Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ukip sees 4 point drop in its projected national vote share

SystemSystem Posts: 12,650
edited May 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ukip sees 4 point drop in its projected national vote share according to the BBC

BBC announces that Provisional National Vote share in yesterday's locals was
Con 29
Lab 31
LD 13
UKIP 17

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    Why is the Beeb authoritative on this point?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    Yebbut this year there were loads of London and other urban council areas! That may have reduced the UKIP %?

    Sunday's Euro figures are what we should be looking forward to!
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    @Charles

    You are a fair whack out there – which may be common hence why the lack of comment on this.

    The Rallings Tory projection was -160....
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    The proper comparison should surely be with the 2010 PNS, yes?
  • MaxUMaxU Posts: 87
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Yebbut this year there were loads of London and other urban council areas! That may have reduced the UKIP %?

    Sunday's Euro figures are what we should be looking forward to!

    I think the projected national vote share forecast takes the demographic differentials into account.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited May 2014
    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.

    I can't see how it's respectable for the Lib Dems. They always ALWAYS do better in local elections because people distinguish between hyper-active local LD councillors who "understand the community" and the national leadership (which has probably become even moreso in the coalition years). So that suggests that 10-11% is their ceiling in next year's general election, which would not exactly be a very good result.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    OblitusSumMe said:

    Socrates said:

    taffys said:

    They already do it with help to buy, now they need help to build.

    My daughter has just started work in London after uni. We live in surrey and don;t charge any rent so she gets to save what she earns.

    Its much worse for every one of her friends. After rent, tax, travel and food they have nothing. Zip. Nada. Nix. They can't dream of a deposit, never mind a home of their own. When I started working in London thirty years ago central properties were expensive, but what were then the grottier boroughs were within some sort of compass. Now nothing is. Nothing at all.

    We have some young people at the office I work who are the same. They have nothing, bless em and no prospect whatsoever of owning.

    What do they do? If they're single on £25,000 a year, then that's £1662 a month. If you rent with three mates, you could get somewhere at £2500 pcm, or £625 each. £50 on groceries a week. £100 a month on a travel card. You've got £700 left. Knock off £200 for socialising and other things that come up, and you've got £500 to save each month. £6k a year.
    I think travel cards are generally a bit more than £100 per month. Zone 1-5 on the tube is more than £200, and I don't think that even includes use of the bus.

    Plus your putative renter hasn't paid for any electricity, water, council tax, etc, assuming that's not included in their rent.
    Fair enough. Just looked up a Zone 1-3 travel card, which were the sort of properties I'm looking at. That's £140. Four bedroom house would have bills or maybe £100 a month, and council tax the same, divided by the four residents. So let's say it's £400 saving a month.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,390
    edited May 2014
    Last years local were in different areas that were more UKIP friendly... this isnt a surprise

    UKIP didnt even stand a full slate in most of London

    Mike has managed to write two thread headers in the last 12 hours that make it seem like UKIP haven't done all that well... maybe he should turn his hand to fiction!

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    Anyone know the 2010 PNS figures?
  • OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats....

    That is irrelevant if we believe that the methodology behind the calculation of the Projected National Shares is any good.
    Stephen Fisher said:

    the PNS is an attempt to estimate what the share of the vote would be if the whole of GB had local elections and if the three main Westminster parties had fielded candidates in all wards, as they do in general elections.

    I don't know how good the methodology is, and even if it's brilliant it might struggle if the change in UKIPs vote has been uneven demographically - which appears to be the case.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    edited May 2014
    1. UKIPs 2014 PNS has increased 7/10ths since their 2009 vote syched with the last Euro vote, when they were 2nd ahead of Lab! Bodes well for EP2014 OGH.
    2. LDs PNS is continuing to fall year on year. Have they hit bottom yet, 11 months from the GE?
    PS Malckie Bruce nailed by BBC Norman over the house line of "LDs still holding on in their target seats" - just look at London.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,445
    Best to wait till R & T deliver their verdict, IMHO. They use data from many more wards than the BBC do.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Anyone know the 2010 PNS figures?

    Tory 35, Lab 27, Lib 26

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Danny565 said:

    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.

    I can't see how it's respectable for the Lib Dems. They always ALWAYS do better in local elections because people distinguish between hyper-active local LD councillors who "understand the community" and the national leadership (which has probably become even moreso in the coalition years). So that suggests that 10-11% is their ceiling in next year's general election, which would not exactly be a very good result.
    ALWAYS is a dangerous word. It's always when the Lib Dems are fluffily popular. I'm not convinced the same will be true when they're lazily unpopular.

    But I now wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to poll around 13% next year. I don't see where they're going to get a major new stash of votes.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    dyedwoolie said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Anyone know the 2010 PNS figures?

    Tory 35, Lab 27, Lib 26

    Thanks, but I saw those on Wiki - what I want is the UKIP score that year...
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Ishmael_X said:

    Why is the Beeb authoritative on this point?

    Because this is the number they publish every year as the local elections result. It's similar to NEV.
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    antifrank said:

    Danny565 said:

    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.

    I can't see how it's respectable for the Lib Dems. They always ALWAYS do better in local elections because people distinguish between hyper-active local LD councillors who "understand the community" and the national leadership (which has probably become even moreso in the coalition years). So that suggests that 10-11% is their ceiling in next year's general election, which would not exactly be a very good result.
    ALWAYS is a dangerous word. It's always when the Lib Dems are fluffily popular. I'm not convinced the same will be true when they're lazily unpopular.
    But I now wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to poll around 13% next year. I don't see where they're going to get a major new stash of votes.
    Agree that LDs looking like a 12% to 14% party at the GE.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    Have their been any records of the absolute national share of the vote each year (as opposed to a 'projection')?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Anyone know the 2010 PNS figures?

    Tory 35, Lab 27, Lib 26

    Thanks, but I saw those on Wiki - what I want is the UKIP score that year...
    It was about 4%, 9 councillor a, net loss of 4
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Norman Smith - impressive on BBC with his local analysis. Real focus on facts.
    Usually not my cup of tea.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,582
    Have we heard from RodCrosby yet? Would like to get his take on what this means for 2015.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    antifrank said:

    Danny565 said:

    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.

    I can't see how it's respectable for the Lib Dems. They always ALWAYS do better in local elections because people distinguish between hyper-active local LD councillors who "understand the community" and the national leadership (which has probably become even moreso in the coalition years). So that suggests that 10-11% is their ceiling in next year's general election, which would not exactly be a very good result.
    ALWAYS is a dangerous word. It's always when the Lib Dems are fluffily popular. I'm not convinced the same will be true when they're lazily unpopular.
    But I now wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to poll around 13% next year. I don't see where they're going to get a major new stash of votes.
    Agree that LDs looking like a 12% to 14% party at the GE.
    The local results give us some big clues which MPs are likely to hold on with local support and which look as if they're in serious trouble.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    dyedwoolie said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    dyedwoolie said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Anyone know the 2010 PNS figures?

    Tory 35, Lab 27, Lib 26

    Thanks, but I saw those on Wiki - what I want is the UKIP score that year...
    It was about 4%, 9 councillor a, net loss of 4
    Thanks, assuming that's right, it's a 13% rise for UKIP, not a 4% drop.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    2014 vs. 2010 PNS

    Tory -6
    Lab +4
    UKIP +13
    LD -13
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    antifrank said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    antifrank said:

    Danny565 said:

    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.

    I can't see how it's respectable for the Lib Dems. They always ALWAYS do better in local elections because people distinguish between hyper-active local LD councillors who "understand the community" and the national leadership (which has probably become even moreso in the coalition years). So that suggests that 10-11% is their ceiling in next year's general election, which would not exactly be a very good result.
    ALWAYS is a dangerous word. It's always when the Lib Dems are fluffily popular. I'm not convinced the same will be true when they're lazily unpopular.
    But I now wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to poll around 13% next year. I don't see where they're going to get a major new stash of votes.
    Agree that LDs looking like a 12% to 14% party at the GE.
    The local results give us some big clues which MPs are likely to hold on with local support and which look as if they're in serious trouble.
    So bye-bye Vince?
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Just checked BBC figs and Cons have lost -178 and LDs -241. The Cons were however defending double the number that the LDs were defending. So far the LD loss rate is 39%.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Completely unverified twitter rumour...

    ashok kumar ‏@broseph_stalin 2m
    Getting word that Lutfur Rahman is on the road to victory results in at 5

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,943
    edited May 2014
    Is Labour 31% the lowest ever national share of the vote for the main opposition party in a mid-term local election?
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,123
    Nick Robinson tweets: "UKIP not party of power yet but are party with power to disrupt. BBC National Vote Share - Lab 29%, Con 25%, UKIP 23% & Lib Dems 14%."

    Just saw this on the BEEB thread. It seems to be more up to date, and intuitively feels about right based on the results.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Anorak said:

    antifrank said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    antifrank said:

    Danny565 said:

    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.

    I can't see how it's respectable for the Lib Dems. They always ALWAYS do better in local elections because people distinguish between hyper-active local LD councillors who "understand the community" and the national leadership (which has probably become even moreso in the coalition years). So that suggests that 10-11% is their ceiling in next year's general election, which would not exactly be a very good result.
    ALWAYS is a dangerous word. It's always when the Lib Dems are fluffily popular. I'm not convinced the same will be true when they're lazily unpopular.
    But I now wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to poll around 13% next year. I don't see where they're going to get a major new stash of votes.
    Agree that LDs looking like a 12% to 14% party at the GE.
    The local results give us some big clues which MPs are likely to hold on with local support and which look as if they're in serious trouble.
    So bye-bye Vince?
    That's not a bet I shall be rushing to place.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Anorak said:

    antifrank said:

    TCPoliticalBetting said:

    antifrank said:

    Danny565 said:

    antifrank said:

    It's hard to assess how good/bad this is for UKIP, given the metropolitan bias of these seats. It certainly doesn't look like an unstoppable purple tide. On the face of it, these figures look pretty respectable for the Conservatives and the Lib Dems, all things considered.

    I can't see how it's respectable for the Lib Dems. They always ALWAYS do better in local elections because people distinguish between hyper-active local LD councillors who "understand the community" and the national leadership (which has probably become even moreso in the coalition years). So that suggests that 10-11% is their ceiling in next year's general election, which would not exactly be a very good result.
    ALWAYS is a dangerous word. It's always when the Lib Dems are fluffily popular. I'm not convinced the same will be true when they're lazily unpopular.
    But I now wouldn't be surprised if the Lib Dems were to poll around 13% next year. I don't see where they're going to get a major new stash of votes.
    Agree that LDs looking like a 12% to 14% party at the GE.
    The local results give us some big clues which MPs are likely to hold on with local support and which look as if they're in serious trouble.
    So bye-bye Vince?
    I'd probably vote for Vince. And he's one of the only Lib Dems I'd say that about.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,445
    Labour regain Harrow from NOC. Lab 34, Con 26, Ind 2, LD 1, almost identical to 2010
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    tyson said:

    Nick Robinson tweets: "UKIP not party of power yet but are party with power to disrupt. BBC National Vote Share - Lab 29%, Con 25%, UKIP 23% & Lib Dems 14%."

    Just saw this on the BEEB thread. It seems to be more up to date, and intuitively feels about right based on the results.

    Except that's last year's figures.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    tyson said:

    Nick Robinson tweets: "UKIP not party of power yet but are party with power to disrupt. BBC National Vote Share - Lab 29%, Con 25%, UKIP 23% & Lib Dems 14%."

    Just saw this on the BEEB thread. It seems to be more up to date, and intuitively feels about right based on the results.

    Those are 2013s figures
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    GIN1138 said:

    Is Labour 31% the lowest ever national share of the vote for the main opposition party in a mid-term local election?

    They got 29% last year.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    GIN1138 said:

    Is Labour 31% the lowest ever national share of the vote for the main opposition party in a mid-term local election?

    No, 29% last year was
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    tyson said:

    Nick Robinson tweets: "UKIP not party of power yet but are party with power to disrupt. BBC National Vote Share - Lab 29%, Con 25%, UKIP 23% & Lib Dems 14%."

    Just saw this on the BEEB thread. It seems to be more up to date, and intuitively feels about right based on the results.

    Aren't those last year's numbers?

  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,857
    tyson said:

    Nick Robinson tweets: "UKIP not party of power yet but are party with power to disrupt. BBC National Vote Share - Lab 29%, Con 25%, UKIP 23% & Lib Dems 14%."

    Just saw this on the BEEB thread. It seems to be more up to date, and intuitively feels about right based on the results.

    That is not current but 2013 1!
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,966
    Looks like BBC will have LAB close to 300 gains. On SKY will be lucky to reach 230 why?
  • TCPoliticalBettingTCPoliticalBetting Posts: 10,819
    Historical point. Strange death of Sotonian liberalism.
    In the early 2000s the LDs were the largest party on Southampton Council.
    This year their 3 last remaining cllrs all lost their seats.
    Maybe they all moved to Eastleigh?
    (actually one moved back).
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited May 2014
    dyedwoolie said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Is Labour 31% the lowest ever national share of the vote for the main opposition party in a mid-term local election?

    No, 29% last year was
    I bet that makes the big noises in the Labour Party feel comfortable. "Good news, people! We are up 2% from our lowest ever, in fact the lowest ever, national vote share for the main opposition party in a mid-term local election. Yup! I kid you not, we have now hit 31%! Let us all get off down the pub and celebrate the great leader's genius in leading us to this wonderful place."

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,325
    SkyNewsElections ‏@skyelections 53s
    Locals - Con hold #Trafford #LE2014
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited May 2014
    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,857
    dr_spyn said:

    SkyNewsElections ‏@skyelections 53s
    Locals - Con hold #Trafford #LE2014

    Great news
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,943
    anotherDave said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Is Labour 31% the lowest ever national share of the vote for the main opposition party in a mid-term local election?

    They got 29% last year.
    dyedwoolie said:

    GIN1138 said:

    Is Labour 31% the lowest ever national share of the vote for the main opposition party in a mid-term local election?

    No, 29% last year was
    Thanks. :) I sat out last years locals due to having an operation the day before the vote.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,325
    state_go_away said:

    dr_spyn said:

    SkyNewsElections ‏@skyelections 53s
    Locals - Con hold #Trafford #LE2014

    Great news
    Another tweet.

    Andy Sweeting ‏@andysweeting85 36s
    Bollocks #Trafford
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    dr_spyn said:

    SkyNewsElections ‏@skyelections 53s
    Locals - Con hold #Trafford #LE2014

    If true, that's a surprise. Compare and contrast with adjacent Manchester, where 95 out of 96 councillors now are Labour.

  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 9,039
    A telling comment on the Guardian's liveblog:
    The Tories have helpfully sent me a list of Labour figures criticising the leadership today.

    Most of them have featured in the blog already, but here are a few I've missed.

    [quotes from Mann/Stringer/Healey]

    If Labour want to sent me quotes from Conservative MPs criticising David Cameron, or CCHQ, I would be more than happy to post those too. But they haven't. In fact, I've had one email from them all day. Frankly, their press operation has been rather useless.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,445
    Brent is 56 Labour, 6 Con, 1 Lib Dem.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited May 2014
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    Absolutely awful, Mr. Nabavi, poor for everyone. However, I think one party might be celebrating next Monday. I think UKIP are going to exceed expectations in the Euros.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    Comparing apples and oranges. The last time these seats were contested was 2010. Changes wrt. 2010 are Tories -6, Lab +4, UKIP +13, LD -13.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    Labour have completed the wipeout in Manchester, every single councillor is now red (with one indy red). Paddy Power will still give you 1/8 on Manchester Withington going from Ld to Lab in 2015, despite it being 44.6% vs 40.5%, a majority of less than 2000.

    Feel free to fill your boots if you feel, as I do, that it's basically a 12.5% AAA Bond.
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    What news of AIFE? I assume like UKIP they stood in the locals?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,325
    antifrank said:

    dr_spyn said:

    SkyNewsElections ‏@skyelections 53s
    Locals - Con hold #Trafford #LE2014

    If true, that's a surprise. Compare and contrast with adjacent Manchester, where 95 out of 96 councillors now are Labour.

    I don't think UKIP contested many of the seats,
    http://www.trafford.gov.uk/about-your-council/elections/local-election-2014-live-results.aspx

    http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/live-local-elections-2014-results-7149848
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    A good result for Survation at least? Their local election poll seems to have been very accurate.

  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    Comparing apples and oranges. The last time these seats were contested was 2010. Changes wrt. 2010 are Tories -6, Lab +4, UKIP +13, LD -13.
    The whole point of the PNS is to create a metric that can be compared year to year.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    edited May 2014
    HurstLlama said:

    Absolutely awful, Mr. Navabi, poor for everyone. However, I think one party might be celebrating next Monday. I think UKIP are going to exceed expectations in the Euros.

    Yes, I agree with that. In fact I posted a comment late last night speculating that, because of split-ticket votes and higher Euro election enthusiasm helping them in areas where there are not locals, UKIP might do relatively less well in the locals but clean up in the Euros. I wouldn't be surprised if the Greens also do relatively well in the Euros, at the expense of the LibDems and Labour. Overall I'm still predicting UKIP/Lab/Con/Green/LD as the order. We shall see!
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Bond_James_Bond said:

    What news of AIFE? I assume like UKIP they stood in the locals?

    No, they didn't.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    @Bond_James_Bond - "To the benefit of Farage's fascist party, unfortunately."

    A disgraceful remark. You and your type are a liability to the Conservative Party.

    UKIP are your opponents, not your enemy.

    No, UKIP are everybody's enemy. They are not some cheery little insurgency - they are vicious, intolerant, minority-hating loonies. The "independence" tag is just a lie. They are a sboʍ-out party who given the opportunity would start repatriating and expropriating. They are just the BNP in blazers.
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Can we assume that since you voted for AIFE you are also a closet racist?

    No. I voted for them to enrage kippers; seems to be working. Nobody can explain to me what MEPs do, or what difference having MEPs of this rather than that party actually makes. So it is an opportunity for frivolity. AIFE appears to be the frivolous work a fairly typically frivolous kipper who is enraged at losing his place at the trough, so he starts a spoiler party. I'm helping him to spoil things, particularly for kippers.
    I've seen a lot of frothers here at PB, but I think that you have just broken the record with that post.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,575
    Grandiose said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    Comparing apples and oranges. The last time these seats were contested was 2010. Changes wrt. 2010 are Tories -6, Lab +4, UKIP +13, LD -13.
    The whole point of the PNS is to create a metric that can be compared year to year.
    Surely though Stephen Fisher's modelling fails on the basis of the comment OGH has quoted above:

    “the PNS is an attempt to estimate what the share of the vote would be if the whole of GB had local elections and if the three main Westminster parties had fielded candidates in all wards, as they do in general elections.”

    We are no longer dealing with 3 parties but 4. How does the model work for that?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 55,724
    Grandiose said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    Comparing apples and oranges. The last time these seats were contested was 2010. Changes wrt. 2010 are Tories -6, Lab +4, UKIP +13, LD -13.
    The whole point of the PNS is to create a metric that can be compared year to year.
    Are there no actual records of absolute % of votes cast for each set of Locals? Genuine question.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    HurstLlama said:

    Absolutely awful, Mr. Navabi, poor for everyone. However, I think one party might be celebrating next Monday. I think UKIP are going to exceed expectations in the Euros.

    Yes, I agree with that. In fact I posted a comment late last night speculating that, because of split-ticket votes and higher Euro election enthusiasm helping them in areas where there are not locals, UKIP might do relatively less well in the locals but clean up in the Euros. I wouldn't be surprised if the Greens also do relatively well in the Euros, at the expense of the LibDems and Labour. So I'm still predicting UKIP/Lab/Con/Green/LD as the order. We shall see!
    The Greens have apparently tallied 10% of the vote in the local seats where they stood. I still think they may surprise significantly on the upside in the European elections.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Grandiose said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    Comparing apples and oranges. The last time these seats were contested was 2010. Changes wrt. 2010 are Tories -6, Lab +4, UKIP +13, LD -13.
    The whole point of the PNS is to create a metric that can be compared year to year.
    Yes but its tricky for a surging party off a tiny base like UKIP has to do it I'd imagine as they might have polled the same numbers in Tooting and Boston, but because Tooting has come up this time and Boston hasn't the swing doesn't look so great.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    antifrank said:

    dr_spyn said:

    SkyNewsElections ‏@skyelections 53s
    Locals - Con hold #Trafford #LE2014

    If true, that's a surprise. Compare and contrast with adjacent Manchester, where 95 out of 96 councillors now are Labour.

    Trafford is, to simplify, the 'posh part' of Manchester and has an impressively strong Tory ground-force. If Labour had taken Trafford it would be a big win, I agree it's slightly surprising they haven't even won the two seats needed to make it NOC.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,390
    The pesky Residents Association doing for UKIP in Havering

    http://democracy.havering.gov.uk/mgElectionResults.aspx?ID=3&RPID=1001255949
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,575
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    @Bond_James_Bond - "To the benefit of Farage's fascist party, unfortunately."

    A disgraceful remark. You and your type are a liability to the Conservative Party.

    UKIP are your opponents, not your enemy.

    No, UKIP are everybody's enemy. They are not some cheery little insurgency - they are vicious, intolerant, minority-hating loonies. The "independence" tag is just a lie. They are a sboʍ-out party who given the opportunity would start repatriating and expropriating. They are just the BNP in blazers.
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Can we assume that since you voted for AIFE you are also a closet racist?

    No. I voted for them to enrage kippers; seems to be working. Nobody can explain to me what MEPs do, or what difference having MEPs of this rather than that party actually makes. So it is an opportunity for frivolity. AIFE appears to be the frivolous work a fairly typically frivolous kipper who is enraged at losing his place at the trough, so he starts a spoiler party. I'm helping him to spoil things, particularly for kippers.
    I've seen a lot of frothers here at PB, but I think that you have just broken the record with that post.
    He is just upset because he voted for BNP-lite.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Betfair - In-Play - European Parliament Election 2014 - Most Votes

    UKIP 1.29
    Lab 3.65
    Con 42

    Betfair - In-Play - European Parliament Election 2014 - Most Seats

    UKIP 1.43
    Lab 2.78
    Con 27
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    What news of AIFE? I assume like UKIP they stood in the locals?

    No, they didn't.
    I wonder why not? I wonder much the same about UKIP in local government. What is the earthly point of having a party, whose main belief is that it hates immigrants, deciding on bin collection days and what roads should have humps on them?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,445
    Labour hang onto Plymouth, but lose 3 to UKIP.
  • QuincelQuincel Posts: 4,042
    Neil Hamilton on BBC News 24, Dimbleby cheekily asks him if he'll be the UKIP candidate for Tatton next year.
  • tysontyson Posts: 6,123
    The BEEB is putting on year old tweets on its news thread. Obviously a long day for some folk.
    state_go_away said:

    tyson said:

    Nick Robinson tweets: "UKIP not party of power yet but are party with power to disrupt. BBC National Vote Share - Lab 29%, Con 25%, UKIP 23% & Lib Dems 14%."

    Just saw this on the BEEB thread. It seems to be more up to date, and intuitively feels about right based on the results.

    That is not current but 2013 1!
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    @Bond_James_Bond - "To the benefit of Farage's fascist party, unfortunately."

    A disgraceful remark. You and your type are a liability to the Conservative Party.

    UKIP are your opponents, not your enemy.

    No, UKIP are everybody's enemy. They are not some cheery little insurgency - they are vicious, intolerant, minority-hating loonies. The "independence" tag is just a lie. They are a sboʍ-out party who given the opportunity would start repatriating and expropriating. They are just the BNP in blazers.
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Can we assume that since you voted for AIFE you are also a closet racist?

    No. I voted for them to enrage kippers; seems to be working. Nobody can explain to me what MEPs do, or what difference having MEPs of this rather than that party actually makes. So it is an opportunity for frivolity. AIFE appears to be the frivolous work a fairly typically frivolous kipper who is enraged at losing his place at the trough, so he starts a spoiler party. I'm helping him to spoil things, particularly for kippers.
    I've seen a lot of frothers here at PB, but I think that you have just broken the record with that post.
    He is just upset because he voted for BNP-lite.
    To call UKIP "fascists" but then vote for AIFE, who are generally acknowledged to be the real "BNP in blazers". Simply bonkers.
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    If we are to believe @MikeSmithson, this is now the election that everyone lost.

    Someone must have won. How did the Anarcho-Socialist Conservative Party go on?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    How long does it take to count the votes in Tower Hamlets...

    Should have announced a result by now !

    It is no Sunderland South.
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    5pm is here and it's time for rum. Have a good long weekend everyone.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Sean_F said:

    Labour hang onto Plymouth, but lose 3 to UKIP.

    Yet the Parliamentary seat is a 2 horse Lib-Con race !
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,325
    Shadow chancellor Ed Balls says results "not good enough yet for Labour" and party had more to do to show it could deliver change.

    ferrets in a sack.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Grandiose said:

    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    If it is indeed true that UKIP's PNS has fallen back by as many as 6 points compared with last year, then we are heading for the curious position of it being a somewhat poor result for everyone.

    Comparing apples and oranges. The last time these seats were contested was 2010. Changes wrt. 2010 are Tories -6, Lab +4, UKIP +13, LD -13.
    The whole point of the PNS is to create a metric that can be compared year to year.
    Surely though Stephen Fisher's modelling fails on the basis of the comment OGH has quoted above:

    “the PNS is an attempt to estimate what the share of the vote would be if the whole of GB had local elections and if the three main Westminster parties had fielded candidates in all wards, as they do in general elections.”

    We are no longer dealing with 3 parties but 4. How does the model work for that?
    The answer is I don't know, but that would be a potential failing in the model itself rather than its underlying purpose, which is to produce something that doesn't rely on comparing results with four years previously.
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    @Bond_James_Bond - "To the benefit of Farage's fascist party, unfortunately."

    A disgraceful remark. You and your type are a liability to the Conservative Party.

    UKIP are your opponents, not your enemy.

    No, UKIP are everybody's enemy. They are not some cheery little insurgency - they are vicious, intolerant, minority-hating loonies. The "independence" tag is just a lie. They are a sboʍ-out party who given the opportunity would start repatriating and expropriating. They are just the BNP in blazers.
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Can we assume that since you voted for AIFE you are also a closet racist?

    No. I voted for them to enrage kippers; seems to be working. Nobody can explain to me what MEPs do, or what difference having MEPs of this rather than that party actually makes. So it is an opportunity for frivolity. AIFE appears to be the frivolous work a fairly typically frivolous kipper who is enraged at losing his place at the trough, so he starts a spoiler party. I'm helping him to spoil things, particularly for kippers.
    I've seen a lot of frothers here at PB, but I think that you have just broken the record with that post.
    He is just upset because he voted for BNP-lite.
    And won't St. Nigel be hopping mad when he sees how many votes the People's Front of Judaea lost to the Judaean People's Front?

    Even if it's one he'll still be angry. He's an angry sort of chap.

    On what specific issues does UKIP disagree with AIFE Richard? ITYF it's none. They're both identically disgusting.

    I voted Labour in Brent East in 2005. I can't stand Labour, but I figured if I could help keep it marginal by doing so, the two leftist envy parties would have fewer resources to contest other marginals where the outcome did matter.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    What news of AIFE? I assume like UKIP they stood in the locals?

    No, they didn't.
    I wonder why not? I wonder much the same about UKIP in local government. What is the earthly point of having a party, whose main belief is that it hates immigrants, deciding on bin collection days and what roads should have humps on them?
    It must be a rather strange hatred for immigrants, considering their leader is married to one. Your hatred for UKIP is completely disconnected from reality.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Pulpstar said:

    How long does it take to count the votes in Tower Hamlets...

    Should have announced a result by now !

    It is no Sunderland South.

    Given Tower Hamlets electoral history, they might be trying to find the necessary votes.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Sean_F said:

    Labour hang onto Plymouth, but lose 3 to UKIP.

    Plymouth Moor View was one of the tips from the Revolt on the Right book. Looks like they knew their stuff.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    dr_spyn said:

    Shadow chancellor Ed Balls says results "not good enough yet for Labour" and party had more to do to show it could deliver change.

    ferrets in a sack.

    That sounds like a measured and accurate comment. With the likes of Ed Balls, Theresa May and Steve Webb, we have some extremely good politicians - it's just the public don't have much interest in noticing them.
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    UKIP tightening on the upper % bands over at Shadsy's:

    Ladbrokes - 2014 UK Euro Parliamentary Elections - UKIP GB Vote Share

    under 15% 100/1
    15-20% 33/1
    20-25% 4/1
    25-30% 13/8
    30-35% 15/8
    35-40% 5/1
    Over 40% 16/1
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Bond_James_Bond said:

    On what specific issues does UKIP disagree with AIFE Richard? ITYF it's none. They're both identically disgusting.

    Well UKIP believes that former BNP members should not be allowed to join the party, while AIFE welcomes them with open arms.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,180
    If the vote share for the locals is as close as it seems does this mean the chance of a Labour second place could be in doubt for the euros?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    edited May 2014
    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    What news of AIFE? I assume like UKIP they stood in the locals?

    No, they didn't.
    I wonder why not? I wonder much the same about UKIP in local government. What is the earthly point of having a party, whose main belief is that it hates immigrants, deciding on bin collection days and what roads should have humps on them?
    It must be a rather strange hatred for immigrants, considering their leader is married to one. Your hatred for UKIP is completely disconnected from reality.
    You don't have to hate all immigrants to hate some or indeed many immigrants. Your party leader knows the difference.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Socrates said:

    Pulpstar said:

    How long does it take to count the votes in Tower Hamlets...

    Should have announced a result by now !

    It is no Sunderland South.

    Given Tower Hamlets electoral history, they might be trying to find the necessary votes.
    Ordering more tipex in ?
  • BobaFettBobaFett Posts: 2,789
    dr_spyn said:

    Shadow chancellor Ed Balls says results "not good enough yet for Labour" and party had more to do to show it could deliver change.

    ferrets in a sack.

    More like a particularly calm and philosophical cat.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,575
    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Stuart_Dickson said:

    @Bond_James_Bond - "To the benefit of Farage's fascist party, unfortunately."

    A disgraceful remark. You and your type are a liability to the Conservative Party.

    UKIP are your opponents, not your enemy.

    No, UKIP are everybody's enemy. They are not some cheery little insurgency - they are vicious, intolerant, minority-hating loonies. The "independence" tag is just a lie. They are a sboʍ-out party who given the opportunity would start repatriating and expropriating. They are just the BNP in blazers.
    Richard_Tyndall said:

    Can we assume that since you voted for AIFE you are also a closet racist?

    No. I voted for them to enrage kippers; seems to be working. Nobody can explain to me what MEPs do, or what difference having MEPs of this rather than that party actually makes. So it is an opportunity for frivolity. AIFE appears to be the frivolous work a fairly typically frivolous kipper who is enraged at losing his place at the trough, so he starts a spoiler party. I'm helping him to spoil things, particularly for kippers.
    I've seen a lot of frothers here at PB, but I think that you have just broken the record with that post.
    He is just upset because he voted for BNP-lite.
    And won't St. Nigel be hopping mad when he sees how many votes the People's Front of Judaea lost to the Judaean People's Front?

    Even if it's one he'll still be angry. He's an angry sort of chap.

    On what specific issues does UKIP disagree with AIFE Richard? ITYF it's none. They're both identically disgusting.

    I voted Labour in Brent East in 2005. I can't stand Labour, but I figured if I could help keep it marginal by doing so, the two leftist envy parties would have fewer resources to contest other marginals where the outcome did matter.
    Still avoiding the point Bond. You voted for the racists who were kicked out of UKIP. The ones who wanted to do the deals with the BNP.

    I think I am content with my assertion of what that says about you and your beliefs no matter how much you might squirm about it.

    Next time why not just have the courage of your convictions and vote BNP. It would at least be more honest.
  • NextNext Posts: 826
    dr_spyn said:

    Shadow chancellor Ed Balls says results "not good enough yet for Labour" and party had more to do to show it could deliver change.

    They could try changing their Shadow Chancellor.

  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    What news of AIFE? I assume like UKIP they stood in the locals?

    No, they didn't.
    I wonder why not? I wonder much the same about UKIP in local government. What is the earthly point of having a party, whose main belief is that it hates immigrants, deciding on bin collection days and what roads should have humps on them?
    It must be a rather strange hatred for immigrants, considering their leader is married to one. Your hatred for UKIP is completely disconnected from reality.
    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    What news of AIFE? I assume like UKIP they stood in the locals?

    No, they didn't.
    I wonder why not? I wonder much the same about UKIP in local government. What is the earthly point of having a party, whose main belief is that it hates immigrants, deciding on bin collection days and what roads should have humps on them?
    It must be a rather strange hatred for immigrants, considering their leader is married to one. Your hatred for UKIP is completely disconnected from reality.
    Not at all. The Campaign for a Free Galilee wants to take half of my staff and send them all back.

    Farage's "strange hatred for immigrants" is the same as greens' hatred for cars: it's just common or garden hypocrisy. He hates other people's cars / immigrants, but he has one himself because he unlike them really, you know, needs his. So of course he doesn't see a problem.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    felix said:

    If the vote share for the locals is as close as it seems does this mean the chance of a Labour second place could be in doubt for the euros?

    I wouldn't expect so, because if (as we all assume) UKIP got a much larger share in the Euros than that implied by the locals, that increase probably came disproportionately from the Tories.

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 33,575
    antifrank said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Shadow chancellor Ed Balls says results "not good enough yet for Labour" and party had more to do to show it could deliver change.

    ferrets in a sack.

    That sounds like a measured and accurate comment. With the likes of Ed Balls, Theresa May and Steve Webb, we have some extremely good politicians - it's just the public don't have much interest in noticing them.
    I agree with you about Balls' comments. I can't see how a senior member of the party admitting they have not yet got it right can be considered 'ferrets in a sack'.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    Stuart_Dickson said:

    UKIP tightening on the upper % bands over at Shadsy's:

    Ladbrokes - 2014 UK Euro Parliamentary Elections - UKIP GB Vote Share

    under 15% 100/1
    15-20% 33/1
    20-25% 4/1
    25-30% 13/8
    30-35% 15/8
    35-40% 5/1
    Over 40% 16/1

    25-30% 13/8
    30-35% 15/8

    Weren't those both 7-4 earlier ?
  • Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    Socrates said:

    Bond_James_Bond said:

    On what specific issues does UKIP disagree with AIFE Richard? ITYF it's none. They're both identically disgusting.

    Well UKIP believes that former BNP members should not be allowed to join the party, while AIFE welcomes them with open arms.
    So there is not one single ex-BNP member in UKIP? Yeah, right.

    The Popular Front of Judea.

  • isamisam Posts: 42,390
    Matthew Goodwin ‏@GoodwinMJ 3m
    In Labour-run Wolverhampton #UKIP retain their seat and finished 2nd in 17 out of 19 other local contests
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    isam said:

    Matthew Goodwin ‏@GoodwinMJ 3m
    In Labour-run Wolverhampton #UKIP retain their seat and finished 2nd in 17 out of 19 other local contests

    To finish second in 17 out of 19 seats suggests exceptionally poor targeting.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Bond_James_Bond said:

    Farage's "strange hatred for immigrants" is the same as greens' hatred for cars: it's just common or garden hypocrisy. He hates other people's cars / immigrants, but he has one himself because he unlike them really, you know, needs his. So of course he doesn't see a problem.

    Either that or there's a difference between opposing mass immigration, and hating individual immigrants. I accept this is a difficult point for some to grasp.
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025