%, 13%, 16% and 21% swings between 1987-1992 and never became PM...

    Sir Roderick

    The swing to Labour only looks good when compared to 2010. When you compare Labour's vote share with its won elections in 1997, 2001 and 2005 then the 55% doesn't impress so much: lower than both 1997 and 2001 and only 3% above 2005.

    Wythenshawe & Sale East
    Vote Shares 
    ================================================================
                               GE      GE      GE      GE      BE   
                              1997    2001    2005    2010    2014  
                               %       %       %       %       %    
    --------------------------------------------------------------  
    Labour                    58.1    60.0    52.2    44.1    55.3  
    Conservative              25.1    24.0    22.3    25.6    14.5  
    Liberal Democrat          12.4    12.3    21.5    22.3     4.9  
    UKIP                                       3.1     3.4    17.9  
    Others                     4.4     3.7     1.0     4.6     7.5  

      Referendum Party         2.3                                  
      Socialist Labour         2.1     1.2                          
      Green                            2.5                     3.1  
      Socialist Alternative                    1.0                  
      BNP                                              3.9     3.2  
      TUSC                                             0.7          
      Monster Raving Loony                                     1.2
    Not where I would want to be a year or so off the General Election if I were Ed Miliband.

    Especially given the low turnout, death of a popular MP causing the by election, and, the general expectation that this was an unlosable seat for Labour.
    Whereas the Tory vote share is shite no matter how you look at it
This discussion has been closed.