Labour back at 2001 General Election level - Indy poll
November 28th, 2004
-
Has Blair really not been hurt by Iraq, Kelly, and Hutton?
The Independent on Sunday’s new pollster, Communicate Research, has Labour back at their 2001 General Election share according to their latest survey out today.
The figures with changes on the same poll last month are CON 31 (-2), LAB 42(+2), LD 20(+3). At the last election Labour got 42%, the Tories 32.7% and the Lib Dems 18.8%. So the only change on 2001, according to CR, is a small switch the Tories to the LDs.
We have talked a lot on the site about weighting results according to people’s recall of what they did in 2001 because the difficulty that phone pollsters have of finding a representative sample. CR do not do this.
What we have are figures unweighted by recalled past vote of people who have landlines and happened to be in, ready to answer an unsolicited phone call from a stranger and be willing to talk when the computer generated dialler got through to them.
For a range of reasons, as other pollsters have found, such an approach tends to produce disproportionately more Labour supporters than those of other parties. Unlike other pollsters, as well, CR do no set out in their interviews the different party options - an approach that has been shown to favour Labour and the Tories.
-
At the 2001 General Election the Indy’s then pollster, Rasmussen, was one of the most accurate and was the only firm to predict precisely the Tory share. Why they should have been replaced by CR and their methodologies beggars belief.
Elsewhere in the Indy today there is sceptical piece on pollsters by the veteran political commentator, Alan Watkins Everyone seems to agree that, come May or whenever it is, this government is going to get in again. The polls say so. The journalists at Westminster have few doubts. Even the Tories admit ruefully that their time has not yet come: if, indeed, it ever does come. But the strange thing is this. Of all the people I know - friends, relations, acquaintances whether close or slight - not one of them intends to vote Labour at the election. Some do not propose to vote at all. Others promise to support the Respect coalition, if there is a candidate available. Most are going for the Liberal Democrats, about half of them (I would estimate) in a switch from Labour. A few, most eccentric of all, say they will vote Conservative. But then, that is because they have always voted this way and, if they were prepared to put up with Mr John Major and then Mr William Hague, they see no reason to forsake Mr Michael Howard now. This, I realise, is what the sociologists used scornfully to call anecdotal evidence, though what other kind of evidence there is I do not know.
The CR survey also opens up a massive 10% gap between the various polling organisations on the Labour lead. They cannot all be right and our money would certainly not be on the Indy survey.
The spread markets are unchanged at LAB 344-352: CON 202-210: LD 70-74. The Labour price is still two seats below where it was at the end of July when Labour’s lead was just 1%.
MessageSpace Advertising
Why they should have been replaced by CR and their methodologies beggars belief.
I would guess that it\’s because CR, being the new kids on the block for political polling, are probably a lot cheaper than any of the other options right now. It may also be that they think (or are gambling) that not weighting for past vote will give them a more accurate result and help them make their name. Their figures certainly seem a lot more volatile than anyone else\’s.
Why have the Indy not got a headline like ours above their story on the poll? Labour being back at the General Election level would seem more newsworthy than the way they have covered it.
Is the paper a bit embarassed about what its new polling firm has produced? Given the paper\’s huge and consistent attacks on Blair over Iraq it might be hard to swallow that according to its own pollster there has been no impact.
Watkins\’s piece seems a setup for an obvious quote, but I\’ll do it anyway:
\”How could Nixon have won? No one I know voted for him.\”
- Pauline Kael, 1972
Fully agree it\’s a shame they dropped Rasmussen and went back to this polling palaeotechnology.
Sad to say - for me as someone who\’ll switch from Labour to LD next year - if Iraq settles down to an \”acceptable level of violence\” by the General Election, then Iraq, Kelly and Hutton are not going to swing an awful lot of votes. (And yes Mike, I think that probably is quite embarrassing to the Indy).
\”This, I realise, is what the sociologists used scornfully to call anecdotal evidence, though what other kind of evidence there is I do not know.\”
He\’s making it a bit too easy to take him apart (perhaps he feels he can rise to Fisk-like prominence this way?), so I\’ll put this down to an off-day.
In other Sunday paper news:
Blunkett is toast if half of this is true.
This will probably blow over for Straw… hardly as if the current regime in Equatorial Guinea is angelic.
Fairly low-grade sleaze - seems unlikely the Tories weren’t at it too when they were in office.
To lose the home secretary in this way would certainly shall we say accentuate the similarities with the last Tory administration.
BV - I\’ve edited your links so they should work.
The impact of the Blunkett story could be very interesting especially as it follows and deflects from the Queen\’s Speech law and order agenda. Toast is the right word.
A hard-line Home Secretary has to be whiter than white. Terrible things love and passion.
Thanks Mike. How do you do that? I think the last time I tried using <a href=\”some URL\”> description of story </a>, it just ate the links. It did the same just now, but all I\’d done was to put the addresses in << >>.
I disagree about this Equatorial Guinea thing - it seems to have all the makings of an enormous Establishment cover-up, with the Government drip-drip conceding details of what they did in fact no. If there was one current story with the potential to cause consequences way beyond what is being predicted (a la Watergate) this must be it. I wouldn\’t be surprised if the reason most of the newspapers seem to be giving it a wide berth, despite giving the impression of being an absolute goldmine for journalists, is because half of the national newspaper owners have got connections to it!
*know
Is it not time we started challenging the \’established wisdom\’ that UKIP draw the bulk of their popular support (ie. people who vote for them, not their core activists) from the Tories (and a bit of the LibDems). This doesn\’t seem to be reflected in any of the polls since they gained so much publicity in June, and the only real \’evidence\’ would seem to be the Hartlepool by-election.
In addition people may be misreading what actually happened in June. Undoubtedly UKIP did very well in the Euros, and to the detriment of the Tories in those elections, but the Cons were expected to poll well above their true (General Election) level of support a la 2000. Is it not possible that UKIP votes in June actually came from Euro-sceptic Labour and Lib Dem supporters? (who may have otherwise lent their vote to the Cons for the occasion).
The conclusion of this would be that if UKIP have any significant success in the General election (ie. above 1-2 %) then it may be as just part of the general dumping ground for people who don\’t want to vote Labour.
I agree there is no doubt UKIP took votes of parties other than the Conservatives in the Euro\’s especially the Lib Dems in the south west, but the key point is where will they come from in a general election and I still think they will come overwhelmingly from the Conservatives. I think voting UKIP in the Euros is very different from effectively wasting your vote in the general election, anyone who feels that strongly on Europe is likely to have found the Lib Dem and Labour policy on Europe unpalatable in 1997 and 2001. However I think the effect will be small in marginal seats (possibly excluding the south west) UKIP are likely to do best either where the Conservatives havent a hope (e.g. Hartlepool) or in safe seats.
What will sink Blunkett (if it does) is not the sexual shenanigans but the allegations of bullying and the visa thing. Does he normally \”examine\” visas for Filipino nannies? I can just imagine what Ian McCartney\’s thinking…
Going back to the original subject, I have no doubt that the Indy changed pollsters on financial grounds - papers don\’t yet lose readers by hiring inaccurate pollsters - maybe Mike\’s contribution to media history will be to change that!
I have been wondering if we will get regional or even constituency polls as the campaign approaches. (I think in the past there have been such in Scotlad, Wales and maybe London.) I can see the potential for a - shall I say - sloppy local poll to be \”spun\” effectively.
System Three used to do Scotland polls for the Herald. They stopped in December 2003 put I\’d be surprised if they didn\’t poll for someone in the run up to the election.
In Wales, NOP did polls for HTV at the last election.
Some wishful thinking about David Blunkett perhaps. It seems that the Lib Dems accept that he has little to answer and the Tories would be asking for his neck NOW if they thought there was anything to it - not an enquiry in the hope they can keep it going a bit longer. Personally I would offer good odds to anyone that said Blunkett would not be Home Secretary at the election.
I\’m not sure Oaten for the LDs should be taken at face value. He\’s quoted as saying he accepted Blunkett\’s denials, but \”But if further evidence emerges he will clearly need to make a fuller statement\”. That sounds more like biding his time to attack rather than letting Blunkett off the hook.
I wouldn\’t write Blunkett off just yet, but have the bookmakers started taking bets on likely successors? Hillary Benn or John Denham could be surprise choices. Or Blunkett\’s departure may even see the splitting up of the Home Office into a Ministry of the Interior and a Department of Justice/Homeland Security.
No Blunkett markets yet - but watch William Hill tomorrow.
It seems to me that the thread has not yet picked up the real significance of the Alan Watkins article. He talks of \”friends, relations, acquaintances\”, so evidently it is not going to be a representative sample of the electorate as a whole. It is probably going to consist of professional people: the \”chattering classes\” or the \”Islington liberals\”, who are sneered at by Fraser Kemp and his like.
But it is precisely these people who are likely, not only to be the opinion formers in their local communities, but also to become involved in political activity, especially in the run up to a general election.
So if they have en masse given up on Blair´s Labour Party and largely switched to the Lib Dems, this will not show up significantly in the opinion polls: but I see it as an enormously important factor in determining the final result whenever the general election comes along. It is surely the Lib Dems´secret weapon.
Is there any polling information about the movement among the \”chattering clases\”.
Not sure I qualify as \”chattering classes\” and anecdotal again, I know, but I\’ve just signed up to be active in the LDs (aafter voting Labour tactically in the past), and when I met the local party secretary on Friday he told me there was another guy just joined from 5 doors down who\’d defected from Labour over Iraq.
As I\’ve opined here before, I think there\’s a mood of disquiet with Labour and the summer\’s bye-elections has shown people that local activism can have some dramatic effects.
To be fair to Alan Watkins, if his excellent (and re-released) \’Brief Lives\’ is anything to go by, he mixes with (and has mixed with) some non-chatterati types (such as the late Sir Kingsley Amis).
Well I chatter and I certainly have class - does that make me a member?
I guess the thing for gamblers to beware of was how any market was defined in time, say if it was \”Blunkett out by Christmas\” or similar. The inertia of this time of year might mean nothing happens in the same month.
Of course, we might see a Christmas week resignation, like Mandelson in 1998. God bless us every one!
Somehow I think offering markets on ministerial resignations would not be good way for the bookmakers to curry favour with the Government! (At a time, with the arguments over the gambling bill rumbling along, when having Government favour is rather important)
Alex - such betting is not unusual. Betfair had a great \”Will they be in their jobs on a specified date\” market last year. There was a similar market on IDS -remember him? There was also a market round Hutton on who would be in their jobs - I made money on Greg Dyke and Gavyn Davis going.
John in reference to point 18, what makes you think that the “chattering classes” are “the opinion formers in their local communities” while I agree that they are politically active to say that the chattering classes are some how opinion formers within society with impact far beyond their cycle of friends and acquaintances is not backed up by the facts, while “guardian man and woman” are spread out across the country the only noticeable concentrations are in university towns and large cities and even then there are few seats where they have much electoral clout and this is precisely because they have little to no impact in influencing the rest of the community in fact if anything many people find the chattering classes elitist and aloof and are unlike to be influenced by their views… I mean I have a hard time coping with either Polly Toynbee or Jonathan Freedland most of the time, both come across as way too self-righteous for my liking.
The only seats that the “Chattering Classes” will probably have an important impact in next May are Islington South and then Cardiff Central and Bristol West but beyond that there really is nothing (Durham City and Newcastle Central are two other potentials but I think both will stay Labour for different reasons). Interestingly Watkins says that he thinks Labour will hold on to Islington South, if that is the case then the disaffection of the chattering classes if its as widespread as he seems to believe (and it probably is) then it must be assumed to have next to no electoral impact if it can’t even help the LDs gain the one seat where they can be said to form a significant part of the electorate.
Actually, Ben, I prefer your term of \”Guardian man or woman\” - even if they are not Guardian readers….
What I am thinking of are professional, competent, thinking people, who seem to have given up on Labour, for a variety of reasons. We saw something similar back in the early eighties, when, thanks to Thatcher´s insensitive attacks on what they were doing, almost all the teachers of my acquaintance became Labour, Liberal or SDP.
The present Labour Government has constantly increased its controls over professional activity, losing the support of many professional people. Such, at least, is my appreciation. This has been aggravated by by the pursuit of the Goverment´s technique of spin (ie: half truths at best) adn taking us all for idiots, exemplified above all by the sorry saga of the Iraq invasion. And further aggravated by the violence of governmental controls being introduced by Blunkett in the name of freedom.
Now, I am not arguing that such people will of themselves be enough to swing many seats (which is your interpretation of what I am saying). But I do think that they are likely to become engaged with the political process and start actively campaigning in the short and medium term, even if they are unable to prolong their involvement beyond the election.
Surely all political parties have had the experience of newcomers turning up to help as soon as an election is called. My argument is that good active people (your \”Gurdian men and women\”) are likely to give a hand with organising the Lib Dem campaigns, not Labour as previously. Such new and invigorating local leadership is likely to multiply the effect of their own votes many times over.
Ben,
I\’d add Cambridge & possibly Leeds NW to your Guardian Man & Woman seats - which makes about 7 in all. That wouldn\’t be a bad set of results for the LibDems if they took them, in addition to some of the more obvious potential gains such as B\’ham Yardley & Oldham E
There\’s also Watford that does not fit into a Chattering Class definition but was one of just three local authority areas which went LD in the Euros on June 10 - the other two were Oxford & Cambridge.
I’m not convinced that Cambridge will go to the LDs, it’s a big labour majority and the sitting MP resigned over the war very publicly, LD control of the council is often pointed out as a strong sign that the party stands a very good chance in the seat however the geographical extent of the local council and its wards is larger than the constituency, But I’d agree that Guardian Man and Woman (need an abbreviation for that
).
That said in Cardiff Central, Oldham, Brum Yardley and Bristol West the LDs are in very strong positions but at the same time in seats like Newcastle Central and Durham City I would argue that LD chances are being overestimated, In Newcastle there is a veteran MP with a solid personal vote and while historically the seat has been conservative (strange once the Tories had seats in most northern cities, hell they once held Darlington and Hartlepool) I would argue there is no reason why he won’t hold on, In Durham Labour suffer from the fact that the very popular Steinberg is stepping down however traditionally the seat was a battle of turnouts between the mining villages and the city its self, I’d expect that to reassert its self but nower days the voting power of the villages is much reduced but it will be an interesting seat to watch.
Sorry i missed out the end of the first paragraph, should have read …are an important voting block in the seat.
Mike… I believe that LDs also won in Penwith, which is ironic to say the least
As to Guardian Man or Woman, whatabout Pinko Liberal Owner-occupier Newly-Converted Additions (Ploncas)?
Blimey some people are about early in the morning….the article in todays guardian by Mark seddon seems to add weight to the arguments above that the chattering classes switching off from Labour is hitting their membership………
ben…is Durham your base when not in Leicester? I have been told by a usually Labour voting ex-girlfriend(parents ex Labour members) that the part has collapsed in Durham City and is elderly/inactive in the villages….in part due to various scandals with the local authority which featured prominently in Private Eye….
#29 Ben - Campbell resigned over the war and then voted with the Govt on the crucial vote. As she did on tuition fees. I live in Kempston just south of Bedford and as a Lib Dem will be spending a lot of time in Cambridge over the next 6 months
All - Although one poll and one set of by-elections, the Indy poll and last Thursday\’s council by-elections reflect each other. A net loss of 4 for the Tories and a net gain of 3 for the LDs. This is one set of local by-elections I suspect the Tories will not be crowing about !
No they don\’t. Last Thursday\’s by-elections, when compared with the previous round of elections, would imply a Conservative lead of 4% or so. The Conservatives lost seats because they were even further ahead when these seats were last contested, and because of intervention/withdrawal by independents and Labour in Duxford and Test Valley.
Personally I think the Liberal Democrats are making a tactical mistake if they are going after seats such as Cambridge. I think it would be more profitable for them to concentrate on the Tory marginals. But that is just my opinion. Also if the election is on 5/5/5 will Cambridge University still be on vacation - not sure who this would help.
I think the problem is that many of the Tory marginals have been squeezed over the last two elections, and issues such as fox-hunting / UKIP might push them back. Still worth going after though.
However some of the Lab/Lib contests look more fruitful ground if you consider some of the discussion above.
Re Cambridge students, May week is the third week of June and you need 8 weeks of lectures before that, so 5/5/05 will be well within Term in Tabland (the students will be there).
To follow up my comment re Tory/LD marginals, I created a list of Tory seats where the LDs were second and then calculated the \”spare\” Labour vote as follows: Tory vote - LD vote + Labour vote. I think this indicated the likelihood of a tactical squeeze on Labour succeeding; ie, the greater the spare Labour votes the more likelihood you are to succeed. Not many surprises in the list:
Taunton 8028.0
Bridgwater 7816.0
Isle of Wight 6850.0
Norfolk South 6826.0
Westbury 5553.0
Dorset West 5319.0
New Forest East 5312.0
Orpington 5248.0
Wells 5119.0
Haltemprice & Howden 4995.0
Aldershot 4827.0
Cambridgeshire South East 4724.0
Harborough 4019.0
Eastbourne 3813.0
Wiltshire North 3678.0
Bournemouth East 3673.0
Surrey South West 3460.0
Folkestone & Hythe 3353.0
Cambridgeshire South 3334.0
Maidenhead 3293.0
Solihull 2966.0
Totnes 2408.0
Westmorland & Lonsdale 2087.0
Woking 1955.0
Sussex Mid 1795.0
Wokingham 1639.0
Ryedale 1595.0
Dorset North 1537.0
Aylesbury 1379.0
Hampshire East 976.0
Henley 909.0
Worcestershire West 901.0
Salisbury 496.0
Tiverton & Honiton 363.0
Worthing West 233.0
Newcastle C is interesting, its a very middle class seat - University, City Park, cathedral - LibDems mad seeping gains under the new local govt boundaries this May. It is a target seat 7 so will be receiving all the \”by-election\” style support that you would expect.
Cambridge - though anne campbel is a good MP, her problem is not just Iraq but the general dissatisfaction that GMW is feeling with the Government. her seat is not just dependent on the Student Vote ( expect a massive postal vote drive by the LibDems with students) but also public sector professionals from the hospitals as well as the University. She has a real fight on her hands - her opponent david heath is the local Council leader & a Cambridge Don who\’s not afraid to get down & dirty.
I should also have added Hornsey & Woodgreen as a likely LD gain & Manchester Withington, Edinburgh South & Inverclyde as GMW seats with large public sector middle class votes where the LDs couuld spring a surprise.
Have the Government got round to reclassifying the Scottish seats yet?
There are some surprises on your list, Steve. I guess most people would name Norfolk South and Bridgwater as going Lib Dem on a very good night for them but it is a surprise to me that they are in the top four on that methodology. Aldershot and the two Cambridgeshire seats are also surprising.
It would be interesting to hear from anybody in those seats (or other surprie seats on the list) about how the campaigns are shaping up as there could be some good betting prices nearer to the time. I suspect the Lib Dem machines in those places are not quite up to breaking the back of big Labour votes and that Aldershot is out as a big army town, but that is all based on guesswork.
Re: 39, I am not sure I like the idea of any party making \”mad seeping gains\”
James - it\’s just one way of looking at it. Basically, it all depends upon how solid that residual Labour vote is. My own suspicion is that it must be pretty solid or else these seats would have gone in 97 or 01.
Also, it seems that the LDs are seriously irritating both the \”big\” parties\’ activists as they see their cosy duopoly dismantled
On the down side this may also limit tactical voting
There\’s a good deal more hostility between the Labour and Liberal Democrats now than there was in 2001, or 1997. A few months ago, someone on this site (I think) said that Paddy Ashdown thought of the Lib Dems as being \”the rural wing of New Labour\”. You only have to look at the way Labour put the boot in Hodge Hill, and Hartlepool, to see that that is no longer the case.
How do you think that will affect the willingness of residual Labour voters to vote tactically for the Lib Dems?
Sean - that\’s a really interesting question and one I\’m not too sure about. The only seat that I can speak about with any confidence is Wiltshire N, having lived there.
I\’ve often asked myself why 8000 odd people would vote Labour there when the Tory majority is around 3,500, given that on paper you would have thought that a LD MP would be preferable to a Tory.
It comes down to a hunch that often there is more similarity between Tories and Labour than many would care to admit, encapsulated by how the local Lord of the Manor would happily drink with born and bred locals but wouldn\’t give the recently arrived middle class the time of day. Also, when you look at New Labour\’s authoritarian streak and some Old Labour lack of political correctness, you can see the residuals being die-hard, socially-conservative \”always a Labour man\” types.
Which means they probably would rather see a Tory MP than soe hand-wringing Liberal.
BV - Could Nottingham South be another GMW seat? It includes a high proportion of ethnic minorities (aside: it annoys me when people talk about \”ethnic\” issues - we\’re ALL ethnic!! Rant over), some middle calss suburbs with amny academics who work at Nottingham University, and high student population in Lenton and Beeston.
As you say, it is only one way of looking at it and I tend to agree that Labour must be doing something right in those places to have hung on in there so long. But it may indicate which seats to look to for \”surprises\” in that the odds there will possibly be much more attractive.
For what it\’s worth, just based on chatting with Labour/ex-Labour friends, I doubt whether the Labour Party high command\’s animosity to the Lib Dems has percolated down to residual Labour voters (and not so residual in some of the seats mentioned). The Tories may be making a mistake in this respect by persisting with a \”they are to the left of Labour\” line, although it\’s a tricky one for them to call as there are problems however they play it.
The main reason (although not the only one) for official animosity to the Lib Dems seems to be Iraq. I cannot see Labour, in places where they are third, running on a \”Vote Lib Dem - Get the Ba\’ath Party\” ticket.
James - are there seat-by-seat markets? I think its interesting how the LDs are being attacked by both parties - the usual one is that they say one thing in Labour constituencies and the opposite in TOry ones. in addition to Iraq, though, is Labour\’s jibe about being soft on crime. This may play well with many Labour voters who might be expected to live in poorer areas whith high social problems, someting GMW is unlikely to have direct experience of.
In my experience, there is no love lost at all between Labour and Lib Dem activists on the ground.
I don\’t know whether that extends to the voters though.
Re: comment 45.
You have to be joking. Would not a more sensible assumption be that the Labour voters think that the LibDems are closet Tories, and so may as well vote for who they really want (or, indeed, that they have no idea as to the tactical situation). After all, if they were closet tories, why don\’t they just vote that way, instead of voting Labour?
Oops, that didn\’t make much sense. The last sentence was referring to the Labour voters.
Sam - again, based on my experiences in that seat the LDs bombarded labour voters with the usual \”Labour can\’t win here, the margin is just X votes\” literature. So they\’re unlikely to be unaware of the tactical situation, which menas they must have had a good reason to vote Labour.
I can\’t see the Lib-Dem = clost Tory argument standing up in this election though.
In my experience, very many people vote for a party that has little in common with their ideological beliefs.
They can do it for family reasons, a belief that a particular party is doing a good/bad job in government or on the local council, or because they like a particular candidate or MP - or sometimes they\’re just eccentric.
That explains 79-97 then
Sean - is Ken CLarke standing again? He\’s socially liberal and pro-Europe; where is he on economic issues?
Sean - is Ken CLarke standing again? He\’s socially liberal and pro-Europe; where is he on economic issues?
As far as I know, he\’s standing again.
Re: 48, I am not aware of any seat-by-seat markets yet although no doubt you will hear the news first from Mike! Presumably they will do it like they did last time with prices available nearer the time from larger bookmakers on special request/pleading. In those circumstances I believe that the starting prices were fairly closely linked to a prediction on uniform national swing, so there is interest in seats where Lib Dems are a fair way back but with a big Labour vote to squeeze.
I liked Sean\’s point… my experience is probably 1/3 of the voters have no idea of the policies of any of the main parties, but that doesn\’t mean they don\’t have very strong opinions! I regret to say this but just having a photogenic candidate is worth a cartload of votes.
PS Based on my experience of university campaigning recently I would say the Tories will get more student votes than Labour in Tabland (I take it Steve is a dark blue) but the LibDems will get over 50%. Biggest threat to LibDems for the student vote is the Green party at least where I live.
Just because the Lib Dems are saying \”vote tactically\” doesn\’t mean everyone believes them if Labour runs a vigorous campaign in large parts of a constituency. Also, what is a \”lot of literature\” for somebody with an interest in it isn\’t necessarily that much for somebody used to getting daily pizza offers and free-sheets through their door.
I would have thought that a lot of people who voted Labour in Bridgwater and South Norfolk last time weren\’t aware of or weren\’t convinced by the accuracy of Lib Dem tactical arguments. Hence my interest in whether Labour activity in those areas has tailed off and whether the Lib Dems have picked up their game.
Jon - no, I\’m light blue through and through (but have spent time with the dark blue scum so have picked up some of their bad habits in describing Fenland Poly)
I\’m interested to hear the Labour have lost ground because in my time there (late 80s) the SU exec was two Lab and two LD.
James - good point, one tends to forget that not everyone is as attuned to politics as oneself. Although your point reinforces some of those made earlier, that if enough Labour activists switch to the LDs there could be some surprising results.
What\’s the opinion of the activists here - does canvassing and doorstepping change people\’s minds? Should the LDs in Bridgwater and Norfolk S be doorstepping those Labour voters asking them to lend their vote?
Re James at 58 - here\’s the list of Lab/Lib seats, giving % majority, Lab vote and Lib vote from 2001. You\’re very soon up into majorities over 20%.
SEATNAME MAJ01 LABVT01 LDVT01
Cardiff Central 1.9 13,451 12,792
Oldham East & Saddleworth 6.0 17,537 14,811
Bristol West 8.0 20,505 16,079
Birmingham, Yardley 8.6 14,085 11,507
Aberdeen South 11.9 14,696 10,308
Rochdale 14.3 19,406 13,751
Edinburgh South 14.8 15,671 10,172
Cambridge 20.0 19,316 10,737
Blaydon 21.1 20,340 12,531
Edinburgh Central 23.7 14,495 6,353
Hornsey & Wood Green 24.1 21,967 11,353
Islington South & Finsbury 25.8 15,217 7,937
Oxford East 26.0 19,681 9,337
Edinburgh North & Leith 26.5 15,271 6,454
St Helens South 26.6 16,799 7,814
Glasgow Kelvin 27.1 12,014 4,754
Strathkelvin and Bearsden 28.2 19,250 7,533
Durham, City of 32.4 23,254 9,813
Manchester, Withington 32.9 19,239 7,715
Newcastle upon Tyne Central 33.3 19,169 7,564
Sheffield, Hillsborough 34.3 24,170 9,601
Sheffield, Heeley 34.3 19,452 7,748
Greenock & Inverclyde 34.8 14,929 5,039
Wansbeck 35.0 21,617 8,516
Blyth Valley 35.3 20,627 8,439
Holborn & St Pancras 35.9 16,770 5,595
Hull North 37.4 16,364 5,643
Liverpool, Garston 38.3 20,043 7,549
Liverpool, Wavertree 38.3 20,155 7,836
Streatham 38.6 21,041 6,771
Vauxhall 39.0 19,738 6,720
Manchester, Gorton 41.5 17,099 5,795
Sheffield, Central 41.7 18,477 5,933
Islington North 42.9 18,699 5,741
Newcastle upon Tyne East & Wallsend 43.5 20,642 6,419
Birmingham, Sparkbrook & Small Heath 44.3 21,087 4,841
Islwyn 48.3 19,505 4,196
Salford 48.9 14,649 3,637
Hackney South & Shoreditch 49.6 19,471 4,422
Hull East 49.6 19,938 4,613
Jarrow 51.0 22,777 5,182
Barnsley East & Mexborough 51.6 21,945 5,156
Manchester, Central 53.0 17,812 4,070
Gateshead East & Washington West 53.3 22,903 4,999
Liverpool, Riverside 54.7 18,201 4,251
Barnsley Central 54.9 19,181 4,051
Liverpool, West Derby 55.3 20,454 3,366
Camberwell & Peckham 56.3 17,473 3,350
Knowsley South 58.3 26,071 4,755
Liverpool, Walton 63.2 22,143 4,147
Bootle 69.0 21,400 2,357
Of course if enough Lab switch or abstain you get the Tory through the middle, or LD from third place scenario (the latter occuring in the summer\’s by-elections). So there are a lod of additional seats where the Tories are second where this may occur. Which depends upon both Lab and Tory local activism.
Going back to my comment at 35, according to the Guardian, there were 16 contests in November in which all three parties stood. Extroplating the shifts in vote share in these contests gives the Conservatives the equivalent of 38%, Labour 34%, and Lib Dems 23%.
would think that Colne Valley would be a seat the Lib dems could win from third….one ward which is in Huddersfield had a significant BME population which added to a strong lib dem base and long tradition should give them a chance…
Mark - I did another piece of analysis, looking at Lab 1st, Tory 2nd, LD 3rd and calculating the gap between 3rd and 1st. The list shows the constituency, the gap between 1st and 3rd, and the Lab majority in votes:
Leeds North West 6363.0 5,236
Falmouth & Camborne 7079.0 4,527
Colne Valley 7273.0 4,639
Conwy 8566.0 6,219
Birmingham, Perry Barr 8849.0 8,753
Hampstead & Highgate 9328.0 7,876
Clwyd West 9492.0 1,115
Norwich South 9727.0 8,816
Swansea West 10331.0 9,550
Is Glenda Jackson standing again in Hampstead? Would have thought it was pretty safe if she is.
One or two things come to mind… parties have gone from third to firstbefore, IIRC Labour did it in Hastings and Hove in 1997, and I\’m sure other cases could be cited.
Jon (#59) - I don\’t know how many votes there are to the cartload, but if you can actually produce any evidence for your assertion, I should think the editor of G2 would buy the article!
They don\’t chatter much louder than that.
Well, it is quite a chattering class seat (albeit Tory prior to 1992).
Steve T
Interesting…it may depend on the strength of the party on the ground. As a plaid activist in Conwy we dont see much of the lib dems now…except a presence in Bangor they are wiped out in Local governerment(their remaining councillors in Conwy are there as individuals with no relation to national party vote) and their vote collapsed between 97 and 2001 with Pc and Labour sharing their vote….Swansea west is an odd seat Plaid do very well in assembly elections twice around 25% but made little impression last GE…
Missing from the list is the Inverness and various bits seat thats a three way split between Labour Lib and SNP did not see it on either list….
BTW in 1992 PC won Ceredigion from 4th place against a sitting MP…with a 15% swing……so winning from third is not that much of a challenge….
Mark - I\’m only doing rudimentary analysis on a spreadsheet. What makes politics so interesting are the factors that don\’t come down to number-crunching, and they include public interest, local activism, turnout, big issues, candidates, date of election, etc etc. Which makes forecasting such a risky (and interesting) game.
However the stats stuff does thow up some possibilities and it would be interesting to get the views of any activists who know what\’s goign on there.
By running a site similar to http://www.electionprediction.org/ over the next six months it would be possible to get some views on local conditions. The general consensus seems to be that national opinion polls are far from telling the story at local level, which makes the next election extremely unpredictable.
Agree with you Steve T …all sorts of factors make up a winning seat…..
Think Conwy is one of the most interesting I have lived/been involved in….we, Plaid, are just picking our candidate this week. Normally I would be worried its all a bit late etc….but think it matters not as the other partys are doing little …Labour MP is busy in one half of seat….Tory has done a survey ….but not much happening yet…
One of our three potential candidates is a young woman with lots of personality, local connections and has run our westminster office for 10 years……in this part of the world the candidate…backed up by a good campaign is key…as is the case in many other seats where three or more parties compete…….
Mark - my folks live in Rhos on Sea - is that in Conwy? If so I shall tell them to watch out for your person!
Can comment briefly on Norwich South as it is my home seat, I expect Clarke to hold on but with a much reduced majority. The Lib Dems will come second but Norwich has a surprisingly strong Labour tradition (more industrial than you may have thought), for example the city council was Labour for 90 years up until I think 2002. The conservatives are very weak and there share of the vote in the Euros was I think the lowest in the south or midlands bar Oxford and a few London boroughs, there only council seat is in Norwich North, this may help the Lib Dems if anti Labour tactical voting appears (I have my doubts on this). Certainly the \’Guardian\’ areas have moved strongly to the Lib Dems, but the strength of the Greens has meant the Lib Dems are not the sole receipiant of the student vote, and Labour has worked very hard on the more deprived areas and actually made gains against the national trend from the Lib Dems in the council elections.
Actually Rhos is in Clywd West ….which is a Labour Tory marginal…it would be worth getting them to tell you what is happening as its one of the most marginal seats in the UK…..there is also a council by-election due in Rhos but dunno if we will fight it or not….
Mark,
Any sense on how big a push the Lib Dems will make in Ceredigion, been quite close in recent times. If the election (as is likely) is in term time and if Cymdeithas keep alienating the \’incomer\’ vote they could win it.
Re. 76 I cannot agree with you about Norwich South, my home seat. I think the Conservatives will come a strong second here - they\’ve selected a very high profile local teacher as their candidate. He came within 14 votes of taking Labour\’s strongest seat on the council in June, the same day the LibDems lost 12 councillors and control of the council. Plus a big threat from the Greens and the President of the NUS standing could see the LibDems struggling. Clarke may win, but he\’ll be fighting the Tories for it.
I would be very surprised if the Conservatives hold onto second in Norwich South, they only have one council seat (in Norwich North) in my ward they came 4th polling only 7%, they came third in the Euros with as I said the lowest share of the vote in the south or midlands bar Oxford and a few inner London boroughs the Conservatives managed to outpoll the Lib Dems in virtually all Lib Dem seats but not in Norwich South.
The green vote was 13% in the Euros I would expect at least soem of that to switch to the Lib Dems in a general election.
\”A high profile local teacher\” as the Conservative candidate in Norwich South?
I had a look at his blog - he doesn´t seem to do much marking or lesson preparation…..
Re. 46, good points re. Nottingham South (I lived in Nottingham for three years), but Beeston is in Broxtowe (which, indeed, was known as Beeston before the 1983 boundary changes).
Re. Ben\’s point at 29, I\’ve never found Freedland or Toynbee anywhere near as irritating (in fact, downright infuriating) as Yasmin Alibaih-Brown. Johann Hari has his moments, but is very tedious when it comes to the supposed virtues of PC and why we shouldn\’t call anyone chavs (he forgets that, before it was hijacked by one or two right-wing snobs, it was a term used to describe anti-social idiots who go round gobbing on pavements, using up to ten f words in every sentence on public transport while there are pensioners and kids around, and sneering at anyone who doesn\’t wear Burberry baseball caps - I didn\’t half chuckle when that pub hit the headlines by banning wearers of burberry).
Re. 76 Norwich South certainly has a long Labour tradition - it only went Tory at the 83 Election, and John Garrett regained it in 87. Norwich North, on the other hand, was held by the Tories between 83 and 97.
Bridgwater is an odd seat - despite being a rural somerset seat it has a surprisingly high level of industry - Labour have traditionally dpone pretty well. They fell back in the 1980\’s allowing it to become a Tory/LD marginal - however a poor local LD campaign in 97 allowed Labour to close the gap. LDs could come back & snatch it if Labour slump nationally & they run a good local campaign
The LDs will be trying very hard in Ceredigion - they were surprised to lose it in 97 - did well in the by-election & the Welsh election with a strong local candidate who is standing again. I expect Plaid to hold on though.
Yes, Will, but the point about Norwich South is that the LibDems never do well at parliamentary level and people around here go Tory at general elections. As for their \”high profile local teacher\” candidate, I too have just read his blog - and he seems to be bogged down with GCSE coursework marking at the moment, so I have no idea why you think he isn\’t doing his job! Besides which, why would you put that sort of detail down about his life?!? I want his views on education, I don\’t want to know the average year 9 score.
We do need a political predictions wesbite soon. Personally, I met Antony Little (the Tory candidate in Norwich South) at the last local elections and was impressed. He may just do it.
Sorry to post twice, but what ward in Norwich South do you live in Will? I\’ve just checked the result and can\’t find any where the Conservatives scored 7% last June. They got (on my figures) pretty big swings across the City.
Thankfully I haven\’t subscribed to the Indy website, so I was spared the last 90% of Y A-B\’s Mugabe apologism today. I don\’t really mind Freedland, and Toynbee is somewhere in between.
Re: 82 and 85, how many seats would you expect Labour to have won in 1987 and lose to the Tories this time? Were there any Labour won in 1987 but the Tories did in 2001?
Hello sorry I live in Nelson ward, my figures could possibly unreliable as they are from the Green party who won here.
Mark, no I’m not based in Durham when outside Leicester, that said my family on my fathers side are from County D from Hartlepool via Houghton Le Spring… hence it was a matter of tribal pride when I went to help out in Hartlepool
Will, your second name isn’t Alford is it?… Norwich South is tricky because the anti-Clark vote will split between the Greens and the LDs either way I think Clark will be fine, as even the most successful voter registering process at the UEA won’t net that many voters, even if they bother to vote, being a student I don’t have much faith in the activism of my comrades in further education
Also sorry the Lib Dems were only just behind the Conservatives in 2001 and there national as well as local profile has risen significantly since then. I do accept the Conservative candidate is a good one but I would still be very surprised if the Lib Dems didn\’t come second.
No Ben not me your thinking of, and I do agree with you Clarke is safe due to the factors you mentioned and the Labour tradition of the city.
Sorry Will, making that mistake a lot of late, I spent a term at UEA and still see folks from there, should have never left, ah well… live and learn
Re 87, absolutely - it\’s bad enough scanning such rubbish after paying just 60p at the newsagent. She says we\’re as bad as him - er, excuse me, but does the government here make food supplies dependent on support for the ruling party, rig elections, encourage the rape of its political opponents, have them beaten and tortured in police custody, or cut their heads off?
Y A-B and Melanie Philips deserve to be marooned together on a desert island, the better to enjoy each other\’s lack of any sense of humour or proportion (summed up nicely by their respective mugshots) I can\’t wait for Craig Brown to imitate Y A-B with anything like the skill with which he parodied M Philips in his \’Frankly, it makes you want to weep\’ piece a few months ago.
As for Amanda Platell, put her on \’What not to wear\’ (since she\’s so keen to criticise the way other women look). Talentless author of (unintentionally) self-parodying columns (which read not so much like the late Linda Lee-Potter as Private Eye\’s Glenda Slagg) gets made (or rolled) over by two bullying Sloanes - truly a match made in heaven.
I haven\’t yet seen Platell\’s duet with Piers Moron on C4 - have I missed anything? If her performances on the BBC\’s \’Crisis Command - Could you run the country?\’ or \’Question Time\’ are anything to go by, I doubt it.
\”the Inverness and various bits seat\”
LOL, you\’ll be pleased to know its naame is getting even longer after the Scottish boundary review - Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey
Ah, Will, don\’t trust the figures from ANY party in Norwich! I\’ve learnt that the hard way … the Tories scored a good result in Nelson (yes, fourth, but compared to previous years). They also got an 8% swing in TownClose, 9% in Thorpe and 13% in Bowthorpe. I think that in a four-way fight like Norwich South the strenght of the candidates will come through. I\’m putting Clarke winning by c.3,000 over the Tories.
Using the tried and tested leaflet-o-meter, the Conservatives will come second to Labour in Norwich South. I live in the City and get more leaflets from the Tories than Labour and the LibDems put together. Greens deliver a lot too, but don\’t think they can do it on previous reasults, whereas the Tories always come 1st or 2nd here.
I\’d never thought of the similarity in the mugshots before: you\’re right, it\’s the \”I\’m sad but I\’m sorry but I\’m not sorry but I won\’t apologise for telling the sad truth\” half smile.
It did seem ironic (from what I saw of the column) that the complaint was about journalists publicising oppression more vigorously when it happened to one ethnic group. This from Y A-B! (Leaving aside the point that the sheer demographics means Mugabe causes much more black suffering than white suffering).
re various points above on vulnerable GMW seats - what do people think of today\’s poll of Muslims in the Grauniad? Potentially good news for the LDs but the vote is less likely to turn out.
Couple of posters asked about Ceredigion……
PC won in 1992 not 97…held it in a byelection in 2000 and ge 2001. The Lib dem vote has been roughly the same in each election since the byelection and they are indeed working hard…….their candidate however is not welsh speaking (a distinct disadvantage) and I understood him to live near Brecon but I could be mistaken. On the issue of the Welsh language campaigners \”alienating incomers\” I would have to disagree. Plaid take their support in Ceredigion from a combination of around 50% of the Welsh speaking population(the rest mostly vote Tory with a bit for LD and Lab) plus a large chunk of the \”incomer\” vote. Many \”incomers\” in Ceredigion in particular and other parts of Wales have, like myself, moved to Wales as a positive choice based on cultural and political preferences. Many of these people are comfortable with bi-lingualism( Cymuned are dominated by Welsh learners) and unlikely to be bothered by the language campaigners. The other sort of \”incomers\” who move to Wales to get away from BME populations in England tend to be rabidly anti-welsh as well as anti everyone who is different so are unlikely to vote Lib Dem. Also this particular group are more heavily concentrated in the seaside resorts in the north.
On the plus side for the LDs in Ceredigion there candidate is actually vaguely liberal in outlook which is more than can be said for their councillors. Lib Dems in Cardiff, let alone England and the sort of people who post here would be horrified they are in the same party.
Interesting we shall have to wait and see, I still fancy the Lib Dems to come second based on the Euro results and the gains they have made since 2001 on the council although they did fall back this year, partly due to boundary changes. Sorry Richard have you got a link to those full results would be useful as your right about the party results, you will know about that Lib Dem graph! are the results for Nelson and Town Close directly comparable as I thought the ward boundaries had changed, Bowthorpe was impressive but I beleive that is the home council seat of the Tory candidate. This debate has also proved the need for seat by seat betting.
If that ICM poll is at all correct, then one could see a few upsets in inner city seats, and possibly a victory for Respect somewhere in the East End.
However, there is a potential elephant trap here for the Lib Dems. The fact that so many Muslims apparently (according to this poll) want Sharia law to be recognised in Britain, and automatically to have time off work for prayers, means the Lib Dems could pay a very heavy price among non-Muslim voters if they become to closely associated with Muslim concerns.
I\’ve mentioned before how Labour are now prepared to take the gloves off against the Lib Dems. One example was in a local by-election in Colchester, where there are plenty of army families. Labour won a landslide victory in a Lib Dem seat on the back of leaflets quoting Muslim Lib Dem councillors reviling British soldiers.
If the Lib Dems become associated with special pleading for Muslims, you can be sure the other parties will highlight this at every opportunity, and the Lib Dems will suffer accordingly.
This is the first time we\’ve gone over 100 for comments on one theme and we were worried whether the system would cope. It might get tougher at 999…1000
Congratulations Mike! Can you share anything with us on your plans to revamp the discussions? (Say, would it be possible as the GE approaches to set up a discussion on each constituency there is interest in?)
Mike, it seems as though the site has now reached discussion-group proportions, which must be a nightmare to manage (although stimulating for the participants). BV\’s suggestion is a good one but we realise this is done in your spare time!
Traffic has increased five-fold since the Leicester South and Birmingham Hodge hill by-elections and we expect a similar step-change during the General Election campaign.
We do have a beta discussion forum site operating which I\’m not happy with yet but would give us a much better structure. We are probably going to ask for users to register. I can see my son\’s visit on Boxing Day being devoted to getting it right!
I like the idea of specific seat category discussions and we need to give more thought to categorisation and indexing.
We might have, say, Lib Dem Tory targets as one heading with separate sub-headings for specific seats.
Our aim is to make this site THE place to find out what\’s happening throughout the UK throughout the whole campaign and we want to do it while maintaining the all-party ethos that has been a major characteristic. It\’s been great to see PC activists now amongst our regulars. So far there\’s been nobody from UKIP or the SNP.
Sounds great - thanks as always.
Most bulletin board software (sorry if I\’m teaching you to suck eggs) will let you create polls on particular threads - so using that on the target seat threads could be used to produce the Politicalbetting.com General Election Call.
Mike - all excellent ideas and I look forward to them being implemented. The registration idea is also good; as you\’ve pointed out, the all-party nature of the site is what makes it special, but increased volume and the passions raised by the GE could lead to some inapropriate exchanges. It would be good to be able to terminate the participation of anyone who tried persistently to abuse the facilities you provide.
Re 97, absolutely right. The dreadful specs sported by Philips and Y A-B in the mughots could be used as an advert for Specsavers (every time I see them, I think \’You should have gone to Specsavers!\’)
Did you know that Y A-B said she wouldn\’t wear a poppy this year because of what was happening in Fallujah? She forgets that, if it wasn\’t for the men and women honoured (and supported) by poppy sales, she wouldn\’t have been able to come to this country after Idi Amin kicked out the Ugandan Asians - because GB would be under Nazi occupation.
To be fair, YAB has got a bit better in recent years. Occasionally, I even find myself agreeing with her. The Zimbabwe piece was appalling though.
Melanie Philips writes extremely well about education. She is far too prone to see anti-semitism in everything that people say and do though.
Sean at 101 - apologies for my naievety but wouldn\’t that approach be sailing a bit close to the wind named BNP?
Hardly surprises me. (And if she wore a white one, the irony is furthered since the proceeds went to an organisation which was pro-appeasement and pro-Nazi in the extreme in the 1930s, and during the Second World War. Personally I prefer my cash to go to supporting disabled veterans, but obviously I\’m some kind of warmonger).
I wonder if anyone has bought her book?
Steve T, your question is probably better directed at a Labour supporter. Personally, I think it is entirely legitimate to quote another party\’s own supporters in order to damage that party.
In the run up to May 2003, Luton Lib Dems put out a leaflet in Urdu stating that \”New Labour has the Blood of Muslims on its hands.\” I think that that leaflet was as inflammatory as anything the BNP would put out.
I am clearly new to this game!
I agree with your analysis re Luton and whoever did that should have been hauled over the coals for it.
On the subject of the Muslims poll - I would be wary of reading too much into it just because it fits in with what you think might be happening. It hasn\’t been demographically weighted so presumably it could be accurate… or way off. It doesn\’t even look like the claim that Labour Muslim support has halved is based upon anything other than (educated?)guesses about what happened at the last election.
I think that there will always be activists in all parties who overstep the mark in their desire to win.
OT, the Independent today posits that the IRA could put all its arms beyond use by spring 2005, with a devolved government following afterwards.
Whatever you think of Paisley, this would be a giant achievement for the DUP. I\’ve not seen much discussion on whether the consitutional arrangements would be effectively those of the GFA, or would be revamped.
Looking at the Independent\’s increasingly dotty letters page (almost as bad as the Guardian these days), I can imagine quite a few of its drippier readers have bought her book. George W Bush\’s second term was almost worth it, given some of the howls of anguish it evoked from the chattering kind (my favourite was the one where someone suggested forming a self-help group where they held hands and prayed).
Funny comment I heard at Conference re. the Independent\’s increasingly shrill front pages - one of our PPCs said that they reminded him of a particularly indignant student paper.
I like how Robert Fisk\’s mugshot varies between red-faced indignation and lip-curled self-satisfaction. As with YAB and Philips, his mugshot gives you a good idea of what to expect from the writing.
Re: Muslims (i.e. Pakistanis and Bangladeshis)
My impression is that the older generations still largely vote Labour but that the younger generations are lost to them. I would be suprised if Labour got anywhere near 50% of their votes in the GE so it will represent a big swing away from them and could hugely affect some seats.
Where the community will eventually end up is unclear. It is a very complicated and internally divided community and the project to set up a Muslim seperatist party (i.e. Respect) seems doomed to fail.
The Tories have always seen them as natural supporters (pro small busniess, socially very conservative) but the issue of race has always poisoned their approach.
The Lib Dems will pick up a lot of votes in the short term but I find it hard to imagine they will be able to sustain it, I could be wrong though.
Re. 116, it\’s \’Nixon goes to China\’ again. Or Begin signing up to the Camp David agreement. The Nixons of this world may not always want to go to China, but if/when they do, they\’ve got no-one looking over their shoulder.
Despite being one-quarter Irish Catholic, I\’ve never been able to entirely dislike Paisley. He\’s always rather amused me, particularly when he accused John Major of shouting him down!
I did sympathise with him when he was suspended from the Commons for accusing John Major of lying over his talks with the IRA - which, of course, he had! There\’s a case to be made for lying in some situations, but it\’s just that - a case to be made, rather than refusing to listen to dissenters.
Re. Will No 100. You are correct that all wards were fought on different boundaries, but that doesn\’t excuse the massive decline in the LibDem vote across Norwich. And thus, this is their dilema. The LibDems do \”quite well\” across the city but not \”very well\” anywhere anymore. Remember, the Greens have snatched Nelson and Wensum Wards from them. Labour fought back to take University and Lakenham from them. Tories hold Cringleford safely, always do well in Eaton at GEs, are making a good showing in Costessey, Town Close and Thorpe Hamlet and are neck-and-neck with Labour in Bowthorpe. All the parties are fighting for the City ward. The LibDems are under pressure and (as I think a post above said) they are being stretched and cannot campaign as hard as the Tories are. In the last month the Conservatives have delivered two leaflets and canvassed my street.
Hang on, Richard W, it is fair enough to say that the Lib Dems had a very bad result in Norwich earlier in the year but you have to add some sort of perspective to it. Looking at the results on the BBC website, it appears that all seats were up for election, the Lib Dems winning eighteen and the Conservatives winning one.
That is a fairly startling statistic (albeit that the Lib Dem figure is a significant drop from the past couple of years). It may be right that the local Tory candidate is good and that the Lib Dems will be hard pressed to convert local to national votes (I have no idea). But a lot of your comment at 121 sounds like party spin, which is not really appropriate for this site.
Yes the Lib Dem vote did decline this year but at 36% for the city wards in Norwich South is still high and around twice the Conservative share, who came fourth by share of the vote in the Norwich South wards. Haven\’t done the figures yet including Cringleford and New Costessey (in South Norfolk) but I suspect both Lib Dem and Conservative share will move up slightly and Labour and Green fall.
Now I am not suggesting this will be anywhere near the general election result but it does illustrate the relative strength of the two parties. I am not even saying the Conservative vote will fall from 2001 but the Lib Dem vote will rise, it is the local election results before 2001 you need to be doing the comparison with and since then despite falls this year the Lib Dems and the Greens are up at the expense of Labour.
The \’Blood on their Hands\’ type quote is a fairly standard trick on Lib Dem leaflets these days. As in Leicester they called their candidate Pat Gill in one part of the constituency and Parmajit Singh Gill in another part of the constituency. The point about the Hartlepool and Hodge Hill by-elections is that the Lib Dem campaign machine found it very difficult when their own tactics were used against them.
Steve - careful, you\’ll set Ben off again
Further (123) in 2000 1 year before last election council was 26 Lab, 21 Lib Dem, 1 Con
in 2004 it was Lab 15, Lib Dem 18, Green 5 and Con 1
I think that supports the fact that it is the Lib Dems and the Greens that have gained since the last election and at the expense of Labour.
Steve 2
Do you actually have evidence of the \”pat Gill\” thing? Labour workers seemed to be getting upset during the by election because he did not use the Parmjit Singh Gill but Parmjit Gill……..when I lived in leicester Parmjit was quite a good mate and I would be surprised if he went along with this…..I find it quite funny Labour supporters moaning about Lib Dem dirty tricks in leicester south by-election….elections have been hard fought in Leicester for years and Labour are hardly innocents……
Re 124, this is the first I have heard of \”Pat Gill\”, though I had heard many times that the \”Singh\” appeared on leaflets for the Sikh areas and not others.
Agree on Hartlepool and Birmingham HH, from listening to some Liberal Democrats you would think those campaigns involved the martyrdom of sainted figures.
oops, simulpost with Mark! The Singh/no-Singh thing didn\’t sound like pandering to me. No different to the EU commission president using the surname \”Barroso\” rather than \”Durao Barroso\” to non-Iberian audiences, who don\’t really understand the double surname thing.
(No, that doesn\’t mean I think \’Singh\’ is part of his surname!)
Or Anthony Wedgewood-Benn changing into Tony Benn….
And who was Tony Blair in a previous incarnation?
Kind of the opposite of Johnny Edwards becoming \”John\”! Or indeed Jackie Derrid