The Rotherham subsample is interesting mind - assuming the Lib Dems run a candidate there then UKIP could be in with a shot come next May.
But perhaps 5-2 is about right.
This was an election where you would have thought UKIP voters were relatively highly motivated and Labour voters were not. If they didn't win this time on a lowish turnout, why would UKIP win at a general election?
I'd say a large section of Labour inclined voters were exceptionally keen to turnout and prevent anyone else getting in
Yes I would say that is an accurate assessment.
(Who says PB's political analysis lacks intellectual rigour?)
And who says these PCCs and their elections are a waste? We have seen democracy in action and prople have taken an interest. In this case they have voted against UKIP. In the recent and forthcoming by election can we say the public were/are voting for 'UKIP'? They are faced with a sitting MP who has switched. They are not voting for an insurgent UKIP candidate.
I was (flippantly, I grant) responding to @Isam's "it was Lab supporters voting for Lab" scything analysis rather than a comment on the PCCs.
But it is a good point. I am of course hugely in favour of extending the democratic process and participation and the PCCs are one such instance of this. People are just getting used to the fact that they have this power and I'm sure as and when they get used to it, turnout will rise.
There are of course those who say that no one wants them and the previous PAs were fine. I disagree but I can see that it is a new dynamic and as such, needs some getting used to.
True. I was not getting at you BTW... the additional though just came to me. In nthis nparticular ncase of coursenitncame to a choice of supporting UKIPnin nwhat was ntheir emotive campaign. They chose not to. UKIP are divisive and careless about who they sling there hate at and are only popular with the sector that is willing to hate. It throws up results like this. I cannot say I am surprised though that Labour want to cheer UKIP on if it could harm the tories.
Labour should feel humbled by the incredible loyalty of voters whose interest they have failed to advocate or protect for years now. Instead, Labour will take it for granted. At some stage the dam will break though.
For UKIP, expectation management is clearly a problem. And if the forgotten. left-behind working class is to be a genuine target, there may have to be some thinking about policy beyond the EU and immigration. Whether the party's ex-Tory leadership can do that is open to question.
"For UKIP, expectation management is clearly a problem."
Why is that? Did they come out and say they thought they'd win?
It's a nonsense. Do you want the fiver at 5-2 ? (Excuse the stake I'd have offered more if I didn't get on with Laddies...)
This is why Labour love postal and proxy voting so much. Also why they love Commonwealth citizens' voting in the UK: they struggle with the natives, so allow foreigners to vote who they can run up the tally with.
If those Commonwealth citizens pay tax to the UK Exchequer (or have paid taxes if retired), why not?
The Rotherham subsample is interesting mind - assuming the Lib Dems run a candidate there then UKIP could be in with a shot come next May.
But perhaps 5-2 is about right.
This was an election where you would have thought UKIP voters were relatively highly motivated and Labour voters were not. If they didn't win this time on a lowish turnout, why would UKIP win at a general election?
I'd say a large section of Labour inclined voters were exceptionally keen to turnout and prevent anyone else getting in
Yes I would say that is an accurate assessment.
(Who says PB's political analysis lacks intellectual rigour?)
And who says these PCCs and their elections are a waste? We have seen democracy in action and prople have taken an interest. In this case they have voted against UKIP. In the recent and forthcoming by election can we say the public were/are voting for 'UKIP'? They are faced with a sitting MP who has switched. They are not voting for an insurgent UKIP candidate.
I was (flippantly, I grant) responding to @Isam's "it was Lab supporters voting for Lab" scything analysis rather than a comment on the PCCs.
But it is a good point. I am of course hugely in favour of extending the democratic process and participation and the PCCs are one such instance of this. People are just getting used to the fact that they have this power and I'm sure as and when they get used to it, turnout will rise.
There are of course those who say that no one wants them and the previous PAs were fine. I disagree but I can see that it is a new dynamic and as such, needs some getting used to.
Well I am surprised you saw it as that but hey ho
I know what you meant...but as a raw statement I thought it quite amusing:
"I'd say a large section of Labour inclined voters were exceptionally keen to turnout and prevent anyone else getting in"
well of course that applies to every election under any circumstances for all parties, but yes, I know what you meant...
Robert Kimbell retweeted Keith Stevens @Belfastbrit 7m7 minutes ago @afneil labour claim 80% postal votes. Why are you not looking into this absurdity? 80% really? http://labli.st/1paHkxy
Just out of hospital and this is the news that greets me, really!
Yes, especially as 51% voted Labour last time.
According to TSE, the high postal vote is due to half term.
This means the 80% are disproportionately people with school age children.
I smell a rat.
Who doesn't? Oh! TSE; he holds his nose; he can only bear the labour stink if it gives a smack to UKIP, no matter how crooked and fraudulent it looks.
SYPCC by-election cost around £1.66m. There were 150,361 votes cast. So that's almost £11 per vote. Stupid policy from the Tories.
For comparison, how much does a vote in a General Election 'cost'? (Feel free to give me the answer in fractions of a scrapped NHS computer system if you like)
Perhaps we should bin those as well if they're too expensive.
By the way I'm guessing Rotherham is an aglomoration of Rotheram (Parliament), Rother Valley and one other ?)
I expect UKIP will have won in Rother Valley as certainly the areas I cycle through are quite white as opposed to the more "diverse" Rotherham proper constituency.
Robert Kimbell retweeted Keith Stevens @Belfastbrit 7m7 minutes ago @afneil labour claim 80% postal votes. Why are you not looking into this absurdity? 80% really? http://labli.st/1paHkxy
Just out of hospital and this is the news that greets me, really!
Yes, especially as 51% voted Labour last time.
According to TSE, the high postal vote is due to half term.
This means the 80% are disproportionately people with school age children.
Robert Kimbell retweeted Keith Stevens @Belfastbrit 7m7 minutes ago @afneil labour claim 80% postal votes. Why are you not looking into this absurdity? 80% really? http://labli.st/1paHkxy
Just out of hospital and this is the news that greets me, really!
Yes, especially as 51% voted Labour last time.
According to TSE, the high postal vote is due to half term.
This means the 80% are disproportionately people with school age children.
I smell a rat.
You wouldn't if you've ever been on the Sheffield Parkway at rush hour.
Robert Kimbell retweeted Keith Stevens @Belfastbrit 7m7 minutes ago @afneil labour claim 80% postal votes. Why are you not looking into this absurdity? 80% really? http://labli.st/1paHkxy
Just out of hospital and this is the news that greets me, really!
Yes, especially as 51% voted Labour last time.
According to TSE, the high postal vote is due to half term.
This means the 80% are disproportionately people with school age children.
The Rotherham result was Labour 42.6%, UKIP 40.4%, Conservative 11.1%, ED 5.9%. I don't know how that would divide between Rotherham and Rother Valley, but the likelihood is UKIP would lead in one of the constituencies.
Overall, the result was Labour 50.01%, UKIP 31.7%, Conservative 12.5%, ED 5.8%. Labour avoided a recount by 19 votes. Had it gone to a second round, I expect Labour would have won by c.55% to 45%, with UKIP ahead in Rotherham, and possibly Doncaster.
Screaming Eagles says 'Pretty vile smear ain't it. ' of a UKIP attack
He is right and its cheap nastiness like that that turns me off UKIP. The problem about the child sex cases etc are severe and the incidents horrible. But its sickening to see the UKIP bigots leaping all over it to smear their opponents.
Yes, TSE would never do that to, say, Catholics, in Nighthawks, for instance.
Looks like a clear Labour win. Alan Billings was a very good candidate and I think Ed should be grateful to him.
They managed to alienate the people they needed with their nasty campaign.
Yes, that's right. I just think Billings came across as much more reasonable.
The whole tone was if you don't vote UKIP you're a paedo enabler.
As one of the parents of abused child said the other day. People forget that Rotherham hasn't exploded in race riots following recent events because people know it was a small minority.
Some in UKIP would have you believe all Pakis are paedos.
Who exactly? Time to name names.
There's a quote saying that "all Pakis are paedos" from an official UKIP source? Please link.
Or just the usual smearing and innuendo that passes for political debate these days.
Pretty vile smear ain't it.
Of course I'll be able to find a post from you condemning such a vile smear.
The former Labour MP admitted they didn't sort out the abuse issue in Rotherham because they were worried about losing voters from ethnic minorities, so I'm not sure alluding to something that is clearly true and well-documented is actually a vile smear.
Actually I'm starting to think that pointing out uncomfortable issues is actually considered "vile" even if it is completely true. The Tories and Labour seem to be refusing to highlight and deal with the abuse cases, until this changes there's absolutely nothing remotely smeary about saying that however right-on it makes you feel.
So You think I think kids being raped is a price worth paying for continued Tory or Lab success.
Cheers.
I've no idea what you think and never said that I did. Just as you don't know if UKIP supporters think "all pakis are peados".
However I think some people would honestly rather not think about the abuse cases at all if it stops UKIP getting in. I mean Labour who admitted that they swept it up under the carpet for years are now pleased that they have got their man re-elected even though they know that things are going to continue to be hushed up. What does that tell you exactly?
SYPCC by-election cost around £1.66m. There were 150,361 votes cast. So that's almost £11 per vote. Stupid policy from the Tories.
To quote Lord Darlington: You are a cynic, sir.
Democratic accountability has a value beyond price.
Amazing Labour supporters suddenly get shirty about public spending when it's on something they don't like. It seems to get re-branded as investment when it is one of their pet projects.
Robert Kimbell retweeted Keith Stevens @Belfastbrit 7m7 minutes ago @afneil labour claim 80% postal votes. Why are you not looking into this absurdity? 80% really? http://labli.st/1paHkxy
Just out of hospital and this is the news that greets me, really!
Yes, especially as 51% voted Labour last time.
According to TSE, the high postal vote is due to half term.
This means the 80% are disproportionately people with school age children.
I smell a rat.
Are you saying that postal votes are fraudulent or that Labour voting postal voters simply cared enough to vote.
As an aside I do have a postal vote and always use it. I think I would have been able to vote in 1 election in the past 10 years otherwise.
It is possible that we have seen peak Kipper, Ukip has crashed and this is the first sign of that. If that is not the case and Ukip continue to prosper, this result is extraordinarily interesting in that it utterly scotches the notion that the Ukip vote consists solely or mainly of closet, or not so closet, race-obsessives and islam-haters. This could actually have been that rare thing, a good one for Ukip to lose.
A win is a win, so Labour can be happy, but it's like the Conservatives celebrating holding Tunbridge Wells. The absence of a Lib Dem enabled them to win just enough votes in Sheffield to avoid a second round.
A UKIP win would have been great, but an increase in vote share of 20.2% is pretty solid. That is only partly explained by the English Democrat and Conservative vote shares dropping by 10% and 3% respectively. Outside of Sheffield, the UKIP vote was pretty encouraging.
SYPCC by-election cost around £1.66m. There were 150,361 votes cast. So that's almost £11 per vote. Stupid policy from the Tories.
To quote Lord Darlington: You are a cynic, sir.
Democratic accountability has a value beyond price.
Amazing Labour supporters suddenly get shirty about public spending when it's on something they don't like. It seems to get re-branded as investment when it is one of their pet projects.
Democracy? Urgh. Think how many Diversity Officers the money wasted could pay for!
£1.66m is the rounding error on a PFI interest payment for one of the previous governments white elephants.
Barnsley: Labour share FALLS from 56% to 50.7% Doncaster: Labour share FALLS from 49% to 45.4% Sheffield: Labour share INCREASES from 51% to 57% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rotherham: Labour share FALLS from 51% to ?
The Rotherham result was Labour 42.6%, UKIP 40.4%, Conservative 11.1%, ED 5.9%. I don't know how that would divide between Rotherham and Rother Valley, but the likelihood is UKIP would lead in one of the constituencies.
Overall, the result was Labour 50.01%, UKIP 31.7%, Conservative 12.5%, ED 5.8%. Labour avoided a recount by 19 votes. Had it gone to a second round, I expect Labour would have won by c.55% to 45%, with UKIP ahead in Rotherham, and possibly Doncaster.
PB Tories must be absolutely thrilled about coming a poor third, getting well under half the votes that UKIP received!
Barnsley: Labour share FALLS from 56% to 50.7% Doncaster: Labour share FALLS from 49% to 45.4% Sheffield: Labour share INCREASES from 51% to 57% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rotherham: Labour share FALLS from 51% to ?
A win is a win, so Labour can be happy, but it's like the Conservatives celebrating holding Tunbridge Wells. The absence of a Lib Dem enabled them to win just enough votes in Sheffield to avoid a second round.
A UKIP win would have been great, but an increase in vote share of 20.2% is pretty solid. That is only partly explained by the English Democrat and Conservative vote shares dropping by 10% and 3% respectively. Outside of Sheffield, the UKIP vote was pretty encouraging.
It is possible that we have seen peak Kipper, Ukip has crashed and this is the first sign of that. If that is not the case and Ukip continue to prosper, this result is extraordinarily interesting in that it utterly scotches the notion that the Ukip vote consists solely or mainly of closet, or not so closet, race-obsessives and islam-haters. This could actually have been that rare thing, a good one for Ukip to lose.
Well exactly. My disdain for the tone of their election literature is well-documented on here.
If this marks a step towards formulating a broader based set of policies then so much the better.
As we have seen from the Green surge, there is absolutely room for a sensible NOTA party and if I were Doug, I would be trying to get Nige to lose the baggage and aim to become it.
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
The Rotherham result was Labour 42.6%, UKIP 40.4%, Conservative 11.1%, ED 5.9%. I don't know how that would divide between Rotherham and Rother Valley, but the likelihood is UKIP would lead in one of the constituencies.
Overall, the result was Labour 50.01%, UKIP 31.7%, Conservative 12.5%, ED 5.8%. Labour avoided a recount by 19 votes. Had it gone to a second round, I expect Labour would have won by c.55% to 45%, with UKIP ahead in Rotherham, and possibly Doncaster.
PB Tories must be absolutely thrilled about coming a poor third, getting well under half the votes that UKIP received!
" Labour should feel humbled by the incredible loyalty of voters whose interest they have failed to advocate or protect for years now. Instead, Labour will take it for granted. At some stage the dam will break though."
I'm sorry S.O but I don't agree with any of that. Voters are like investors and they vote on a future prospectus.They know what the Tories are like and more so the dismal UKIP. This is a vote for hope and Labour knows this to be the case. This is something they'll never take for granted because it's the fact that they give a damn that makes them Labour in the first place.
A win is a win, so Labour can be happy, but it's like the Conservatives celebrating holding Tunbridge Wells. The absence of a Lib Dem enabled them to win just enough votes in Sheffield to avoid a second round.
A UKIP win would have been great, but an increase in vote share of 20.2% is pretty solid. That is only partly explained by the English Democrat and Conservative vote shares dropping by 10% and 3% respectively. Outside of Sheffield, the UKIP vote was pretty encouraging.
Better or worse than you expected?
A bit worse. I'd have expected first round shares of something like Labour 47%, UKIP 34%.
I must get a copy of her version of Je ne regret rein.
I rather like Ella Fitzgerald - I wish Ms Monroe did better stuff - I tried her Greatest Hits to get I Want To Be Loved By You - and it was the only decent song on it.
It is Edith Piaf for me - probably the result of too much misspent time in parts of Paris. More into the modern era I have a soft spot for Carla Bruni, but got to know her very well in her early years around Cap D'Antibes.
Would it be okay if these jobs were down mines instead? In Durham? Or Merthyr?
Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?
*she
Yesterdays comment on something like the temptations of Lesbianism may have been a small clue
That poster (or some iteration thereof) once fretted no end about my gender - which I guess is a diversion from their tiresome posts about whether people are following their betting tips.....
Carlotta's avatar is actually Marie Dressler in Dinner at Eight!
While the world remembers Gable, Garbo, Crawford, Dietrich, Hepburn and Davis from the 1930s, Dressler was bigger than them all in the first half of the decade - and already dying from cancer when this was shot.....
This is why Labour love postal and proxy voting so much. Also why they love Commonwealth citizens' voting in the UK: they struggle with the natives, so allow foreigners to vote who they can run up the tally with.
If those Commonwealth citizens pay tax to the UK Exchequer (or have paid taxes if retired), why not?
The same reason that non-Commonwealth citizens that pay tax to the UK Exchequer don't: they haven't joined our nation via becoming a citizen yet.
The Rotherham result was Labour 42.6%, UKIP 40.4%, Conservative 11.1%, ED 5.9%. I don't know how that would divide between Rotherham and Rother Valley, but the likelihood is UKIP would lead in one of the constituencies.
Overall, the result was Labour 50.01%, UKIP 31.7%, Conservative 12.5%, ED 5.8%. Labour avoided a recount by 19 votes. Had it gone to a second round, I expect Labour would have won by c.55% to 45%, with UKIP ahead in Rotherham, and possibly Doncaster.
PB Tories must be absolutely thrilled about coming a poor third, getting well under half the votes that UKIP received!
Any result that makes Ed secure as Lab leader is thrilling for all Tories.
Barnsley: Labour share FALLS from 56% to 50.7% Doncaster: Labour share FALLS from 49% to 45.4% Sheffield: Labour share INCREASES from 51% to 57% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rotherham: Labour share FALLS from 51% to ?
Lib Dems?
Nothing surprising about that. Lib Dem voters in Sheffield are very left-wing in general and would have transferred to Labour.
A win is a win, so Labour can be happy, but it's like the Conservatives celebrating holding Tunbridge Wells. The absence of a Lib Dem enabled them to win just enough votes in Sheffield to avoid a second round.
A UKIP win would have been great, but an increase in vote share of 20.2% is pretty solid. That is only partly explained by the English Democrat and Conservative vote shares dropping by 10% and 3% respectively. Outside of Sheffield, the UKIP vote was pretty encouraging.
Better or worse than you expected?
A bit worse. I'd have expected first round shares of something like Labour 47%, UKIP 34%.
Pretty encouraging in that you did worse than anticipated
OK thanks
Come on give us LAB bods something to cheer its been a crap week in the polls.
Barnsley: Labour share FALLS from 56% to 50.7% Doncaster: Labour share FALLS from 49% to 45.4% Sheffield: Labour share INCREASES from 51% to 57% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rotherham: Labour share FALLS from 51% to ?
Lib Dems?
Nothing surprising about that. Lib Dem voters in Sheffield are very left-wing in general and would have transferred to Labour.
SYPCC by-election cost around £1.66m. There were 150,361 votes cast. So that's almost £11 per vote. Stupid policy from the Tories.
It's not like they set fire to that amount of cash! Almost all of that money will have been spent locally, ending up in pockets of ordinary people acting as polling station clerks, on wages for counting staff, or in local businesses one way or another.
It's quite Keynesian in that sense, a mini local stimulus of sorts.
There are good reasons to think electing police commissioners is a daft idea, but cost is not high on the list really.
A two and a half degree jump in the record is worthy of Bob Beamon....
The local 'weather' in Gravesend is not in the least related to 'global' warming which according to the satellite record has not risen for 18 years. It might perhaps be something to do with clear skys. I wonder if the BBC will be peddling the night time temperastures? Indeed I wonder if they will be taking a look at the siteing of the recording equipment and the effects of urban heat island effects?
A win is a win, so Labour can be happy, but it's like the Conservatives celebrating holding Tunbridge Wells. The absence of a Lib Dem enabled them to win just enough votes in Sheffield to avoid a second round.
A UKIP win would have been great, but an increase in vote share of 20.2% is pretty solid. That is only partly explained by the English Democrat and Conservative vote shares dropping by 10% and 3% respectively. Outside of Sheffield, the UKIP vote was pretty encouraging.
Better or worse than you expected?
A bit worse. I'd have expected first round shares of something like Labour 47%, UKIP 34%.
Pretty encouraging in that you did worse than anticipated
OK thanks
Come on give us LAB bods something to cheer its been a crap week in the polls.
I think the most hilarious thing about all this are all those Tories one here who have spent the last two years tirelessly regurgitating 'vote UKIP get Labour' who are either applauding a Labour victory or indeed actually voted Labour.
Clearly they would rather see UKIP beaten than win anything themselves because a defeat for Labour today would have been another crushing blow for Miliband and another step towards Tory survival but instead here they are cheering on their main opponents.
Putting aside they clearly have little clue how to win elections anymore one has to wonder if they actually want to win them and instead are subconsciously preparing themselves to become also rans in elections?
The Rotherham result was Labour 42.6%, UKIP 40.4%, Conservative 11.1%, ED 5.9%. I don't know how that would divide between Rotherham and Rother Valley, but the likelihood is UKIP would lead in one of the constituencies.
Overall, the result was Labour 50.01%, UKIP 31.7%, Conservative 12.5%, ED 5.8%. Labour avoided a recount by 19 votes. Had it gone to a second round, I expect Labour would have won by c.55% to 45%, with UKIP ahead in Rotherham, and possibly Doncaster.
PB Tories must be absolutely thrilled about coming a poor third, getting well under half the votes that UKIP received!
UKIP's performance in by-elections this year has seen increases in vote share of 14.5%, (Wythenshawe and Sale East), 22% Newark, 35% (Heywood & Middleton) and now 20.2%. Then of course, there's Clacton, but no comparison can be made with 2010.
I'd like us to do *even better* of course, but these are highly satisfactory results.
A two and a half degree jump in the record is worthy of Bob Beamon....
The local 'weather' in Gravesend is not in the least related to 'global' warming which according to the satellite record has not risen for 18 years. It might perhaps be something to do with clear skys. I wonder if the BBC will be peddling the night time temperastures? Indeed I wonder if they will be taking a look at the siteing of the recording equipment and the effects of urban heat island effects?
Rubbish.
Weather is climate when it's warm, everyone knows that. Just don't mention it when it's cold...
This is a vote for hope and Labour knows this to be the case. This is something they'll never take for granted because it's the fact that they give a damn that makes them Labour in the first place.
We can all share hope - that one part of Labour's core vote stops committing rape on an industrial scale on the young children of another part of its core vote.
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
Yes, the third constituency is Wentworth and Dearne. The 2 Dearne wards are under Barnsley local authority though. So I would expect Labour to have carried the constituency overall as they did in May 2014 (a 200 votes UKIP lead in Wentworth overturned by a 2000± Lab lead in Dearne)
By the way I'm guessing Rotherham is an aglomoration of Rotheram (Parliament), Rother Valley and one other ?)
I expect UKIP will have won in Rother Valley as certainly the areas I cycle through are quite white as opposed to the more "diverse" Rotherham proper constituency.
SYPCC by-election cost around £1.66m. There were 150,361 votes cast. So that's almost £11 per vote. Stupid policy from the Tories.
It's not like they set fire to that amount of cash! Almost all of that money will have been spent locally, ending up in pockets of ordinary people acting as polling station clerks, on wages for counting staff, or in local businesses one way or another.
It's quite Keynesian in that sense, a mini local stimulus of sorts.
There are good reasons to think electing police commissioners is a daft idea, but cost is not high on the list really.
There's the hit to party funds to consider. Postal votes don't grow on trees.
A win is a win, so Labour can be happy, but it's like the Conservatives celebrating holding Tunbridge Wells. The absence of a Lib Dem enabled them to win just enough votes in Sheffield to avoid a second round.
A UKIP win would have been great, but an increase in vote share of 20.2% is pretty solid. That is only partly explained by the English Democrat and Conservative vote shares dropping by 10% and 3% respectively. Outside of Sheffield, the UKIP vote was pretty encouraging.
Better or worse than you expected?
A bit worse. I'd have expected first round shares of something like Labour 47%, UKIP 34%.
Pretty encouraging in that you did worse than anticipated
OK thanks
Come on give us LAB bods something to cheer its been a crap week in the polls.
An increase of 20% is pretty encouraging. An increase of 22% would be even more encouraging.
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
Course you do, you're Labour. Good for you.
What postal vote fraud?
How did your prediction work out?
The postal vote fraud diametrically opposite the squirrel you are pointing at.
The only disappointing thing is that we didn't get the 2nd preference votes - it might have told us whether the Tories would vote tactically for UKIP - which has a great bearing on GE2015 in the North of England.
Barnsley: Labour share FALLS from 56% to 50.7% Doncaster: Labour share FALLS from 49% to 45.4% Sheffield: Labour share INCREASES from 51% to 57% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Rotherham: Labour share FALLS from 51% to ?
Lib Dems?
Nothing surprising about that. Lib Dem voters in Sheffield are very left-wing in general and would have transferred to Labour.
Now they are not.
They are what would be called Orange bookers.
I thought that was in Clegg's constituency. There are/were plenty of LD voters in the other Sheffield seats (in 2010).
For example the LDs almost won Sheffield Central at the last election and I can't believe many of those voters are Orange bookers.
The Rotherham result was Labour 42.6%, UKIP 40.4%, Conservative 11.1%, ED 5.9%. I don't know how that would divide between Rotherham and Rother Valley, but the likelihood is UKIP would lead in one of the constituencies.
Overall, the result was Labour 50.01%, UKIP 31.7%, Conservative 12.5%, ED 5.8%. Labour avoided a recount by 19 votes. Had it gone to a second round, I expect Labour would have won by c.55% to 45%, with UKIP ahead in Rotherham, and possibly Doncaster.
PB Tories must be absolutely thrilled about coming a poor third, getting well under half the votes that UKIP received!
UKIP's performance in by-elections this year has seen increases in vote share of 14.5%, (Wythenshawe and Sale East), 22% Newark, 35% (Heywood & Middleton) and now 20.2%. Then of course, there's Clacton, but no comparison can be made with 2010.
I'd like us to do *even better* of course, but these are highly satisfactory results.
No. The Returning Officer can order a recount on his/her own initiative, without waiting for the candidates to request one, if necessary. The first recount in Croydon Central in 2005 (there was a margin of 75 between the top two candidates and initially a discrepancy of c.20 between the counted total and the verification total) was done so.
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
A two and a half degree jump in the record is worthy of Bob Beamon....
The local 'weather' in Gravesend is not in the least related to 'global' warming which according to the satellite record has not risen for 18 years. It might perhaps be something to do with clear skys. I wonder if the BBC will be peddling the night time temperastures? Indeed I wonder if they will be taking a look at the siteing of the recording equipment and the effects of urban heat island effects?
Rubbish.
Weather is climate when it's warm, everyone knows that. Just don't mention it when it's cold...
Weather for West Midlands (temperature) from BBC Weather site:
Latest news — Labour was over 50% in South Yorks by 19 votes out of 148,082.
Bollocks, second preferences would have been very revealing. I suspect UKIP to have won in Rotherham convincingly on second preferences, and some analysis I've done as a result of this may well feature in @Antifrank's piece this afternoon...
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
Course you do, you're Labour. Good for you.
Whine. Whine. Whine.
Don't you mean:
Ed, Ed Wine Stay close to me Don't let me be alone It's tearin' apart My true, blue heart
The contrast between results in Sheffield confirm a trend that was seen in the European elections: UKIP generally do much worse in major cities than they do in working-class towns, even when said cities are very white and working-class.
I think the most hilarious thing about all this are all those Tories one here who have spent the last two years tirelessly regurgitating 'vote UKIP get Labour' who are either applauding a Labour victory or indeed actually voted Labour.
Clearly they would rather see UKIP beaten than win anything themselves because a defeat for Labour today would have been another crushing blow for Miliband and another step towards Tory survival but instead here they are cheering on their main opponents.
Putting aside they clearly have little clue how to win elections anymore one has to wonder if they actually want to win them and instead are subconsciously preparing themselves to become also rans in elections?
I am certainly not applauding a Lab victory and who of the known PB Tories actually voted Labour in this election? I concede there was a danger of Ed feeling he'd have to resign if Lab were defeated in the PCC elections but a Lab victory should make that less likely. Ed being in charge can only assist the Tories as well as all of Labours other opponents including Ukip.
The contrast between results in Sheffield confirm a trend that was seen in the European elections: UKIP generally do much worse in major cities than they do in working-class towns, even when said cities are very white and working-class.
No surprise really. People with liberal views are always going to choose to live in Sheffield rather than Barnsley, Doncaster or Rotherham.
The contrast between results in Sheffield confirm a trend that was seen in the European elections: UKIP generally do much worse in major cities than they do in working-class towns, even when said cities are very white and working-class.
No surprise really. People with liberal views are always going to choose to live in Sheffield rather than Barnsley, Doncaster or Rotherham.
The bit of Sheffield near where I am sat could be described as working class, but it isn't very white. I suspect Labour will have got about 90% of the votes from Spital Hill on a turnout of perhaps 6% or so.
"Diverse areas"
Burngreave Ward 2014 local election results
UK Independence Party (UKIP): Shane Harper Votes: 894
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
Course you do, you're Labour. Good for you.
Whine. Whine. Whine.
OK you win, Lab are on a roll.
Shame Mori don't accept postal returns in their Scottish polls, don't you agree?
Would it be okay if these jobs were down mines instead? In Durham? Or Merthyr?
Mr Financier, that raises an interesting question for our Kipper friends. How are they going to square that circle? Clearly the current policy of insisting that claimants have a good reason for turning down jobs isn’t working, in your locality at least. Why not?
*she
Yesterdays comment on something like the temptations of Lesbianism may have been a small clue
That poster (or some iteration thereof) once fretted no end about my gender - which I guess is a diversion from their tiresome posts about whether people are following their betting tips.....
Carlotta's avatar is actually Marie Dressler in Dinner at Eight!
While the world remembers Gable, Garbo, Crawford, Dietrich, Hepburn and Davis from the 1930s, Dressler was bigger than them all in the first half of the decade - and already dying from cancer when this was shot.....
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
Course you do, you're Labour. Good for you.
Whine. Whine. Whine.
Why do Labour always seem to do better via postal votes than by people turning up at the ballot box?
Latest news — Labour was over 50% in South Yorks by 19 votes out of 148,082.
0.012%
SF won Fermanagh & S. Tyrone by 0.0085% in 2010 (4 votes).
LD Mark Oaten won Winchester by 0.0032% (2 votes) in 1997 (but result declared void and new by-election called, which he again won but this time by a massive 40%).
A two and a half degree jump in the record is worthy of Bob Beamon....
The local 'weather' in Gravesend is not in the least related to 'global' warming which according to the satellite record has not risen for 18 years. It might perhaps be something to do with clear skys. I wonder if the BBC will be peddling the night time temperastures? Indeed I wonder if they will be taking a look at the siteing of the recording equipment and the effects of urban heat island effects?
Across the world, the "warm" records to "cold" records ratio is about the 3:1. In a steady state system we would expect that to be 1:1.
Anyway, I'm not going to convince the PB Tories that anthropogenic global warming is a real and present fact.
With regards your night time temperature assertions, you are wrong my friend. Night time temperatures were quite mild last night hence why we have smashed daytime temperatures across vast swathes of Central and Eastern England. The uppers (temperatures at 850 HPa) are incredibly warm for the time of year.
Of course, I know the difference between weather and climate. There is a good possibility that winter 14/15 will be colder than normal for the UK - that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening - it is.
The sceptics like to chery pick this 18 year period - it's quite disengenous. Global temperature increase may have slowed over these 18 years but the trend is still UP (i.e. not DOWN or even FLAT).
Out of interest, 2014 is likely to be the warmest year ever recorded according to NOAA. Anyway, as far as the PB Tory loons are concerned, the facts are really not of importance when it comes to a good story.
I'm a huge supporter of PCCs. It will take time for voters to get used to the notion. And perversely I don't mind low turn-outs - it means residents aren't as bothered as they claim to be.
The Rotherham subsample is interesting mind - assuming the Lib Dems run a candidate there then UKIP could be in with a shot come next May.
But perhaps 5-2 is about right.
This was an election where you would have thought UKIP voters were relatively highly motivated and Labour voters were not. If they didn't win this time on a lowish turnout, why would UKIP win at a general election?
I'd say a large section of Labour inclined voters were exceptionally keen to turnout and prevent anyone else getting in
Yes I would say that is an accurate assessment.
(Who says PB's political analysis lacks intellectual rigour?)
And who says these PCCs and their elections are a waste? We have seen democracy in action and prople have taken an interest. In this case they have voted against UKIP. In the recent and forthcoming by election can we say the public were/are voting for 'UKIP'? They are faced with a sitting MP who has switched. They are not voting for an insurgent UKIP candidate.
I was (flippantly, I grant) responding to @Isam's "it was Lab supporters voting for Lab" scything analysis rather than a comment on the PCCs.
But it is a good point. I am of course hugely in favour of extending the democratic process and participation and the PCCs are one such instance of this. People are just getting used to the fact that they have this power and I'm sure as and when they get used to it, turnout will rise.
There are of course those who say that no one wants them and the previous PAs were fine. I disagree but I can see that it is a new dynamic and as such, needs some getting used to.
True. I was not getting at you BTW... the additional though just came to me. In nthis nparticular ncase of coursenitncame to a choice of supporting UKIPnin nwhat was ntheir emotive campaign. They chose not to. UKIP are divisive and careless about who they sling there hate at and are only popular with the sector that is willing to hate. It throws up results like this. I cannot say I am surprised though that Labour want to cheer UKIP on if it could harm the tories.
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
Course you do, you're Labour. Good for you.
Whine. Whine. Whine.
Why do Labour always seem to do better via postal votes than by people turning up at the ballot box?
Labour weighs the vote in 'diverse' areas of Sheffield.
The contrast between results in Sheffield confirm a trend that was seen in the European elections: UKIP generally do much worse in major cities than they do in working-class towns, even when said cities are very white and working-class.
The distinction between towns and cities can be a bit arbitrary. Places like Rotherham, Dudley, Oldham and Doncaster, are big enough to be cities.
Latest news — Labour was over 50% in South Yorks by 19 votes out of 148,082.
Bollocks, second preferences would have been very revealing. I suspect UKIP to have won in Rotherham convincingly on second preferences, and some analysis I've done as a result of this may well feature in @Antifrank's piece this afternoon...
My guess is that UKIP would lead c.54/46 in Rotherham, had second preferences been taken into account.
I was being entertained by the Chairman of P&G or else would never have got tickets. Best fun though was linking up with a jazz band in New Orleans in a club - I used to hit the keys a bit and sing a bit with our band at uni - was a great night and day - in that order. The strippers (and very nice they were too as my memory serves me) walked along the top of the bar and served the drinks.
Would it be okay if these jobs were down mines instead? In Durham? Or Merthyr?
?
*she
Yesterdays comment on something like the temptations of Lesbianism may have been a small clue
That poster (or some iteration thereof) once fretted no end about my gender - which I guess is a diversion from their tiresome posts about whether people are following their betting tips.....
Carlotta's avatar is actually Marie Dressler in Dinner at Eight!
While the world remembers Gable, Garbo, Crawford, Dietrich, Hepburn and Davis from the 1930s, Dressler was bigger than them all in the first half of the decade - and already dying from cancer when this was shot.....
Labour has far more strength in the "diverse" areas of Sheffield than it does in the WWC bits.
(It is still ahead in WWC areas though I'll admit).
Wouldn't you say that they do better in the WWC areas of Sheffield than they do in similar WWC towns?
It's something that's replicated in most cities too. Those "Revolt on the Right" authors put one of the Liverpool constituencies near the top of their list of UKIP-friendly seats, purely because it's very deprived and over 90% white, but in actual fact UKIP came in well below their national average in Liverpool in the European elections.
The concert I most wished I'd been at was Japan's November 1982 performance at the Hammersmith Odeon which formed the basis of their 1983 live album Oil On Canvas:
Would it be okay if these jobs were down mines instead? In Durham? Or Merthyr?
.......
*she
Yesterdays comment on something like the temptations of Lesbianism may have been a small clue
That poster (or some iteration thereof) once fretted no end about my gender - which I guess is a diversion from their tiresome posts about whether people are following their betting tips.....
Carlotta's avatar is actually Marie Dressler in Dinner at Eight!
While the world remembers Gable, Garbo, Crawford, Dietrich, Hepburn and Davis from the 1930s, Dressler was bigger than them all in the first half of the decade - and already dying from cancer when this was shot.....
The contrast between results in Sheffield confirm a trend that was seen in the European elections: UKIP generally do much worse in major cities than they do in working-class towns, even when said cities are very white and working-class.
The distinction between towns and cities can be a bit arbitrary. Places like Rotherham, Dudley, Oldham and Doncaster, are big enough to be cities.
I think Danny565 is referring to Core Cities. I wrote about these in the summer:
Whining about Postal Votes when losing is another example of UKIPs lack of fitness for any public office.
You think postal vote fraud is part of the rough-and-tumble of jolly old politics, and it's just bad sportsmanship and big-girls-blousery to object to it (in any circumstances, never mind when it leads to a stolen election)?
Course you do, you're Labour. Good for you.
Whine. Whine. Whine.
Why do Labour always seem to do better via postal votes than by people turning up at the ballot box?
I think that is one of those questions like "what is the square root of 1 million?" to which we'll just never know the answer.
Labour has far more strength in the "diverse" areas of Sheffield than it does in the WWC bits.
(It is still ahead in WWC areas though I'll admit).
Wouldn't you say that they do better in the WWC areas of Sheffield than they do in similar WWC towns?
It's something that's replicated in most cities too. Those "Revolt on the Right" authors put one of the Liverpool constituencies near the top of their list of UKIP-friendly seats, purely because it's very deprived and over 90% white, but in actual fact UKIP came in well below their national average in Liverpool in the European elections.
UKIP certainly underperform in the sorts of cities that shifted heavily against the Conservatives from the 1980s onwards eg Sheffield, Manchester, Liverpool, Newcastle.
Labour has far more strength in the "diverse" areas of Sheffield than it does in the WWC bits.
(It is still ahead in WWC areas though I'll admit).
Wouldn't you say that they do better in the WWC areas of Sheffield than they do in similar WWC towns?
It's something that's replicated in most cities too. Those "Revolt on the Right" authors put one of the Liverpool constituencies near the top of their list of UKIP-friendly seats, purely because it's very deprived and over 90% white, but in actual fact UKIP came in well below their national average in Liverpool in the European elections.
Yes, they do a bit - UKIP support is strongest in white areas NEAR to high immigration places I think, and outside the more liberal big cities.
But my point is the more diverse areas are better yet for Labour than the WWC areas.
I've placed a UKIP bet off the back of this PCC to back this lot up that I think is good value.
Comments
I was not getting at you BTW... the additional though just came to me. In nthis nparticular ncase of coursenitncame to a choice of supporting UKIPnin nwhat was ntheir emotive campaign.
They chose not to. UKIP are divisive and careless about who they sling there hate at and are only popular with the sector that is willing to hate. It throws up results like this.
I cannot say I am surprised though that Labour want to cheer UKIP on if it could harm the tories.
You're all lucky that Scotland is such a backwards country you can go miles without a mobile signal and superfast broadband round here is 33 Kbps.
The avatar wedgies shall not be worn tonight. I shall, however, have my pointy hat and broom ;-)
Have fun....
"I'd say a large section of Labour inclined voters were exceptionally keen to turnout and prevent anyone else getting in"
well of course that applies to every election under any circumstances for all parties, but yes, I know what you meant...
chillax
Perhaps we should bin those as well if they're too expensive.
Democratic accountability has a value beyond price.
Overall, the result was Labour 50.01%, UKIP 31.7%, Conservative 12.5%, ED 5.8%. Labour avoided a recount by 19 votes. Had it gone to a second round, I expect Labour would have won by c.55% to 45%, with UKIP ahead in Rotherham, and possibly Doncaster.
However I think some people would honestly rather not think about the abuse cases at all if it stops UKIP getting in. I mean Labour who admitted that they swept it up under the carpet for years are now pleased that they have got their man re-elected even though they know that things are going to continue to be hushed up. What does that tell you exactly?
Used to dial in on a Tuesday and get BBC homepage by following Friday
Kids Today dont know their born
As an aside I do have a postal vote and always use it. I think I would have been able to vote in 1 election in the past 10 years otherwise.
A UKIP win would have been great, but an increase in vote share of 20.2% is pretty solid. That is only partly explained by the English Democrat and Conservative vote shares dropping by 10% and 3% respectively. Outside of Sheffield, the UKIP vote was pretty encouraging.
£1.66m is the rounding error on a PFI interest payment for one of the previous governments white elephants.
No doubt when Carswell realises what a sickening den of anti democratic bigots he has jumped in to he will dive somewhere else.
If this marks a step towards formulating a broader based set of policies then so much the better.
As we have seen from the Green surge, there is absolutely room for a sensible NOTA party and if I were Doug, I would be trying to get Nige to lose the baggage and aim to become it.
Course you do, you're Labour. Good for you.
" Labour should feel humbled by the incredible loyalty of voters whose interest they have failed to advocate or protect for years now. Instead, Labour will take it for granted. At some stage the dam will break though."
I'm sorry S.O but I don't agree with any of that. Voters are like investors and they vote on a future prospectus.They know what the Tories are like and more so the dismal UKIP. This is a vote for hope and Labour knows this to be the case. This is something they'll never take for granted because it's the fact that they give a damn that makes them Labour in the first place.
Rejoice. Rejoice. Rejoice.
OK thanks
Come on give us LAB bods something to cheer its been a crap week in the polls.
They are what would be called Orange bookers.
It's quite Keynesian in that sense, a mini local stimulus of sorts.
There are good reasons to think electing police commissioners is a daft idea, but cost is not high on the list really.
Clearly they would rather see UKIP beaten than win anything themselves because a defeat for Labour today would have been another crushing blow for Miliband and another step towards Tory survival but instead here they are cheering on their main opponents.
Putting aside they clearly have little clue how to win elections anymore one has to wonder if they actually want to win them and instead are subconsciously preparing themselves to become also rans in elections?
I'd like us to do *even better* of course, but these are highly satisfactory results.
Weather is climate when it's warm, everyone knows that. Just don't mention it when it's cold...
How did your prediction work out?
I think I said Ukip win by 3.odd%, why?
For example the LDs almost won Sheffield Central at the last election and I can't believe many of those voters are Orange bookers.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/523094299005956097
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/523095042186289152
Today 19 degrees
Tomorrow 14
Sunday 13
Monday 10
Tuesday 9
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/2655603
Ed, Ed Wine
Stay close to me
Don't let me be alone
It's tearin' apart
My true, blue heart
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/oct/31/landmark-legal-victory-allotments-redevelopment-farm-terrace-plot-watford-eric-pickles-housing
If it goes much higher it'll start to represent value IMO.
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490
"Diverse areas"
Burngreave Ward 2014 local election results
UK Independence Party (UKIP): Shane Harper
Votes: 894
Labour Party: Talib Hussain
Votes: 3193
Electorate: 15,644
Rejected votes: 22
Turn out: 33.8%
Darnall Ward 2014 local election results
Labour Party: Mazher Iqbal
Votes: 2824
"WWC area"
Mosborough Ward 2014 local election results
Labour Party: Isobel Bowler
Votes: 1844
UK Independence Party (UKIP): Joanne Elizabeth Parkin
Votes: 1414
http://www.betfair.com/exchange/politics/market?id=1.101416490#id=1.101416490
Shame Mori don't accept postal returns in their Scottish polls, don't you agree?
I saw Alice Cooper at Hammersmith Odeon on his first tour to the UK back in about 83. He beheaded his guitarist with a guillotine...
I'm not sure it matches yours. Was backstage with Hawkwind too. That was oddly Spinal Tap.
LD Mark Oaten won Winchester by 0.0032% (2 votes) in 1997 (but result declared void and new by-election called, which he again won but this time by a massive 40%).
(It is still ahead in WWC areas though I'll admit).
Anyway, I'm not going to convince the PB Tories that anthropogenic global warming is a real and present fact.
With regards your night time temperature assertions, you are wrong my friend. Night time temperatures were quite mild last night hence why we have smashed daytime temperatures across vast swathes of Central and Eastern England. The uppers (temperatures at 850 HPa) are incredibly warm for the time of year.
http://www.wetterzentrale.de/pics/Rmgfs092.gif
Of course, I know the difference between weather and climate. There is a good possibility that winter 14/15 will be colder than normal for the UK - that doesn't mean AGW isn't happening - it is.
The sceptics like to chery pick this 18 year period - it's quite disengenous. Global temperature increase may have slowed over these 18 years but the trend is still UP (i.e. not DOWN or even FLAT).
Out of interest, 2014 is likely to be the warmest year ever recorded according to NOAA. Anyway, as far as the PB Tory loons are concerned, the facts are really not of importance when it comes to a good story.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2014/9
It's something that's replicated in most cities too. Those "Revolt on the Right" authors put one of the Liverpool constituencies near the top of their list of UKIP-friendly seats, purely because it's very deprived and over 90% white, but in actual fact UKIP came in well below their national average in Liverpool in the European elections.
The concert I most wished I'd been at was Japan's November 1982 performance at the Hammersmith Odeon which formed the basis of their 1983 live album Oil On Canvas:
http://thequietus.com/articles/12875-japan-oil-on-canvas
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/core-cities-labours-reservoir.html
Given a second chance, I'd definitely want to revisit this piece now to consider how UKIP fit into this.
If you are insinuating something, I'm sure the authorities would like to know...
But my point is the more diverse areas are better yet for Labour than the WWC areas.
I've placed a UKIP bet off the back of this PCC to back this lot up that I think is good value.
Now let's see what the Tories are made of in Rochester.
It's a good job the postal voting system's so robust.