Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » CON hold Witney with a much reduced majority & the LDs coming
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » CON hold Witney with a much reduced majority & the LDs coming 2nd securing a 19.3% CON to LD swing
Witney result:CON: 45.1% (-15.1)LDEM: 30.2% (+23.5)LAB: 15.0% (-2.2)GRN: 3.5% (-1.5)UKIP: 3.5% (-5.6)
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
"For a party with double digit leads in all the national polls the Tory vote drop in Witney was poor & hardly vote of confidence in TMay"
Ahem...
https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/789293246954561544
https://twitter.com/MattSingh_/status/789293343893295104
Performance of LDs good, but not Earth-shattering. That of Government consistent with established norms.
Result of a by-election in a Government held seat in mid-term, in which turnout was fairly low, a lot of Tories stayed at home, and the LDs threw everything at the seat and still couldn't get close.
You could just as easily say the following:
1. Pro-EU party concentrates all its resources on Remain-voting Govt seat, still can't get within 5,000 votes of winning
2. Total Con + Ukip vote = 48.56%, which is actually slightly HIGHER then the Leave percentage recorded in the local authority area in which Witney falls
This is not somewhere where the Lib Dems - who are still, lest we forget, totally becalmed at 8% in the national VI averages - are liable to do well in a general election. Restoration of a 20,000+ Tory majority is still perfectly reasonable to imagine under those conditions.
First UKIP lost deposit in parliamentary by since when?
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/michelle-obama-campaign-arizona-230121
Update: this morning's main items on the Beeb - Aberfan anniversary, Russian controversies, Batley by-election, Witney by-election (still fourth.)
I don't rule out the possibility of a yellow revival in the national polls by any means, but I won't believe it until I see it.
The Witney result and the yellow peril local by-election results indicates the the LibDems remain in the thoughts of engaged voters. Progress from a low base.
The last time anyone was booed at the Al Smith dinner was Carter in 1980 apparently.
So far Jeremy Corbyn has outperferformed the low expectations set for him at every electoral test. At a low level, Labour's support seems solid.
Trying to win seats at a general election entirely on the basis of hacking away at the Tory vote might be enough to secure a small handful of seats - assuming that things remain as they are, and thus there are, perhaps, enough right-leaning voters who feel secure about the overall outcome to go back to a party which might vote to put Labour back in office if given the chance - but it won't get them all that far.
My guess would be that it's down to a combination of factors. First, the nature of the constituency - the Labour vote there being, one would assume, disproportionately comprised of the sort of well-to-do middle-class lefties who are attracted rather than repelled by Corbyn. And second, the continued unwillingness on the part of all those left-leaning voters who deserted the Lib Dems over the Coalition to contemplate supporting them again. In short, I'd guess that the Lib Dem performance is a product of winning over some Conservative voters, whilst many others stayed at home.
Trying to win seats at a general election entirely on the basis of hacking away at the Tory vote might be enough to secure a small handful of MPs - assuming that things remain as they are, and thus there are, perhaps, enough right-leaning voters who feel secure about the overall outcome to go back to a party which might vote to put Labour back in office if given the chance - but it won't get them all that far. Besides, I'm still not convinced - on the basis of isolated by-election results - that the current LD leader (or his soft left offer) are as attractive to the yellow Tory vote as Nick Clegg was.
Moderators
I claim this thread header off topic because as we all know any discussions to be had means it's either Trump or Brexit on this site
Pretty much free money with hindsight, given the current state of play as regards UKIP and the absence of any serious independent candidates.
Precisely the type of betting tips we need on PB.com.
I've invested heavily, but please DYOR .
Cameron was PM and took Witney with the same 45% share when he started out as a MP.
For the LibDems it's a far cry from the days of Christchurch or Newbury.
Trump leads by 3% and 1% respectively:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch_oct20
http://www.investors.com/politics/trump-holds-on-to-1-point-lead-as-debate-sparks-fly/
What we can state is that there is some serious value to be had on Trump.
or
June 23 Brexit 46.3%
October 20 Hard Brexit 48.6%
Will you be spinning the results that way as well Mike ???
This site often embarrassed itself during the referendum campaign please don't do so now.
Jezza has a small but fervent following.
There's clearly a core Labour vote which either is impressed by Corbyn and/or strongly hostile to the LibDems.
UKIP I would say have no purpose in the middle class South with this Conservative government.
There niche is at present being a populist working class party.
On Witney, this looks like a warning to the Tories not to take the voters for granted.
I can understand his reasons at the time, but with hindsight a poor decision.
Well done Shadsy for a very close prediction – a career in national polling beckons...
GE - Tory/UKIP = 54.1% across the country on that move.
I also suspect that the Tories will be much improved in Scotland on last May. It's become very clear that they are the unionist opposition to the nationalists and the vote dynamic up there would be a particular blend of EU v UK v SIndy judging by Sturgeon's rhetoric.
The historical evidence does not support this conclusion. When Blair stood down in 2007 after resigning as PM, at the by election the Labour vote dropped by 14% down to 45%.. Almost the same as Witney.
Not to mention the anti-Brexit leftists everywhere:
' On Friday morning, the bookies assume, there will be a new Conservative MP for Witney, the constituency suddenly vacated by David Cameron when he resigned last month. While few doubt that the Tory candidate, Robert Courts, will win, it is likely he will have no more than 40% of the vote, where his predecessor won 60%.
Now just imagine what a message could have been sent if Labour and the Lib Dems – and perhaps the Greens too – had run a single candidate to campaign just on a pro-single market, pro-migrant, pro-refugee ticket. These are issues that many voters in Witney, a constituency that voted to remain in the EU by 54% to 46%, care about deeply. These are people who trek into Oxford to join Refugees Welcome marches like the one last week, and who support the local council’s Asylum Welcome work. '
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/17/left-united-witney-theresa-mays-britain-byelection-lib-dems-labour
So the Conservatives did better than the guardianistas were expecting.
"24+% - This is a genuinely good result for the LDs, and they can go into future by-elections (such as Richmond Park, if Zac resigns) with a degree of confidence"
30% is a very good result for the LibDems.
UKIP dropping to 5th and losing deposit is very bad for them.
Elsewhere UKIP lose a council seat they were defending and the LibDems gain a seat from the Tories (look at UKIP's vote)
Britain Elects @britainelects 8h8 hours ago
St Mary's (E. Riding of Yorks.):
LD: 40.0% (+28.7)
CON: 25.3% (-3.2)
LAB: 18.4% (+0.6)
BEV: 9.7% (-1.2)
IND: 3.8% (+3.8)
UKIP: 2.7% (-10.3)
Their votes will not always go to the Tories, as so many did not start there.
It is for the voters to decide whether there should be political change and there have been plenty of events on which the voters should have the right to express a view. This is about the rights of voters. Not the rights of parties to hold onto seats without challenge.
Democracy should not be suspended as a result of murder. This sets a very bad precedent - that a violent act can lead to the suspension of full multi party democracy.
There seem to be two ways:
1) As TSE's figures have, from the estimated adult population - this is what most historic figures seem to be
2) From the estimated number of eligible voters (this is what Betfair say they'll settle on) - i.e. not foreign, not felons (FWIW, this seems to give a figure about 4-5% higher, DYOR, etc.)
They obviously both differ from the UK method of counting the number of registered voters, hence turnout seems lower.
Turnouts of barely 50% for POTUS are surprisingly low.
Edit: I see, so based on estimated population rather than number registered. Curious that Betfair use a different formula.
Stay in EU parties 33.7% LD and green
Don't know 15% lab
Brexit 48.6% con and ukip
I don't suggest it means anything., just more fun with numbers.
Here's another way of comparing the byelection result which Mike wont be tweeting:
2015 Pro Hard Brexit 9.2%
2016 Pro Hard Brexit 48.6%
As opposed to a violent act changing which party holds the seat?
Democracy was not suspended because of a murder. A murder attempted to suspend democracy.
This was the right decision, and should be a policy going forward.
There is no shock, it wasn't Orpington, the Tories were never going to lose it, and it was pretty much as expected/predicted. The LD's thro everything at Witney and failed, that's the real story.
Though Mrs J happens to agree with you.
(You could also argue that a death - not just murder - should be treated in the same manner. Was the death of Michael Colvin any less sad than that of Jo Cox?)
Labour 28.8
LD 20.3
Green 2.2
Was the result in 2001 when Cameron took the seat.
Conservative 43.0
When Shawn Woodward took it in 1997
Conservative 45.23
When Douglas Hurd took it in 1974 as Mid Oxon.
So despite all the spin what we can say is that 45% of Witney voters will vote for a new Tory candidate with no personal vote. Otherwise half the Labour vote has moved to the LDs and the Kippers, which given the Corbyn situation should not be news.
He should have said nothing, but standing down was the easier decision at the time. I don't blame him, but it was the wrong call. I would bet good money that he never considered that there would be a by-election in his own seat on the same day!
No, neither have I, but it must surely be enormous. The Magic Sign have much to thank him for over the years, as do we PBers, although it hurts somewhat to admit as much.
LD + 7658
LAB -4281
UKIP -3998
GREEN -1607
NHAP -183
Switching:
CON -> LD 1587
LAB -> LD 4281
GREEN -> LD 1607
NHAP -> LD 183
GE Voters that did not turn out at BE
CON 16301
UKIP 3998
?
The ironic thing is that UKIP's continuing existence now benefits only the Conservatives.