Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The results continue to roll in

123468

Comments

  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "Lord Reid, don't worry, we'll be with you in a second!"

    Take your time, Huw, please...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,362
    meanwhile back in Europe the french have been given an extra 2 years to get their deficit under control.

    Some animals are more equal than others

    http://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2013/05/03/20002-20130503ARTFIG00351-deficit-public-bruxelles-accorde-un-sursis-deux-ans-a-la-france.php
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,241
    surbiton said:

    Can I take the UKIP East/West divide as making up for my catastrophic Romney error?

    Your obsession with a Romney win was a bit whimsical. Particularly, when it was reinforced by your visit to the States.

    All is forgiven. I don't remember anyone else actually mentioning the East/West divide. What's behind it ? East Europeans settling numbers ?
    And the destruction of fishing down the East coast. UKIP made a clean sweep in Great Yarmouth.

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    What a sensational day. The day, perhaps, when FPTP died as a credible electoral system in this country. If that is the case, for me it will be the most significant and joyous event of my little political life. God bless UKIP. I agree with little of what they say, but should they have helped to bring about the end of our awful voting system if they achieve nothing else they will have made this country a better place.

    I would like to read a coherent piece from a Tory why FPTP is either good for them or for the country ?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,695
    Re Rob's spreadsheet:

    Re gains / losses: note that boundary changes mean 52 less seats in total this time - so Rob's gains / losses will end up totalling to -52.

    BBC have allowed for boundary changes so their gains / losses will sum to zero.

    Thus Rob will overstate Con losses.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,772
    Tom Newton Dunn ‏@tnewtondunn 2m
    Looks like Tories may lose less seats than Labour did in 2009 (291), and Labour may only gain 250-ish. That's terrible for Ed.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    Plato said:

    Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    Looks like Tories may lose less seats than Labour did in 2009 (291), and Labour may only gain 250-ish. That's terrible for Ed.

    Heroic spin! Bless his little cotton socks.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,517
    2 more Labou seats in Notts - Carlton East, Tory vote down by a third, LibDems down two thirds, Greens down three quarters. Next result coming up.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893

    I really do need Ukip to get to 100 gains. I staked more than I would like to admit on that outcome.

    AndyJS said:

    Sky News saying that UKIP have gained 93 seats so far.

    Including non-declared councils, I make the gains 117. And there is no way they can get less than that figure.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,752
    edited May 2013

    320 CON losses is almost bang in line with the Rallings and Thrasher projection.

    Their LAB figure is going to be very much out

    @RobD

    Many thanks for your work on this - it seems to be the only coherent place where you can actually get the results promptly.

    Running my eye down the counties still to declare fully, it looks to me as though the total Con losses will be something like 320. If I'm right, that's not too bad considering the starting point and the Ukipalypse.

    I am very far from sure I trust the BBC figures but according to them with only 4 councils left to fully declare the tory losses are 229. 320 seems seriously high to me unless there are some major collapses to come.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815



    Not looking good for Labour.

    Andrea, you win the Tosca Sofia Antonia Cabello-Watson Inaugural Award for understatement of the day.

  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    "I would like to read a coherent piece from a Tory why FPTP is either good for them or for the country ?"

    It's an article of faith, they've forgotten the reason why.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,058
    carl said:

    What a sensational day. The day, perhaps, when FPTP died as a credible electoral system in this country. If that is the case, for me it will be the most significant and joyous event of my little political life. God bless UKIP. I agree with little of what they say, but should they have helped to bring about the end of our awful voting system if they achieve nothing else they will have made this country a better place.

    Agree.

    FPTP is surely untenable now. With only the Tories and a few Labour dinosaurs to fight its corner, versus 3 of the 4 main parties, something's got to give.

    AV was not the answer though. Anyway PR now. I assume the Lib Dems will still want PR. They will won't they ?!? !!
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I used to be a fervent supporter of FPTP. Now I think it's a national disgrace.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,241
    UKIP are wll past 100 gains now. The BBC doesn't post figures until every division in a council has declared.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Just watching Hardtalk on BBC World.

    Apparently, the Head of BBC News has publicly said that he was pro-Israel. Not a surprise really. Surprisingly, he didn't say he was pro Tory !
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893

    @RobD

    Many thanks for your work on this - it seems to be the only coherent place where you can actually get the results promptly.

    Running my eye down the counties still to declare fully, it looks to me as though the total Con losses will be something like 320. If I'm right, that's not too bad considering the starting point and the Ukipalypse.

    That's no problem, made it all the more exciting :D

  • samsam Posts: 727
    Who are possible defectors? Carswell must be a runner?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,999
    Socrates said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Socrates said:



    I'm also not clear what you your point is around "terms of trade"? Do you mean balance of payments, the standard definition of terms of trade, or something else I'm missing?

    @Socrates,

    I mean that I do not believe the rules with which we trade with the rest of the world would be adversely impacted by us leaving the EU. (There a few exceptions to this, such as the auto industry where we are very integrated into pan-Euro supply chains, but I suspect we'd negotiate a position with the EU where we remained effectively part of the SEA for this sector.)
    Ah ok. The economist in me was thinking this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_trade

    Don't you think we'd benefit from trade deals with people like the US, Canada, India, Japan, Australia etc? Not to mention cheap food from Africa...
    My point is simply that I don't think we would be in a worse position.

    It's a difficult question. I think there are some clear wins, such as food from Africa. With the US, we'll get the standard Most Favoured Nation status. I think India will be a tough nut to crack, because the protectionist instincts run strongly there. If they are able to exploit the giant Bay of Bengal gas fields then that will narrow their trade deficit, and they will be more open to opening their borders to us (and others). For China, we'd almost certainly get a pretty good deal - quite possibly better than with the EU. However, the benefits there would be quite modest as China is surprisingly open to the EU right now.

    So - better terms of trade with non-EU nations. If we were outside the EEA, I think we'd still get a pretty good deal with the EU (free trade or thereabouts). The issue would be more one of documentation and bureaucracy. In other words, they would be keen to ensure that goods imported from China could not be just rebadged and then re-exported into the SEA. This would undoubtedly have a modestly negative impact on those businesses tightly integrated into European supply chains (such as autos), but I suspect we would negotiate things in this area too.

    All-in-all, I don't think we have anything to be *too* worried about. There would be near-term disruption, of course, but that would be sorted in time. I think the bigger impact would be on areas like The City. Which you can take as a positive or a negative :-)
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Kent held by Tories.

    Con 44 seats with two still to declare.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    edited May 2013

    "I would like to read a coherent piece from a Tory why FPTP is either good for them or for the country ?"

    It's an article of faith, they've forgotten the reason why.

    It's because they have a lot less / virtually no chance of a majority under a proportional system (though more chance of power).
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,695
    BBC numbers are NOT after 30 councils.

    BBC put in council result (ie control) before they enter seats!

    It just means overall council control is known in 30.
  • Did Ed MIliband put out his alternative queen's speech last week?

    Clearly not the most resonant of platforms

    Reid on BBC talking completew drivel about the vote shares......
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    Edit last post. The Tories have a lot less chance of a majority under a proportional system, I meant.

    How do you edit posts?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2013
    Interesting comment on UKPR by someone called Richard (hope he doesn't mind me quoting him):

    "I think we’re seeing three rough voting blocks forming:
    Labour – public sector + non-white
    Conservative – middle class private sector
    UKIP – working class private sector
    The LibDems don’t have a voting block only personal votes, tactical votes and heritage votes.
    The UKIP block is the one suffering from globalised capitalism and metropolitan bigotry. While these continue – and they will for the rest of the decade at least – UKIP will continue to grow stronger.
    The Labour and Conservative voting blocks are shielded from the effects of globalisation and sometimes benefit from it or support it.
    Which is why the Labour and Conservative leaderships underestimated the UKIP threat and now struggle to deal with it."


    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/bostonandskegness/
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    2 more Labou seats in Notts - Carlton East, Tory vote down by a third, LibDems down two thirds, Greens down three quarters. Next result coming up.

    Who are getting the votes then ?
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    What Lord Reid isn't explaining is why Labour are only four points ahead in mid-term, despite this 'historic opportunity' of the centre-right being split down the middle.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited May 2013
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    Can I take the UKIP East/West divide as making up for my catastrophic Romney error?

    Your obsession with a Romney win was a bit whimsical. Particularly, when it was reinforced by your visit to the States.

    All is forgiven. I don't remember anyone else actually mentioning the East/West divide. What's behind it ? East Europeans settling numbers ?
    It's not just Slovaks picking sprouts: UKIP have done well in eastern areas less impacted by immigration. It is perhaps an archaic cultural thing, as I speculate on a Telegraph blog, where I shamelessly nicked Morris Dancer's "ukipalypse".

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100215196/eastern-england-is-in-rebellion-this-has-happened-before/
    There was a good US article last year, that suggested that the culture of the original settlers to the various US states are responsible for their political culture today.

    EDIT
    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/novemberdecember_2011/features/a_geography_lesson_for_the_tea032846.php?page=1

  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,517
    2 more big swings to Labour deliver 2 more gains in Arnold South. One declaration to go, Arnold North, which has a Tory lead of 3200 to 1900.
  • samsam Posts: 727
    carl said:

    Edit last post. The Tories have a lot less chance of a majority under a proportional system, I meant.

    How do you edit posts?

    Hover the mouse over the top right corner of your post and an edit function appears
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    carl said:

    Plato said:

    Tom Newton Dunn @tnewtondunn
    Looks like Tories may lose less seats than Labour did in 2009 (291), and Labour may only gain 250-ish. That's terrible for Ed.

    Heroic spin! Bless his little cotton socks.
    More to the point its the Sun 'vote for who you like' that's spinning it......

    I'd say

    Cons - bad night - but priced in/could have been worse
    LibDem - gruesome
    Lab - good, but 'could do better'
    UKIP - great - but still fans of FPTP?

  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,695
    BBC numbers are after 1700 seats.

    700 seats o/s per BBC.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893
    AveryLP said:

    Kent held by Tories.

    Con 44 seats with two still to declare.

    Can you give me the full figures? I seem to have misplaced the good Kent website with up to date figures!

  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    tim said:

    sam said:

    Who are possible defectors? Carswell must be a runner?


    Why would he defect, he's got a seat for life.

    And, more to the point, he wants a referendum on Europe.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    Plaid Cymru sources say they expect to easily be the biggest party on the new Anglesey council, with 'eleven or twelve' of the 30 seats.

    They will seek a coalition deal with another party, probably Labour, who Plaid predict will have 'about four seats'.

    They insist that they will not be prepared to include any independents in a new administration, saying a fresh start is needed.


    http://www.itv.com/news/wales/story/2013-04-15/anglesey-council-election-campaign/#plaid-cymru-well-lead-new-council_198499
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893
    Labour need to win the remaining 4 seats in Nottinghamshire to take control.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    UKIP - great - but still fans of FPTP?

    UKIP arent fans of FPTP.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 56,999
    sam said:

    Who are possible defectors? Carswell must be a runner?

    Defectors will know there history. Of the 28 defectors from the Labour Party to the SDP, I believe only a handful kept their seats.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Labour missed out on a seat in Bramford and Stapleford by 82 votes:

    https://www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/Election2013/division/bramcote-and-stapleford
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    "I would like to read a coherent piece from a Tory why FPTP is either good for them or for the country ?"

    It's an article of faith, they've forgotten the reason why.

    That reminds me of something else.....oh now what is it?
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    edited May 2013
    Carlotta -

    "UKIP - great - but still fans of FPTP?"

    I can't claim to be an expert on UKIP's evolving policy platform, but the last time I checked they were in favour of PR.
  • JamesKellyJamesKelly Posts: 1,348
    edited May 2013
    "That reminds me of something else.....oh now what is it?"

    With all due respect, I've given up trying to work out what the hell goes on in your head, Carlotta, so I really can't assist you there.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,241
    It looks like the Tories are heading to retain Northants County Council.

    A friend of mine who switched from Conservative to UKIP was beaten 1300 to 1100 by the Council leader.

    The Conservatives are lucky to have just outpolled UKIP in so many divisions across the country.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    Neil said:


    UKIP - great - but still fans of FPTP?

    UKIP arent fans of FPTP.
    I bet their suporters are, though. I doubt if many of those UKIP voters in Great Yarmouth, Thanet or Peacehaven voted for AV.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,699
    Socrates said:

    Socrates said:

    So let's imagine there's a little bit of swingback by 2015 and we end up with a Lib-Lab coalition. The Lib Dems would almost certainly demand STV as part of the deal. That means a very, very interesting 2020 election.

    Or not. I doubt Labour could get a move to STV through parliament without a referendum, which they'd lose. If they tried to force it, I could easily see a big enough backbench rebellion to cause the bill to fail.

    If the Lib Dems had any sense they'd demand STV for a reformed Lords, which should be far more easily accomplished. But then if they'd had any sense they'd have demanded that in 2010 too.
    I really don't think they would lose a referendum. Among a lot of people I know who voted against AV, one of the leading reasons was that it wasn't proportional and thus didn't seem like a worthwhile change. The benefits of AV were hard to make clearly. A system that can be classed as PR, which STV definitely will be, has a very clear argument that makes sense to most non-political people.
    You think that after the experience of this parliament, people will vote for perpetual coalitions and horse-trading, cutting the electorate out even more than happened beforehand? OK, two elections in a row resulting in hung parliaments would undermine the ability of FPTP to deliver that too but FPTP does have a historic record of delivering workable majorities most of the time.

    The message of these elections is that an increasingly large number of voters are fed up with being ignored by politicians. Why would they then vote for a system that would - for a while at least - enshrine the established parties and require consensus in the liberal metropolitan centre?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    You think that after the experience of this parliament, people will vote for perpetual coalitions and horse-trading, cutting the electorate out even more than happened beforehand?

    How does coalition government cut out the electorate any more than single party government?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893
    Labour now just need the last two seats up for grabs on Nottinghamshire.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    RobD said:

    AveryLP said:

    Kent held by Tories.

    Con 44 seats with two still to declare.

    Can you give me the full figures? I seem to have misplaced the good Kent website with up to date figures!

    I'll try but the website only comes up in one in ten attempts.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Neil said:


    UKIP - great - but still fans of FPTP?

    UKIP arent fans of FPTP.
    Indeed, my mistake:

    "Introduce an element of proportional representation
    in national and local elections. UKIP
    favours an electoral system based on Alternative
    Vote Plus so that constituency MPs have
    to earn at least 50% of the vote (as in Scottish
    Parliament and Welsh Assembly elections). For
    illustration, 450 MPs might be elected on a
    single member constituency basis (with each
    constituency increased to 100,000 voters) and
    200 MPs on a party list basis. A second ballot
    approach may be preferable."

    http://www.ukip.org/media/pdf/UKIPmanifesto1304a.pdf
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    I bet their suporters are, though.

    Pesky voters, Richard, we'd all be better off without them.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited May 2013
    Huzzah! The Beeb has just confirmed that UKIP have exactly 117 seats. The very number I predicted, though I admit that I said 117 gains and not just seats. Close, so close.

  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Labour takes Notts by 1 maj

    Congratulations Nick.
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,772

    Carlotta -

    "UKIP - great - but still fans of FPTP?"

    I can't claim to be an expert on UKIP's evolving policy platform, but the last time I checked they were in favour of PR.

    It'll be labour which certainly won't be fans of PR. FPTP works hugely for them at the moment, probably more so than it does for the tories.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893
    MikeK said:

    Huzzah! The Beeb has just confirmed that UKIP have exactly 117 seat. The very number I predicted, though I admit that I said 117 gains and not just seats. Close, so close.

    Currently UKIP have 133 seats, according to my workings. And there are only Durham (64) Kent (11) Northamptonshire (34) Nottinghamshire (2) Worcestershire (6) and Ynys Mon (9) left to declare.
  • corporealcorporeal Posts: 2,549
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    Can I take the UKIP East/West divide as making up for my catastrophic Romney error?

    Your obsession with a Romney win was a bit whimsical. Particularly, when it was reinforced by your visit to the States.

    All is forgiven. I don't remember anyone else actually mentioning the East/West divide. What's behind it ? East Europeans settling numbers ?
    It's not just Slovaks picking sprouts: UKIP have done well in eastern areas less impacted by immigration. It is perhaps an archaic cultural thing, as I speculate on a Telegraph blog, where I shamelessly nicked Morris Dancer's "ukipalypse".

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100215196/eastern-england-is-in-rebellion-this-has-happened-before/
    "Why is eastern England the cradle of English rebellion? That is more difficult to say"

    It's fairly easy to say really, namely you're picking selectively to create a pattern (If you were really trying hard you could include Kett's rebellion etc). There are certain factors involved to do with the type of land (agricultural vs pastoral) but you could construct a similar pattern in the north (The Rising of the North being one of the most famous).
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    "That reminds me of something else.....oh now what is it?"

    With all due respect, I've given up trying to work out what the hell goes on in your head, Carlotta, so I really can't assist you there.

    I'm sure its got something to do with 'inhumane weapons' (as opposed to humane ones?) - if that's any help.....

  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,699
    Neil said:


    You think that after the experience of this parliament, people will vote for perpetual coalitions and horse-trading, cutting the electorate out even more than happened beforehand?

    How does coalition government cut out the electorate any more than single party government?
    Single party governments are elected on their manifesto and can be held accountable to it. Coalitions are not elected on any manifesto and the promises made before the election are not therefore enforceable as they depend on whether the party concerned can win the support of others to realise them.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Michael Heaver ‏@Michael_Heaver
    Green Leader @natalieben said they'd win more seats than UKIP. Greens on 16. UKIP on 108. Fringe vs. mainstream.

    Aah! Revenge is sweet. ;)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Amazing result for Labour in Notts.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,630
    SeanT said:

    surbiton said:

    Can I take the UKIP East/West divide as making up for my catastrophic Romney error?

    Your obsession with a Romney win was a bit whimsical. Particularly, when it was reinforced by your visit to the States.

    All is forgiven. I don't remember anyone else actually mentioning the East/West divide. What's behind it ? East Europeans settling numbers ?
    It's not just Slovaks picking sprouts: UKIP have done well in eastern areas less impacted by immigration. It is perhaps an archaic cultural thing, as I speculate on a Telegraph blog, where I shamelessly nicked Morris Dancer's "ukipalypse".

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100215196/eastern-england-is-in-rebellion-this-has-happened-before/

    You miss possibly the most cricial event of all - the division of England into Wessex and Danelaw in the 9th century. The place names of eastern England are very different to those of the west, as are the accents (of course). Inheritance, land holding, all kinds of things were affected by the split, long after it ended - including, no doubt, how peope view the world. Alfred and Guthrum created a monster that Nigel Farage, with some help from Dave and George, has begun to reawaken. And there is nothing that EdM can do about it. We are going back to the future.

  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    UKPR
    Con 25
    Lab 29
    LD 14
    UKIP 24

    Under PR^2
    Con 176
    Lab 237
    LD 55
    UKIP 163
    Oths 18

    Con-UKIP coalition majority?
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited May 2013
    RobD said:

    AveryLP said:

    Kent held by Tories.

    Con 44 seats with two still to declare.

    Can you give me the full figures? I seem to have misplaced the good Kent website with up to date figures!

    Kent CC
    Number of seats declared - 82 (2 remaining)

    Party Seats Gained Lost Held
    Conservative 44 0 25 44
    UK Independence Party 15 14 0 1
    Labour 13 11 1 2
    Liberal Democrat 7 1 1 6
    Green Party 1 1 0 0
    Residents Association 1 0 0 1
    British National Party 0 0 0 0
    English Democrats 0 0 0 0
    Independent 0 0 0 0
    TU & S Against Cuts 0 0 0 0
    Rob

    Do you want the individual wards?

    Not sure how easy it will be to lift the data.


  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    UKIP @UKIP
    Where UKIP and Lib Dems are both standing, we are 175,000 votes ahead of them.
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    AndyJS said:

    Amazing result for Labour in Notts.

    was I asking too much to Notts Labour? But I thought winning back control should have been a reasonable aim, not an amazing result

    If not, it may seem I like reprimanding Nick and Notts Labour! :-)

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    "634 second places, only 32 candidates with less than 10% @ukip"

    https://twitter.com/GawainTowler/status/330333469945253889
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893
    AveryLP said:

    RobD said:

    AveryLP said:

    Kent held by Tories.

    Con 44 seats with two still to declare.

    Can you give me the full figures? I seem to have misplaced the good Kent website with up to date figures!

    Kent CC
    Number of seats declared - 82 (2 remaining)

    Party Seats Gained Lost Held
    Conservative 44 0 25 44
    UK Independence Party 15 14 0 1
    Labour 13 11 1 2
    Liberal Democrat 7 1 1 6
    Green Party 1 1 0 0
    Residents Association 1 0 0 1
    British National Party 0 0 0 0
    English Democrats 0 0 0 0
    Independent 0 0 0 0
    TU & S Against Cuts 0 0 0 0
    Rob

    Do you want the individual wards?

    Not sure how easy it will be to lift the data.


    Thats good enough, ta! Just wanted to update the table.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2013
    The BBC's projection is a bit odd because if UKIP are averaging 25% in contested seats you'd expect them to go a lot lower than the projected share of 23% once you include places like London, Scotland, Wales, Birmingham, etc.

    I can't see UKIP only dropping 2 percentage points once you include those areas.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Interesting Hodges observation:

    If Ed Miliband continues with his 35% strategy, Labour will be sidelined. Next 2 years will become debate between 2 wings of Tory party.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    AndyJS said:

    The BBC's projection is a bit odd because if UKIP are averaging 25% in contested seats you'd expect them to go a lôt lower than the projected share of 23% once you include places like London, Scotland, Wales, Birmingham, etc.

    I can't see UKIP only dropping 2 percentage points once you include those areas.

    I've been thinking exactly the same.

    Any idea how they calculate it?

    Interesting to see what the figures are when the dust settles and the boffins have got stuck into it.
  • RicardohosRicardohos Posts: 258
    edited May 2013
    Remarkable remarkable time in British politics. Just watched the Farage interview on the Telegraph site. God, difficult not to like him to be honest. Comes across as an ordinary bloke unlike the Westminster clowns (yep) that have bankrupted this country and cut across most people's wishes.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10035780/Local-elections-2013-Ukips-leader-Nigel-Farage-drinks-to-his-success.html
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,241
    tim said:

    Labour doing well in areas full of marginals in the Midlands

    Notts,Derby,Warwicks etc

    Labour regaining Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire is like the Conservative regaining Surrey in 1997.
  • dragontreedragontree Posts: 27
    Question for tories

    What do you make of Tory mp for Erewash Jessica Lee who felt it was unnecessary for her to help her councillors campaign or attend the count?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,630

    Interesting Hodges observation:

    If Ed Miliband continues with his 35% strategy, Labour will be sidelined. Next 2 years will become debate between 2 wings of Tory party.

    And if Labour get their 35% of the vote they will not give a monkeys.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    MikeK said:

    Michael Heaver ‏@Michael_Heaver
    Green Leader @natalieben said they'd win more seats than UKIP. Greens on 16. UKIP on 108. Fringe vs. mainstream.

    Aah! Revenge is sweet. ;)

    I'm not her biggest fan but I really doubt she said the Greens would win more seats in yesterday's elections (they're the weakest part of the electoral cycle for us). Surely she said we'd have more Cllrs in total than UKIP after yesterday's elections. Something that looks like a close run thing but will probably come to pass (though I'm missing a few councils so could be wrong).
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    You miss possibly the most cricial event of all - the division of England into Wessex and Danelaw in the 9th century. The place names of eastern England are very different to those of the west, as are the accents (of course). Inheritance, land holding, all kinds of things were affected by the split, long after it ended - including, no doubt, how peope view the world. Alfred and Guthrum created a monster that Nigel Farage, with some help from Dave and George, has begun to reawaken. And there is nothing that EdM can do about it. We are going back to the future.

    Following the Danelaw reference up it looks to me like UKIP are particularly strong among swamp-dwelling demographics.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:England_878.svg
  • Sean_F said:

    The Conservatives are lucky to have just outpolled UKIP in so many divisions across the country.

    I agree, it could have been far far worse.
    Interesting if the LDs actually lose a greater % of cllrs than the Conservatives, will the main broadcast media notice? Currently BBC showing C lost -20.7% and LD lost 25.9% of their starting cllr numbers.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Rob's spreadsheet has Ukip on 140 total ?

    Is that correct.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Remarkable remarkable time in British politics. Just watched the Farage interview on the Telegraph site. God, difficult not to like him to be honest. Comes across as an ordinary bloke unlike the Westminster clowns (yep) that have bankrupted this country and cut across most people's wishes.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/10035780/Local-elections-2013-Ukips-leader-Nigel-Farage-drinks-to-his-success.html

    Greens and LDs get a Farage compliment.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited May 2013
    Robert Jackson @Robert58585858
    Several Redditch/Worcs seats are double headers with Ukip picking up 1 of the 2 - Lab & Con voters splitting tickets or maybe ex-LD voters?

    My ward returned a Kipper and a Tory - @RobD is it possible to tell from your data how many wards returned a split UKIP ticket?
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    As things are going Labour only need a 30% strategy for a majority, never mind 35%!
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    No doubt that Boston and Skegness will be UKIP's number one target seat at the next general election.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366

    Well, the Lincolnshire jury have voted.

    As expected, it's a triumph for the anecdote, despite tim's protestations.
  • dragontreedragontree Posts: 27
    Election 2015 midland marginals
    - Leicestershire; Labour would gain Leicestershire NW + Loughborough
    - Nottinghamshire; Labour would gain Broxtowe, Sherwood,
    - Derbyshire; Labour would gain Amber Valley, High Peak, Erewash,
    - Staffordshire; Labour would gain Cannock Chase and Stafford.
    - Lincolnshire; Labour would gain Lincoln
    - Warwickshire; Labour would gain Nuneaton, Warwickshire North, Leamington.


  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,305
    TGOHF said:

    Rob's spreadsheet has Ukip on 140 total ?

    Is that correct.

    That is indeed correct.

    Ten more seats and I get a kiss from MikeK.

    Better go and put some lippy on....

  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,893
    edited May 2013
    TGOHF said:

    Rob's spreadsheet has Ukip on 140 total ?

    Is that correct.

    How dare you question my work! ;)

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    LOL

    BBC Propaganda @BBCPropaganda
    Harriet Harman "people might have voted UKIP, but they don't want it running the country" << They don't want her running the country either
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2013
    tim said:

    AndyJS said:

    The BBC's projection is a bit odd because if UKIP are averaging 25% in contested seats you'd expect them to go a lot lower than the projected share of 23% once you include places like London, Scotland, Wales, Birmingham, etc.

    I can't see UKIP only dropping 2 percentage points once you include those areas.


    They'll be on about 2/3rds of that once Scotland,London, Wales and the Northern conurbations are accounted for
    Yes but this BBC projection is supposed to have already taken into account how the whole country would have voted. They're saying that even with London, Scotland, Wales, etc, UKIP would be on 23%. That doesn't sound right to me.
  • Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    Michael Heaver ‏@Michael_Heaver
    Green Leader @natalieben said they'd win more seats than UKIP. Greens on 16. UKIP on 108. Fringe vs. mainstream.

    Aah! Revenge is sweet. ;)

    I'm not her biggest fan but I really doubt she said the Greens would win more seats in yesterday's elections (they're the weakest part of the electoral cycle for us). Surely she said we'd have more Cllrs in total than UKIP after yesterday's elections. Something that looks like a close run thing but will probably come to pass (though I'm missing a few councils so could be wrong).
    I'm afraid she did and it was on no less a platform than the BBC.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22367125
  • dragontreedragontree Posts: 27
    Will Nigel Farage be the candidate for skegness/boston or will he target a southern seat?

  • Does this map indicate that Ed Milliband's 35% strategy can be renamed the boil approach?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21240025
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,630

    Election 2015 midland marginals
    - Leicestershire; Labour would gain Leicestershire NW + Loughborough
    - Nottinghamshire; Labour would gain Broxtowe, Sherwood,
    - Derbyshire; Labour would gain Amber Valley, High Peak, Erewash,
    - Staffordshire; Labour would gain Cannock Chase and Stafford.
    - Lincolnshire; Labour would gain Lincoln
    - Warwickshire; Labour would gain Nuneaton, Warwickshire North, Leamington.


    I thought Leamington was looking like a decent performance for Labour.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    As @Andrea noted upthread

    Tim C @forwardnotback
    Nice as it is to take Notts remember we held it from 81 - 2009 - should be a far more comfortable gain
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,752

    Sean_F said:

    The Conservatives are lucky to have just outpolled UKIP in so many divisions across the country.

    I agree, it could have been far far worse.
    Interesting if the LDs actually lose a greater % of cllrs than the Conservatives, will the main broadcast media notice? Currently BBC showing C lost -20.7% and LD lost 25.9% of their starting cllr numbers.

    It has been getting worse and worse for the Lib Dems all afternoon. Given that they basically stood still in the Labour meltdown of 2009 with all the gains going to the tories these are really poor results. Have we seen the pinnacle of Lib Dems in local government?
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    Interesting Hodges observation:

    If Ed Miliband continues with his 35% strategy, Labour will be sidelined. Next 2 years will become debate between 2 wings of Tory party.

    And if Labour get their 35% of the vote they will not give a monkeys.

    And if they are irrelevant for two years and/or on the wrong side of the argument - do you think they will?

    I suspect a lot of 2010 'stay at home' Labour voters voted yesterday - and not for Labour.

  • carlcarl Posts: 750

    Election 2015 midland marginals
    - Leicestershire; Labour would gain Leicestershire NW + Loughborough
    - Nottinghamshire; Labour would gain Broxtowe, Sherwood,
    - Derbyshire; Labour would gain Amber Valley, High Peak, Erewash,
    - Staffordshire; Labour would gain Cannock Chase and Stafford.
    - Lincolnshire; Labour would gain Lincoln
    - Warwickshire; Labour would gain Nuneaton, Warwickshire North, Leamington.


    Taxi for Cameron.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    I'm afraid she did and it was on no less a platform than the BBC.

    Mind boggling.

    I can confirm that I did not vote for her in the leadership election.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Paul Francis @PaulOnPolitics
    That means #ukip have 17 seats on #kent_cc. Staggering result. #kccelections
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    RobD said:

    TGOHF said:

    Rob's spreadsheet has Ukip on 140 total ?

    Is that correct.

    How dare you question my work! ;)

    Sorry - my question should have been - you appear to be far ahead of the mainstream media outlets with your numbers..
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    OGH tweets: "Agreed. Lab should have more gains. In fact Ukip, CON and LDs all did better than expectations - LAB did worse"
This discussion has been closed.