Sean Fear’s Friday slot
March 30th, 2007
-
How Will the Liberal Democrats Do on May 3rd?
I’m reluctant to comment on this subject, as there are a couple of posters to this site who consider that I display my inherent Conservative bias by refusing to predict anything other than stunning success for the Liberal Democrats in local elections. Nevertheless, it is only right that I do so, given that I have posted about Labour and the Conservatives in the past two weeks.
The Liberal Democrats’ performance in opinion polls is, without doubt, disappointing from their point of view. Only one of this month’s tranche of opinion polls, Communicate Research, has placed them on as much as 20% of the vote. Personally, I had expected Ming Campbell to be much better regarded among the public than appears to be the case. Perhaps he is destined to be one of those effective second-in-commands, who prove unsuccessful when they reach the top position.
However, as Mark Senior and others have pointed out, the Liberal Democrats’ record in local by-elections has been much better. Recent weeks have seen the Liberal Democrats pull off some remarkable results in Ashfield, Burnley, and Tewkesbury, and apparently holding their own in a number of other seats.
There are clearly a lot of people who tell pollsters they will vote Labour or Conservative nationally, but who vote Liberal Democrat locally.
I would expect it to be at least 25%, similar to that of last year, and possibly higher still, if Labour perform really badly. The problem for the Liberal Democrats is that the Conservatives will probably win something close to 40% of the vote on May 3rd, and a lot of rural Liberal Democrat seats are vulnerable to a Conservative advance.
The Liberal Democrats do have a good chance of gaining from Labour though, and to a large extent, I would expect their gains and losses to cancel each other out. However, it does mean that the Liberal Democrats are unlikely to be making the headlines on the morning of May 4th.
Sadly too, for the Liberal Democrats, good local electoral performances often fail to translate into good performances at Parliamentary level.
There were four local by-elections last night.
Basingstoke and Deane BC- Rooksdown: Conservative, 156, Lib Dem 122, Labour 18. Conservative hold.
Buckinghamshire CC - Stoke Poges and Farnham Common: Conservative 875, Independent 283, Lib Dem 280, Labour 89. Conservative hold.
Powys CBC - St David Within: Independent 215, Independent 156, Lib Dem 143, Conservative 47. Independent hold.
Rhondda Cynon Taf CBC - Treorchy: Labour 1139, Plaid Cymru 849, Conservative 161. Labour hold. This is in fact a very good result for Labour, as Plaid hold the other two seats in the ward. One would have expected Labour to suffer from the news that Burberry are closing their factory here, but in fact they achieved a swing of 9% in their favour.
Sean Fear is a London Tory activist
MessageSpace Advertising
We should have candidates in 15 Wakefield wards up from the 12 we had last year.
Ming should never have been installed as leader, he’s a nice enough old bloke but his image as Leader of the LD’s is all wrong. Usually LD leader’s in recent years have been young thrusting types the opposite of Ming. He is nether young or Dynamic!!!
Ming’s strategic vision is all wrong and he has made gaffe after gaffe in relation to positioning his party in relation to the Tories and Labour. He was even against opposing Iraq as some LD’s have led us to believe, the trident opposition is utterly silly as in England it is a vote loser! He is too keen to get into bed with Brown and the positioning of any union will be on Brown’s terms not ming’s! He get’s a G- on his report!!!
LD’s should do alright on some areas, it will be a local issue thing. Whether they focus on Labour areas i don’t know but i would imagine that Labour areas are the place for them to tap for support at this time unless it is a local thing.
A very fair summary of LibDem prospects Sean , I am not one who has said that you have shown a Conservative bias in your articles at all . More later perhaps , Friday night shopping now .
Good article Sean, only one correction, a lot of the results will not be out on the morning of May 4th as many councils won’t start counting until then.
I do expect the Liberal Democrats to be under presure against Conservatives though, which is in quite a lot of places, and lose seats, though they will gain them elsewhere.
Who can predict locals? Last year I thought that predictions of big lib dem gains from labour were overdone because Labour were defending low water marks in so many authorities. This time Lib Dems seem to have more scope for gains form Labour. But we’re also defending high watermarks against the tories in all sorts of places. We’ll see…
“Sadly too, for the Liberal Democrats, good local electoral performances often fail to translate into good performances at Parliamentary level.” Sean says (obviously having spent some time talking to Smithson). It is true. But it is also true that a lot of our parliamentary success has been based on local government success. “Neither Left nor Right” gives it is one our biggest success factors.
(OT) I predict that Le Pen will be 3rd and Bayrou will be 4th.
I did enjoy the opening line Sean. I think you are being excessively kind to the Lib Dems though - they are surely likely to lose seats overall (possibly rather a large number) unless Labour go into total meltdown in the Metropolitan authorities. Last year’s elections were in areas more favorurable to them than this year’s, and they only managed a couple of net gains.
5. Yes but the Plague on the other two houses cannot work all the time, people get a bit cynical of it.
When, Ming say’s they are willing to do deals with only one major party on the proviso of 5 basic points it loses it’s effect (We are talking at Parliamentry level here). It is interpreted as nothing less than a duplicitous!!! Be warned!!!
If the two of them are that bad, why say you might be inclined to do a deal with only one?
Lucky for Lib Dems this has little impact on local elections!
Sean It would be good to have a bit more detail here. Will LDs do about as badly as they did last year against the Tories? As I recall they lost the odd seat in many shire districts which added up to quite a few. Will there be some headline grabbing losses of control or by contrast are there councils they might reasonably hope to capture, either from the Conservatives, or more likely from Labour. I still think council elections matter a lot in assessing which LD seats are vulnerable to capture by the Tories and which are safer. For instance last year the LDs did very well in Eastleigh and Westmoreland which suggests that the MPs concerned are mouting an effective ground war to hold their seats. If the Tories do really well next time the LDs are vulnerable to a real haemorrhage of seats in the South. My suspicion, however, is that the LD/Con battlefield next time like last time will be extremely patchy with a huge amount depending on individual incumbents.
8. ‘Lucky for Lib Dems this has little impact on local elections!’
Well we don’t know that, as in recent years the Lib Dems have not made such an explicit committment toward supporting Labour, and nor has Labour been so unpopular as now. I’m sure many local Tory campaigns will be pushing the line that a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote to prop up Labour - how effective this proves remains to be seen.
8 Yeah but he didn´t. He said it was how he would judge whether Brown would turn around Blairism.
Interesting topic for nearer the election though. Do you think Cameron could possibly deliver his party to a coalition? major could hardly deliver his backbenchers for a single party govt.
How Will the Liberal Democrats Do on May 3rd?
OK, reasonably, adequately, etc.
They’ll never succeed until they behave like a political party not a club.
That is a poor result for Plaid - Maybe due to Burberry, and Rhondda is not on Plaid’s first or second target list - but they should have won here. No spin - poor result.
Having been slogging around campaigning for the Lib Dems for many years, this year will not be easy. There is no doubt there is a Conservative improvement this year. Fortunately very many people vote on local issues. Only last night two people who normally vote Conservative said if we could fix a problem they would support us - fortunately it was easy to resolve so we hope these people who I am sure will vote for DC nationally may vote for the Lib Dems as being effective locally (at least this year!)
Twenty years or so ago folks thought of themselevs as little Conervatives or Labour (and a few Liberals). I find most but not, o course all,much more pragmatic and will look at local issues for local elections and national for nationals. Personally I think that is a good thing.
I think most of the above posts prove that as a Conservative poster Sean Fear is pretty even handed…
15 Must say I have never had a problem with Sean. On the occasion I stood in for him I had exactly the same complaint (from Icarus!)
re 15. Sean Fear has been posting on PB since mid-2004 and for a long periods was almost the site’s sole Tory contributor. I have always appreciated his even-handedness and civility.
I’ve often thought that if more Tories were like Sean there would be a lot more Tories.
17. still, there are a lot more Tories than anyone else at the moment!
6- John
I agree but I’m not sure any poll will show it before polling day.
17 we are that’s why there are so many of us!
Re 16, Peter
What for being tory biased? 
Chris from Paris I noticed on the Nouvel Observateur website a piece suggesting that there has been a surge of new voter registrations, particularly it seemed to be saying, in Socialist strongholds. As a Sarko supporter are you worried about this? Has there been any analysis of the political affiliations of this large group of new voters?
18 Yes, that’s true Noisy but it just goes like that sometimes. It’s fortunate for the other two parties that there aren’t more like Sean F or nobody would vote for them at all!
I don’t know who ‘the couple of posters’ he refers to are but thye are wildly off target and can be safely ignored.
21 yes.
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2007/02/16/peter-pigeons-local-election-round-up/
post no 13
Back on topic, anyone care to venture a prediction for net seat gains/losses for each party? I have no idea, apart from Labour losing some and the Tories gaining some
And now I am sorry to veer wildly off thread but I must repeat a post from last night for those who go to bed at a sensible time.
Here’s a list of the names of the confirmed acceptances to attend the PB.com combined Party and Book Launch. There are fourtythree in total, which means we still have seven spare places (although that number may increase when people realise SeanT is coming.) If anybody thinks they should be on the list and they are not, please contact me immediately on arklebar@talktalk.net
Thanks.
Amelia Gudgion
Augustus Carp
Baskerville
Benedict White
Chris A
Christopher Squire
Cicero
David Douglas
David Herdson
David Kendrick
Dominique Lazanski
Double Carpet
George Crozier
George Little
Gideon Hoffman
Ian Jones
Ian Lang
Icarus
Innocent Abroad
John O
John Wheatley
Julian H
Kieran Barry
Martin Coxall
Matt (and partner)
Neil Foster
Neil Walsh
Nigel White
Patrick
Patrick Rock
Penelope Spiller
Peter from Putney
Peter the Punter
Richard S
Rik W
Sean Fear
SeanT
StJohn (and partner)
Tom Hunt
tpfkar
UK Paul
I mean in the May local elections
17. Really. A death penalty fan like Sean Fear? No one who supports state murder is remotely civilised.
re 24, Peter, I liked the bolded bit best:
Sean - Thank you for your impartial review of last weeks local erections.
Is there something about Icarus that we should know?
I like the fact that on that golden map of Lib Demo domination, the people of Ceredigion said they wouldnt vote Lib Dem if they thought they could win in the area…and yet the Lib Dems did win! So, does that mean that ion Ceredigion they only vote Lib Dem if they think that cant win??
re 26, Peter the Punter, has anyone invited either Iain Dale or Guido?
Oh, I should add that the MPs Nick Palmer, Stewart Jackson, John Hemming and Dan Rogerson are also attending, as guests of Harriman House, and some guy called Smithson is also coming.
Should be a riot.
Afternoon all :). It’s hard to argue with Sean’s comments while the predictably vitriolic outpouring from Martin Day can be ignored.
Would the LDs be in a better position if Huhne were now leader ? Impossible to know - he would have made mistakes too - and in the absence of a juicy by-election, it’s been quiet of late.
I suspect the LD performance on May 3rd will be as it is most years - some good, some bad. We will probably not do as well against the Tories though doubtless some local results will buck that trend while we may do better against Labour though doubtless some local results will buck that trend.
Turnout will be interesting - Tories are motivated and organised to vote and will do so. However, as we all know, the results of elections with 35-40% turnout and those with 65-70% turnout often tell very different stories.
I am going to come in disguise, so people don’t hit me. Watch for the guy with the ginger Afro and the lemon yellow kipper tie. That’ll be Benedict White in his normal gear.
I’ll be the dude in the balaclava.
I think you can all guess who one of the “couple” is, now. For the rest, thank you for the kind words. I’ll try to give you some more detail shortly Blue Moon.
31 I don’t know, Benedict, but I would guess they would be coming as guests of Harriman House, the publishers, under the pretext that they are journalists. I can ask. Are there any other quasi-journalists who might also be added? Yourself, perhaps?
Incidentally, the proceeding start at 3pm. Since there are likely to be fifty or so journos attending, you will need to arrive promptly if you want to be there before the drink runs out. My guess is that 3.15 would be cutting it fine.
34 It’s OK, SeanT, I’ve organised a separate room for you - although if anybody can lend us a decent sized shark-cage for the day, that might do better.
27 Many of us made our predictions for May on the 2007 competition thread at the beginning of January . I forecast Lab -550 losses LibDem - 100 gains . Forecasting now I would say Lab - 650 losses LibDems - 120 gains .
650 sounds a bit high!
I’ll go for Lab -200, Con +150 LD+50
Re 34, SeanT,
Re 36, Peter,
I’ll be there!
By-Election Results: Thursday 29th March 2007.
Basingstoke and Deane DC, Rooks Down
Con 156 (52.7; -10.9), LD Andrew Hood 122 (41.2; +4.8), Lab 18 (6.1; +6.1).
Majority 34. Turnout 33.7%. Con hold. Last fought 2004.
Buckinghamshire CC, Stoke Poges and Farnham Common
Con 875 (57.3; -4.8), Ind 283 (18.5; +18.5), LD Ingrid Greenhow 280 (18.3; -1.8), Lab 89 (5.8; -11.9).
Majority 592. Turnout 23.8%. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Powys UA, St David Within
Ind 215/156 (66.1), LD Vivien Hopkins 143 (25.5), Con 47 (8.4).
Majority 59. Turnout not known. Ind hold. Ind elected unopposed 2004.
Rhondda Cynon-Taff UA, Treorchy
Lab 1139 (53.0; +6.2), PC 849 (39.5; -13.7), Con 161 (7.5; +7.5).
Majority 290. Turnout 37%. Lab hold. Last fought 2004.
Please note:
The figures for percentage change are based on the details of the results from the last time that there was an election in the ward by statute in the May (or sometimes June) elections, rather than by any by-election. We use the figures in The Local Elections Handbook by Colin Rallings & Michael Thrasher.
The Party-defending seat is the party that the former Councillor (who has died, resigned or been disqualified) belonged to when she or he was elected not the one that she or he may have subsequently belonged to as a result of any defection.
Peter the P, what’s the date and address of the party again? I know, I know: Mister Disorganised.
43 Tuesday April 17th - from 3pm to 7pm at The National Liberal Club (off Whitehall) and probably in some sleazy bar afterwards.
Sean I think you are being too optimistic in saying that KLIb Dem gians will offset losses.This neutral position was lastvyears results when the Libs were higher in the polls and Thentories lower.I would expect a net loss of council seats in England of 100-200 and net loss of councils.
In more detail
VOTE SHARE
In terms of share of vote this year of the local election cycle is uniquely favourable to the Tories and uniquely unfavourable to Labour as it is the year when most of the Districts are all up as in 2003.
In 2003 the actual vote shares in England(as opposed to the 3 ways contests reperted on the BBC election programme)were.
Con 34.6 (+5 Above ICM poll figure of April 2003)
Lab 27.0 (-15)
Lib 26.1 (+5)
Oth 12.3 (+5)
Taking the latest ICM polls and giving the same local election bonus or deficit as above give sthe Tories 45%,Labour 12%,Libs 23%,and others 15%.
Now it is highly unlikely Labour would slip so low so but it could fall under 20% with as Sean suggests the Tories over 40% and 23% the likely Lib share.
SEAT CHANGES.
Labour are likely to be hollowed out with the major gainers from them being the Tories, who will also gain from the Lib Dems.
A result as follows is quite possible
Con gains District 750, Unitary 170, Metro 100. Total 1020
Lab Losses District- 500, Unitary -140,Metros 100
Lib Losses District -250, Unitary -30., Metro nil
(In the metros the comparison is with 2004 when they were all up national swings since then has been less than v 2003)
COUNCILS
This will,be fascinating expect Labour to be reduced to a very low total and Lib Dems to go backwards.
Taking the Lib Dems first they should should win Rochdale( although I think they already have overall control because of a defection)In the Unitaries Hull and Bristol look possible gains.
Likely Lib Dem losses are Bournemouth,Torbay and Maidenhaed inthe Unitaries and in the Districts Malvern HIlls,N Devon, N wilts.Oadby,Restormel,S Norfolk,Uttlesford and Vale of White Horse.
Labours meltdown could well include in the loss of control of Barnsley, Oldham,and Sheffield,Blackpool,Nottingham, Wrekin,Wear Valley,Corby,Gravesham,Leics NW, and S Derbydhsire.
This would leave Labour with only 26 coucils in England a similar number to the Lib Dems.
May 3rd will be a night of triimph for the Tories- so watch them spin down their prospects.Expect over 40 Council gains -largely from NOC. but some direct gains Bournemouth,Torbay,Maidenhead, Oadby,S Norfolk and Vale of White Horse from lib Dems and Corby,Gravesham,Lincoln,Leics NW,S derbdshire from Labour
With over 150 English coucils the Tories will dominate local government to the hihghest degree since the 80’s
Roger H
39 Labour are going to lose nearly 200 in Scotland alone .
45. An elections expert. Not.
44. Cool. That’s the middle day of the London Book Fair, where my agent will be striving to sell my novel. So I’ll either be celebratingly happy, suicidally depressed, or painfully anxious; either way I’ll be up for a drink.
30: You jest, but that is indeed the case. The poll that the poster was based upon did indeed show some people who currently voted Lib Dem, but said that they wouldn’t if they thought that the Lib Dems would win.
45 Roger H and Sean F
Would either of you like to comment on the fact that the LDs seem to be doing much better in real elections than their poll rating would suggest? Or am I imagining it? If I’m not, why would that not be repeated in May?
49. The fact that the LibDems DID win Ceredigion doesn’t say much for opinion polling data then, does it?
48 “Celebratingly happy, suicidally depressed, or painfully anxious.”
Situation normal then, Sean T?
52. I forget you have met me, and read my book. You know me too well.
Have you not persuaded the fair Snowflake to show “her” face at the beano?
53 How do you know it’s a her? You know more than you should. Is there something going on between you two?
PtP@50
But has this not also been the case for parliamentary by-elections for the last 15 years or so? I’m no LD supporter, but do recognise that they have had a formidable by-election campaigning machine. Success in bys has not been wholly replicated at the national level.
btw. Is there a cloakroom or somewhere safe to leave a folding bicycle at the NLC? Anyone been there before?
O/T France - New poll IFOP
first round
sarkozy 28(+2) royal 23 (-2) bayrou 21(-1) le pen 13.5 (-1)
(comparison with last IFOP poll published)
second round
sarkozy 53 royal 47
update of my poll of polls
sarkozy 28,08 royal 25,50 bayrou 19,92 le pen 12,58
First time in more than three weeks that bayrou’s average falls under 20% !
56- sorry the second round figure is sarkozy 54 (+1) royal 46 (-1)
45 Roger H Your figures are fallacious , you are not comparing like with like . If you take just the shire districts in 2003 the Conservatives polled 39.4% Labour 20.7% . Labour are not going to drop 15% to 5.7% . Labour won 1,526 seats in 2003 some have alredy been lost in byelections and a high proportion are in strong Labour councils in the North East , the Conservatives will not even contest many of them let alone gain them .
50 Yes. They will. They should win 25%+ in May, compared to a poll rating of c.18%.
Roger H, London, Wales, and a number of English authorities weren’t contested in 2003, so *overall* figures are somewhat misleading. You can’t really link them to opinion polls mechanistically, as these cover national, not local, voting intention.
Overall, I’d expect the net gain, or net loss, for the Lib Dems to be more like 100, rather than a net loss of 280.
Is there a cloakroom or somewhere safe to leave a folding bicycle at the NLC”
Yes.
55 Yes, it’s a huge place, Richard. You should be OK.
26 PtP. You’ve assembled an excellent cast of rogues and villains there Peter.
The naked political mud wrestling will be a sight to behold, sadly I’ll will miss it all.
Chris from Paris I wonder if you’ve seen the piece in the Nouvel Observateur website about the surge in new voter registrations. It gave the impression that they were mainly in Socialist areas. Is there any information on their political affiliations? Also can one deduce any shift in voting intentions post the metro emeute? Are people expecting some copycat rioting in the banlieus this weekend. Ca fait ecole usually. I notice by the way that 85% in a poll were opposed to Sego’s every home should have a flag initiative. There was a good piece in Le Figaro in which an anonymous campaign worker said: Elle ne fait qu’a sa tete. It sounds like a real shambles.
33 & 11- I actually said the Lib dems might do all right in some places.
Your problem is you know skeleton is not upto the job but cannot admit it!
The truth is hard to swallow and i would not put myself in the swivel - eyed catogary of posters far from it. I am not even a member of a political party! I nearly voted Lib Dem’s a couple of years ago, that was before your leader was outed as a pisshead, your home affairs spokesman hit some sort of glass ceiling and Hughes demonstrated his personal equidistance policy!!!
Then to cap it all we have opek and a cheeky girl! How can anyone take this person seriously again - he claims to be green but flies his own plane!!! oh! Then there is the unilitral disarment issue, opek is always going on about comets hitting earth. A bunker busting nuclear warhead may actually be the only thing to obliterate incoming comets / Asteroids!!! But nuclear is not going to get you any votes in Scotland so you oppose it!
You also mention the MING / Brown thing not being real? So we all had a collective phychotic eposide and imagined it - grow up! We all heard it and if it was aproblem of delivery then it is obvious skeleton should be pensioned off!
62 We’ll be thinking of you, Jack. In fact we’re planning to have an empty bath-chair to represent you.
Would 100-150 net lib dem losses be enough to see Ming under pressure to quit?
66. I would have thought that would be a good result for ming!
List of byelections since May 2006, south of a line drawn from the Wash to the Severn (approx). All principal LAs outside London. In chronological order.
Cambridgeshire CC, Romsey
Lib Dem 955 (40.2;-4.8), Lab 656 (27.6;-5.7), Green 265 (11.2;+0.4), Con 258 (10.9;+1.2), Respect 240 (10.1;+10.1) [UKIP 0 (0.0;-1.2)]
Majority 299. Turnout 37.1%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2005.
Chiltern DC, Prestwood & Heath End
Con 1387 (58.2;-4.0), Lib Dem 998 (41.8;+4.0)
Majority 389. Turnout 46.6%. Con hold. Last fought 2003
Norfolk CC, Humbleyard
Con 1725 (47.7;+1.6), Lib Dem 1474 (40.7;+7.4), Green 239 (6.6;+0.7), Lab 180 (5.0;-9.7).
Majority 251. Turnout 46.7%. Con hold. Last fought 2004
Oxfordshire CC, Banbury Grimsbury & Castle
Con 880 (51.5;+14.4), Lab 488 (28.6;-6.3), Lib Dem 340 (19.9;-2.2) [Green 0 (0.0;-5.9)]
Majority 392. Turnout 24.6%. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Oxfordshire CC, Eynsham
Con 1652 (53.0;+17.9), Lib Dem 1034 (33.2;-11.1), Green 254 (8.2;+1.2), Lab 176 (5.6;-8.0).
Majority 618. Turnout 43.9%. Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2005.
Reading BC, Southcote
Lab 1252 (59.9;+6.8), Con 837 (40.1;+7.0) [Lib Dem 0 (0.0;-13.8)]
Majority 415. Turnout 38%. Lab hold. Last fought 2004.
Reading BC, Thames
Con 1887 (57.7;+5.4), Lib Dem 802 (24.5;-7.7), Lab 579 (17.7;+2.1)
Majority 1085. Turnout 48%. Con hold. Last fought 2004.
Rother DC, Bexhill Kewhurst
Con 1141 (64.6;-23.5), Lib Dem 525 (29.7;+17.8), Lab 99 (5.6;+5.6)
Majority 616. Turnout 44%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Rother DC, Bexhill Sackville
Con 655 (48.3;-19.8), Lib Dem 566 (41.8;+9.9), Lab 134 (9.9;+9.9)
Majority 89. Turnout 38%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Rother DC, Bexhill St Marks
Con 863 (51.4;-26.1), Lib Dem 538 (32.1;+6.8), UKIP 185 (11.0;+11.0), Lab 92 (5.5;+5.5).
Majority 325. Turnout 45%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Suffolk CC, Pakefield
Con 1338 (36.5;+2.8), Lab 1097 (29.9;-1.2), UKIP 592 (16.1;+16.1), Lib Dem 397 (10.8;-6.0), Green 243 (6.6;-1.0)
Majority 241. Turnout 32.5%. Con gain from Lab. Last fought 2005.
Taunton Deane BC, Taunton Blackbrook & Holway
Lib Dem 1326 (75.3;+26.8), Con 436 (24.7;-9.9) [Lab 0 (0.0;-16.9)]
Majority 890. Turnout 35.9%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Epsom & Ewell BC, Stoneleigh
Resident 597 (41.5;-1.0), Con 560 (38.9;+0.1), Lib Dem 209 (14.5;+2.9), Lab 72 (5.0;-2.1)
Majority 37. Turnout 38.4%. Resident gain from Con. Last fought 2003.
Caradon DC, Saltash-Pill
Lib Dem 474 (43.6;+15.8), Ind 334 (30.7;-23.5), Con 280 (25.7;+7.7)
Majority 140. Turnout 31.97. Lib Dem gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
Chichester DC, Tangmere
Con 278 (44.1;+2.9), Lib Dem 275 (43.7;-8.4), BNP 41 (6.5;+6.5), UKIP 22 (3.5;+3.5), Lab 14 (2.2;-4.5).
Majority 3. Turnout 36%. Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2003.
Arun DC, Angmering
Con 1052 (73.6;+10.2), Lib Dem 254 (17.8;-18.8), Lab 123 (8.6;+8.6)
Majority 798. Turnout 24.7. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Arun DC, Yapton
Con 699 (70.5;-3.1), Lib Dem 205 (20.7;-5.7), Lab 87 (8.8;+8.8)
Majority 494. Turnout 24%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
North Somerset Council, Portishead West
Con 488 (38.9;+20.8), Lib Dem 452 (36.1;+36.1), Lab 205 (16.4;+16.4), Ind 108 (8.6;-73.3)
Majority 36. Turnout 49.02. Con gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
North Somerset Council, Yatton
Lib Dem 812 (31.1;+1.3), Ind 1 749 (28.7;-5.8), Con 678 (26.0;+3.5), Ind 2 267 (10.2;-24.3), Lab 104 (4.0;-9.1),
Majority 63. Turnout 38.39. Lib Dem gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
West Sussex CC, Angmering & Findon
Con 1500 (75.6;+25.4), Lib Dem 334 (16.8;-21.0), Lab 149 (7.5;+7.5), UKIP [0.0 -12.0]
Majority 1166. Turnout 25.8. Con hold. Last fougt 2005
North Norfolk DC, Holt
Lib Dem 885 (56.6;+29.3), Con 637 (40.8;+15.8), Lab 41 (2.6;+2.6) [Ind 0 (0.0;-44.4), Green 0 (0.0;-3.3)]
Majority 248. Turnout 54.1%. Lib Dem gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
Suffolk CC, Row Heath
Con 1222 (61.5;+20.7), UKIP 297 (14.9;+5.6), Lab 219 (11.0;-11.1), Lib Dem 118 (5.9;-7.1), Ind 110 (5.5;-9.3), Ind 22 (1.1;+1.1)
Majority 925. Turnout 27%. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Uttlesford DC, Newport
Lib Dem 746 (60.4;-9.7), Con 489 (39.6;+9.7)
Majority 257. Turnout 48.7%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Purbeck DC, Swanage South
Con 642 (45.4;+9.8), Lib Dem 409 (28.9;+6.6), Lab 363 (25.7;-4.3), [UKIP (0.0;-12.1)].
Majority 233. Turnout 30%. Con hold. Last fought 2004.
South Norfolk DC, Diss
Con 845 (50.9;+25.5), Lib Dem 714 (43.0;+2.9), Green 102 (6.1;+6.1), [Lab (0.0;-11.9)], [Ind (0.0;-22.6)].
Majority 131. Turnout 29.6%. Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2003.
St Edmundsbury BC, Kedington
Con 350 (53.8;-9.1), Lib Dem 250 (38.4;+38.4), Lab 51 (7.8;-29.3).
Majority 100. Turnout 43%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Watford BC, Nascot
Lib Dem 887 (45.4;+17.4), Con 828 (42.4;-12.0), Green 145 (7.4;+1.3), Lab 92 (4.7;-6.9).
Majority 59. Turnout 36.6%. Lib Dem gain from Con. Last fought 2004.
Breckland DC, Swaffham
Con 851 (66.3;+11.2), Lab 243 (19.0;+19.0), Lib Dem 189 (14.7;-30.2).
Majority 608. Turnout 24.3. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
East Hertfordshire DC, Great Amwell
Con 314 (78.3), Lab 36 (9.0), Green 26 (6.5), Lib Dem 6.2).
Majority 278. Con hold. Last fought unopposed 2003.
Hertfordshire CC, Knebworth & Codicote
Con 1759 (69.7;+14.4), Lab 322 (12.7;-5.6), Lib Dem 310 (12.3;-7.0), Green 133 (5.2;-1.8).
Majority 1437. Turnout 23.0. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Mid Devon DC, Yeo
Lib Dem 565 (59.7;-4.1), Con 382 (40.3;+4.1).
Majority 183. Turnout 38.75. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Plymouth City Council, Southway
Lab 1624 (43.3;+3.9), Con 1517 (40.5;+0.3), Lib Dem 214 (5.7;-14.7), BNP 200 (5.3;+5.3), UKIP 139 (3.7;+3.7), Green 53 (1.4;+1.4).
Majority 107. Turnout 40.37. Lab hold. Last fought 2006.
Weymouth & Portland DC, Westham West
Con 436 (35.0;+11.3), Lab 412 (33.1;-5.2), Lib Dem (27.3;-10.7), Ind 58 (4.7;+4.7).
Majority 24. Turnout 45.51. Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2004.
Canterbury City Council, Sturry South
Con 474 (52.4;-23.1), Lib Dem 318 (35.1;+23.3), Lab 89 (9.8;-2.8), Ind 24 (2.6;+2.6).
Majority 156. Turnout 41.29. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Epsom & Ewell BC, Ruxley
RA 313 (36.0;-7.1), Con 292 (33.6;+15.5), Lab 152 (17.5;-11.6), Lib Dem 66 (7.6;-2.1), UKIP 46 (5.3;+5.3).
Majority 21. Turnout 19.5. RA hold. Last fought 2003.
Wealden DC, Uckfield New Town
Lib Dem 381 (58.4;+4.2), Con 211 (32.4;+9.6), Green 60 (9.2;+9.2), Lab [0.0 -23.0].
Majority 170. Turnout 32.46. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
North Dorset DC, Lydden Vale
Lib Dem 429 (57.0;+47.4), Con 324 (43.0;+28.5)
Majority 105. Turnout 50.0. Lib Dem gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
Devon CC, Alphington and Cowick
Lib Dem 1265 (39.3;-4.5) Con 1211 (37.6;+17.8) Lab 568 (17.7;-8.7) Green 174 (5.4;+0.8) UKIP (-3.9;-3.9) Liberal (-1.5;-1.5).
Majority 54. Turnout 30%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2005.
Essex CC, Brentwood Rural
Con 2062 (61.5;+11.8) Lib Dem 1150 (34.3;+2.3) Lab 142 (4.2;-4.5) Green (-3.1;-3.1) UKIP (-6.4;-6.4).
Majority 912. Turnout 26%, Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Exeter City Council, Alphington
Lib Dem 890 (45.4;-9.1) Con 703 (35.8;+8.0) Lab 227 (11.6;-6.0) Green 142 (7.2;+7.2).
Majority 187. Turnout 30.4%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Fenland DC, Slade Lode
Con 259 (57.2;+17.8) Lib Dem 194 (42.8;+12.0) Lab (-29.8;-29.8)
Majority 65. Turnout 26.7%. Con hold. Last fought 2003
North Wiltshire DC, Colerne
Lib Dem 425 (51.6;-8.8), Con 399 (48.4;+15.2) Lab [0.0 -6.4].
Majority 26. Turnout 42.82. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Peterborough City Council, Northborough
Con 393 (44.6;-16.5), Ind 388 (44.0;+18.3), Lib Dem 64 (7.3;+7.3), Lab 36 (4.0;-9.2).
Majority 5. Turnout 41.04 Con hold. Last fought 2004.
Chichester DC, West Wittering
Con 868 (57.5;+5.6), Ind 330 (21.9;+21.9), Lib Dem 139 (9.2;-9.9), BNP 123 (8.1;+8.1), Lab 48 (3.2;-2.7), UKIP [0.0 -18.0]
Majority 538. Turnout 37.5. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Dover DC, Little Stour & Ashstone
Con 892 748 (66.6;+29.2), Lib Dem 336 254 (25.1;-2.9), Lab 111 110 (8.3;+0.9), Ind [0.0 -27.2]
Majority 412. Turnout 24.26. Con hold, Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2003.
New Forest DC, Totton West
Lib Dem 535 (48.1;+0.3), Con 498 (44.8;-7.4), Lab 79 (7.1;+7.1)
Majority 37. Turnout 28.45. Lib Dem gain from Con. Last fought 2003.
Rushmoor BC, Grange
Lib Dem 515 (43.2;+18.7), Con 445 (37.4;-7.5), BNP 137 (11.5;-5.4), Lab 94 (7.9;-5.9).
Majority 70. Turnout 30.7. Lib Dem gain from Con. Last fought 2006.
Aylesbury Vale DC, Gatehouse
Lib Dem 559 (56.3;+3.5), Con 343 (34.6;+14.5), Resident Assc 90 (9.1;-0.2). Lab [0.0 -17.8].
Majority 216. Turnout 24.0. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Dartford BC, Heath
Con 637 (35.1;-12.2), Lab 518 (28.6;+2.3), BNP 240 (13.2;+13.2), UKIP 179 (9.9;-4.2), NEP 174 (9.6;+9.6), Green 65 (3.6;+3.6), Lib Dem 0 (0.0;-12.2),
Majority 119. Con hold. Turnout 38.0. Last fought 2003.
East Northamptonshire DC, Rushden East
Con 506 (66.4;+21.5), Lab 256 (33.6;-2.9) [Lib Dem 0 (0.0;-18.6)]
Majority 250. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Norwich City Council, Mile Cross
Lib Dem 789 (46.1;+11.7), Lab 702 (41.0;-0.7), Green 115 (6.7;-5.6), Con 106 (6.2;-5.4).
Majority 87. Turnout 24.4. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2006.
Oxford City Council, Hinksey Park
Lab 676 (45.6;-3.2), Green 436 (29.4;-0.6), Lib Dem 217 (14.6;+5.7), Con 155 (10.4;-1.8).
Majority 240. Turnout 33.48. Lab hold. Last fought 2006.
Guildford BC, Ash South and Tongham
Con 1245 (64.5;+8.2), Lib Dem 684 (35.5;+1.0) [Lab 0 (0.0;-9.2)]
Majority 561. Turnout 32.8. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Surrey CC, Ash
Con 1547 (63.3;+12.2), Lib Dem 898 (36.7;+3.5) [Lab 0 (0.0;-15.7)]
Majority 649. Turnout 27.7. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Caradon DC, St Cleer and St Neot
Lib Dem 519 (58.8;+23.3), Con 363 (41.2;+16.0), [Ind (0.0;-39.3)].
Majority 156. Turnout 24.6%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003
Lewes DC, Ouse Valley and Ringmer
Lib Dem 715 (43.7;+21.6), Con 521 (31.8;+6.5), Seagulls 359 (21.9;+21.9), Lab 41 (2.5;-10.7) [Green (0.0;-7.0)] [Ind (0.0;-32.4)].
Majority 194. Turnout 33.4%. Lib Dem gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
Elmbridge BC, Walton Central
Ind 656 (50.0;-2.7), Con 482 (36.7;+5.1), Lib Dem 115 (8.8;-0.1), Lab 59 (4.5;-2.2)
Majority 174. Turnout 28.8. Ind hold. Last fought 2006.
Tonbridge and Malling BC, Ightham
Con 352 (53.9;-20.6), Lib Dem 301 (46.1;+20.6).
Majority 51. Turnout 42.5%. Con hold. Last fought 2003
North Somerset Council, Pill
Ind 360 (33.9;+33.9), Lab 353 (33.2;-28.0), Lib Dem 202 (19.0;+3.4), Con 147 (13.8;-9.3).
Majority 7. Turnout 40%. Ind gain from Lab. Last fought 2003.
Adur DC, Hillside
Con 445 (59.1;-0.2), Lib Dem 184 (24.4;+2.7), Lab 124 (16.5;-2.5).
Majority 261. Turnout 22.0. Con hold. Last fought 2006.
South Somerset DC, Chard Holyrood
Lib Dem 367 (54.5;+37.0), Con 180 (26.7;+26.7), Ind 127 (18.8;-63.7).
Majority 187. Turnout 30.23. Lib Dem gain from Ind. Last fought 2003
West Devon DC, Chagford
Ind 310 (58.1), Con 224 (41.9).
Majority 86. Turnout 46.0. Ind hold. Last fought 2003 unopposed.
West Sussex CC, Southwick
Con 907 (55.5;+15.4), Lab 316 (19.4;-9.6), Lib Dem 314 (19.2;-0.3), Green 96 (5.9;+0.9), UKIP [0.0 -6.5].
Majority 591. Turnout 21.0. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Oxford City DC, Lye Valley
Lab 784 (52.8;+8.4), Lib Dem 487 (32.8;-10.2), Con 150 (10.1;+10.1), Green 64 (4.3;-8.4)
Majority 297. Turnout 31%. Lab hold. Last fought 2006.
East Hants DC, Whitehill Deadwater
Lib Dem 214 (64.7;+3.7), Con 93 (28.1;-10.9), Lab 24 (7.3;+7.3).
Majority 121. Turnout 16.4. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Cambridgeshire CC, Somersham and Earith
Con 1377 (68.0;+18.8), Lib Dem 566 (28.0;-9.4), Lab 81 (4.0;-9.4).
Majority 811. Turnout 28.2%. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Huntingdonshire DC, Earith
Con 703 (67.4;-1.2), Lib Dem 295 (28.3;+3.6), Lab 45 (4.3;-2.5).
Majority 408. Turnout 22.6%. Con hold. Last fought 2006.
Chiltern DC, Great Missenden
Con 494 (74.2;+9.8), Lib Dem 149 (22.4;-13.2), Lab 23 (3.5;+3.5).
Majority 345. Turnout 36.4%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
South Cambridgeshire DC, The Abingtons
Con 496 (65.5;+42.8), Lib Dem 261 (34.5;-29.1), [Ind (0.0;-13.8)].
Majority 235. Turnout 43.4%. Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2004.
Havant BC, Battins
Lib Dem 401 (41.9;+11.7), Con 264 (27.6;+2.2), Lab 236 (24.7;-7.2), Green 55 (5.8;-6.7).
Majority 137. Turnout 20.3%. Lib Dem gain from Con. Last fought 2006.
West Wiltshire DC, Warminster West
Con 572 (42.3;-14.3), Lib Dem 448 (33.1;+12.4), Ind 332 (24.6;+14.0), [Green (0.0;-12.2)].
Majority 124. Turnout 21.3%. Con gain from Ind. Last fought 2003.
Wiltshire CC, Warminster West
Lib Dem 548 (40.2;+11.1), Con 543 (39.8;+4.4), Ind 273 (20.0;-15.5).
Majority 5. Turnout 21.3%. Lib Dem gain from Ind. Last fought 2005.
Wycombe DC, Great Hughenden
Con 1040 (65.4;+9.7), Lib Dem 549 (34.6;+4.7) [Lab 0 (0.0;-14.5)]
Majority 491. Turnout 24.3%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Cambridge City Council, Trumpington
Lib Dem 858 (51.4;+5.9), Con 618 (37.0;+1.3), Lab 109 (6.5;-2.6), Green 85 (5.1;-4.6)
Majority 240. Turnout 30.9%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2006.
Reading BC, Tilehurst
Lib Dem 919 (47.8;+6.4), Con 586 (30.5;-0.1), Lab 317 (16.5;-5.7), Green 79 (4.1;-1.6), The Roman Party 21 (1.1;+1.1)
Majority 333. Turnout 27.8%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2006.
Salisbury DC, Downton & Redlynch
Con 907 (67.4;+19.4), Ind 311 (23.1;+23.1), Lab 127 (9.4;-25.9) [Green 0 (0.0;-16.7)]
Majority 596. Turnout 29.3%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Slough BC, Langley St Mary’s
Con 805 (50.5;+13.8), Lab 682 (42.8;+6.4), Ind 107 (6.7;+0.7) [Resident 0 (0.0;-20.9)]
Majority 123. Turnout 30%. Con gain from Ind. Last fought 2006.
Stroud DC, Cainscross
Lab 489 (43.1;+6.9), Con 407 (35.9;+3.1), Lib Dem 238 (21.0;+8.5) [Green 0 (0.0;-18.5)].
Majority 82. Turnout 22.1%. Lab hold. Last fought 2006.
Huntingdonshire DC, St Neots Eaton Ford
Con 658 (53.3;+0.9), Lib Dem 577 (46.7;+6.5) [Lab 0 (0.0;-7.4)]
Majority 81. Turnout 23.4%. Con hold. Last fought 2004.
Surrey CC, Englefield Green
Con 664 (45.9;-3.1), Lib Dem 317 (21.9;-1.5), UKIP 281 (19.4;+13.8), Lab 150 (10.4;-9.2), Monster Raving Loony Party 34 (2.4;+0.0)
Majority 347. Turnout 16.2%. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
Torridge DC, Northam
Con 556 (57.3;+57.3), Green 414 (42.7;+42.7) [Lab 0 (0.0;-16.9), Ind 0 (0.0;-33.6), Community Alliance 0 (0.0;-49.4)]
Majority 142. Turnout 21.6%. Con gain from Community Alliance. Last fought 2003.
Havant BC, Hart Plain
Con 839 (55.3;+7.1), Lib Dem 593 (39.1;+0.1), Lab 84 (5.6;-1.9), [Green 0 (0.0;-5.2)]
Majority 246. Turnout 21.8%. Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2006.
Maidstone BC, Parkwood
Lib Dem 347 (57.6;+23.5), Lab 130 (21.6;-13.3), Con 125 (20.8;-10.1)
Majority 217. Turnout 19.3%. Lib Dem gain from Lab. Last fought 2006
Tewkesbury BC, Northway
Lib Dem 250 (33.3;+33.3), Con 205 (27.3;-2.7), Ind 202 (27.0;+4.5), Lab 93 (12.4;-35.2)
Majority 45. Turnout 19.9%. Lib Dem gain from Lab. Last fought 2003.
Gravesham BC, Central
Con 689 (54.6;-0.4), Lab 463 (36.7;-8.3), Lib Dem 109 (8.6;+8.6).
Majority 226. Turnout 28.2%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
Horsham DC, Denne
Lib Dem 550 (40.8;-8.5), Con 456 (33.8;-8.3), BNP 171 (12.7;+12.7), Ind 78 (5.8;+5.8), Lab 54 (4.0;-4.6), UKIP 40 (3.0;+3.0).
Majority 94. Turnout 32%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2003.
Southend-on-Sea BC, West Shoebury
Con 765 (56.2;+12.2), BNP 243 (17.9;+4.9), Lab 180 (13.2;+13.2), Lib Dem 173 (12.7;+5.7), [Mum’s Army (0.0;-5.0)], [Alliance Southend (0.0;-17.0)].
Majority 522. Turnout 18.5%. Con hold. Last fought 2006.
Epping Forest DC, Grangehill
Con 609 (39.4;-12.2), Lib Dem 586 (37.9;-4.9), BNP 302 (19.5;+19.5), Lab 48 (3.1;+3.1), [Ind (0.0;-5.5)].
Majority 23. Turnout 32.8%. Con gain from Lib Dem. Last fought 2006.
Basingstoke and Deane BC, Buckskin
Con 332 (47.1;+15.2), Lab 210 (29.8;-19.0), Lib Dem 123 (17.4;+17.4), Green 40 (5.7;+5.7), [Ind (0.0;-19.3).
Majority 122. Turnout 22.1%. Con gain from Lab. Last fought 2004.
New Forest DC, Barton
Con 990 (56.9;-16.7), Lib Dem 426 (24.5;-1.9), Ind 277 (15.9;+15.9), Lab 48 (2.8;+2.8).
Majority 564. Turnout 36.7%. Con hold. Last fought 2003.
West Oxfordshire DC, Witney Central
Con 417 (53.5;+10.6), Lib Dem 207 (26.6;+8.8), Lab 87 (11.2;-16.5), Green 68 (8.7;-2.9).
Majority 210. Turnout 25.1%. Con hold. Last fought 2004.
Tewkesbury BC, Brockworth
Lib Dem 639 (45.3;+45.3), Con 343 (24.3;+6.4), Lab 237 (16.8;-15.1), Residents 193 (13.7;-27.7), [Green (0.0;-8.7)].
Majority 296. Turnout 28.8%. Lib Dem gain from Residents. Last fought 2003.
Cornwall CC, Penryn
Lib Dem 456 (38.6;+4.3), Ind 360 (30.5;+8.6), Con 207 (17.5;+6.0), Lab 94 (8.0;-12.7), Ind 63 (5.3;+5.3).
Majority 96. Turnout 24%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2005
Huntingdonshire DC, Warboys and Bury
Lib Dem 1122 (64.7;+27.9), Con 495 (28.5;-29.4), UKIP 97 (5.6;+5.6), Lab 20 (1.2;-4.0).
Majority 627. Turnout 37%. Lib Dem hold. Last fought 2006.
Brentwood BC, Pilgrims Hatch
Lib Dem 712 (50.3;+0.6), Con 651 (46.0;+1.2), Lab 53 (3.7;-1.7).
Majority 61. Turnout 31.8%. Lib Dem gain from Con. Last Fought 2006.
Northamptonshire CC, Long Buckby
Con 1541 (67.0;+2.4), Lib Dem 456 (19.8;+19.8), Lab 302 (13.1;-22.3).
Majority 1085. Turnout 36.7%. Con hold. Last fought 2005.
65 PtP.
63- well new voters’ impact on the election will be huge, but…difficult to assess beforehand.
the media have talked a lot about possible votes of suburban youth against sarkozy but new voters have been registered almost everywhere (only very rural departments had small rises, explainable by the higher average age of the population and higher level of voter registration before).
Post métro riot, the first polls did not show big shifts for the moment (except the +2 for le pen in the CSA poll). I’m not sure that copycat actions are coming: most people know this kind of event is self-defeating : the more immigrant youths are seen fighting against policemen, the more le pen will rise in the polls…
The “flag incident” is typical of Royal’s camapign : attacks sarkozy over “national identity”, sees that polls reacts better to sarkozy’s position, imagines a populist and improvised way to take back the lead on the subject (flag-waving) and finally discover that she overdid it and the public don’t buy it…
Being in her campaign team require a capacity to U-turn every two days without feeling sick…
70 You won’t be voting for her then, CfP?
68 What is this post trying to tell me?
60/61. Ta! now just have to hope for fair weather & absence of an attack of sloth. Might have to wheel the thing back tho, assuming the evening goes well…
72 I think it was just an attempt on the record for the longest post on record since PB was started, Augustus.
11. Do you think Cameron could possibly deliver his party to a coalition? major could hardly deliver his backbenchers for a single party govt.
Blair - Education, Trident etc????
Hardly deleivering his backbenhers and his majority is 3 times that of Major! I think the Tories in 92-97 probably had less rebellions than the last 5 years as well! (Last 5 years as half way through current parliament!).
I think the question should be: could the Lib Dems supporting a coalition and i doubt it they would even have great difficulty with Brown.
Peter the P I think that may still be my record when I was doing a survey of betting odds on individual marginal constituencies in 2005. Actually I learned a lot from the information but maybe others were fed up with the lengthy posts which flowed from them….
72-That of the 1500+ seats Labour are defending not a huge number have already been lost in by elections as suggested by Mark Senior in 58.
O/T
Raise your glasses to the USA please
WASHINGTON DC — The long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 AM on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly “Argumenty Nedeli.” Uglanov cites Russian military experts close to the Russian General Staff for his account.
The attack is slated to last for twelve hours, according to Uglanov, lasting from 4 AM until 4 PM local time. Friday is a holiday in Iran. In the course of the attack, code named Operation Bite, about 20 targets are marked for bombing; the list includes uranium enrichment facilities, research centers, and laboratories.
78. Link? (hope it’s true)
72- Either that ColinW collects election statistics or that as
ColinWs Housemaster posted yesterday with a message to ColinWs Mum, confirmation that the little one does his homework.
68. This post is giving you a form guide, free of spin. It shows that the Tories are definitely not getting any sort of surge in southern shire districts & UAs, despite what Tory posters here may claim.
re 50 Peter the punter.Yes lib dems generally do better in locals elections than their poll rating suggest.Their share in May 2003 was 5 points above their national poll rating.The same will be the case in 07.However we cannot ignore the fact that there has been a large swing to the Tory’s nationally since 2003.
Mark 58.Have covered that point by saying that Labour will not drop the full amount -but they could poll below 20%.Agree some of seats have changed hands but have looked at actual contests in 2003 where Conservatives stood against Labour and Lib dems.
Sean 59 I would predict 23% forLib Dems. and up to 250 losses. Agree you cant predict everything mechanically but scale of swing to Tories suggest large scale gains on the scale of Tory losses in 1995 when labour was strong in the polls and Tories vey weak.
Even if Tory gains are overstated by a couple of hundred it will not change the overall picture which is meltdown for Labour,Lib Dems going backwards for first time in many years and a Tory triumph.
78. This egregious piffle is whizzing around the blogosphere. Just Google the Russian hack’s name. Even the stupidest rumour can gain credence if people WANT to believe it.
77 Probably around 50-80 some lost at byelections and some by defection to other parties/Independents
78. Early April Fool…..
85. Post 81. seems a better candidate for that.
79
The best I can do
Rense.com: Operation Bite - April 6 Sneak Attack By US Forces On Iran Planned - Russian Military Sources Warn
This is no April Fool I can assure you
Back on topic: despite the relative differences in the poll standings, I’d expect a similar set of local election results to last year, always allowing for the larger number of seats contested. That is (looking at it from the Lib Dem perspective), some tricky campaigns against the Tories, but by no means all one-way traffic (there may be a few Richmonds this year as well - nobody’s mentioned Taunton Deane DC, which I think may be a bit tricky for the Tories). And yes, Labour are vulnerable, but not necessarily pushovers: some of the recent by-election results have suggested they’re in difficulties (but then, there haven’t been many in the mets lately, which is where the main battleground may be). In other words, the situation seems much as Sean F has described it (and less triumphant for the Tories than some others have suggested).
Anyone keeping an eye on the cricket? Thinking especially of number of sixes…
86. You’re an idiot then, aren’t you?
Apologies if this has already been posted (but I like the last line). The infamous Newsnight Locals Forecast this time last year (a warning about basing predictions on limited dat from recent by-elections IMO):
“On April 7, a report produced by the University of Plymouth for Newsnight, based on results of council by-elections in the past three months, suggested that, compared to the 2002 local elections:
Labour would increase their national vote share by 2% to 28% but that they would lose around 130 seats.
The Conservatives would suffer a decrease in the national vote share of 4% leaving them with 33% and a loss of around 95 seats.
The Liberal Democrats would increase their vote share by 2% to 29% and would gain around 190 seats. [1]
This prediction may be seen to be almost entirely inaccurate.”
question - is a Pb regular the author of this Wikipedia entry?
81 True but it is too full of facts for most Conservative posters on here to take in .
86 Yet another post from you which contributes sweet FA of any interest to this site .
90 When the forecast came out many of us who discussed it on here thought it was a bad forecast especially from that particular source .
89. Nice to see you engaging in your usual high standard of argument. Where’s your Mum to wash your mouth out with soap?
92 Could check the archives Mark but I’d be willing to bet you might have disagreed with Labour gaining and maybe with Tories losing but probably went along with Liberal gains, rather than the meagre +2 they actually got
89. What do you think will be the gain / losses of seats in the Locals for each party then Colin? I haven’t seen you put forward a prediction yet.
89.I don’t make predictions. Local elections are far too difficult to call precisely because they are local.
Suffice to say there will be overall Labour losses & LibDem & Tory gains.
94. The archives for the day after are amusing, when MS tried to spin the Lib Dems’ handful of gains in Worthing as somehow invalidating the national picture.
95-Not sure what the line up is, but anywhere with all out elections will see gains/losses magnified as the multiple member system kicks in.
Also, do LDs do better at by-elections per se? Be they Westminster or local? We have been so accustomed to LD gains at local level that a +2 (or was it +1) seat gain last year came as a shock.
The questions as someone posted earlier is, how many do the LDs have to lose to start a whispering campaign against Ming? By the same token how many losses will mean a still born Brown premiership/the trigger for a heavyweight rival to put their hat in the ring? Or is it all too late and the LDs and Labour are stuck with Ming and Brown?
O/T France New poll -TNS Sofres
first round
sarkozy 30(+2) royal 27 (+0.5) bayrou 18 (-3.5) le pen 12 (+1)
second round
sarkozy 52 royal 48 (=)
update of my poll of polls
sarkozy 28,42 royal 25,58 bayrou 19,33 le pen 12,75
The gap between royal and bayrou gets bigger.
One consequence of this week’s riot could be a stronger polarization between the two big candidates, meaning less political space for the centrist candidate.
re 88 and 90. Can any one remind us of the 2006 gains and losses by party in 2006 since there seems to be a view - which strongly disagree (partly because of the larger number of all up Distict contests ) - that 2007 is going to be repeat of last year.
Roger H
96. All in all a pretty hopeless effort Colin. You produce a long list of election results, which you claim ‘definitely’ show no signs of Conservative progress even though you engage in no statistical analysis whatever. This may of course be because you are aware that average change in vote share across all byelections since last May shows a 3-4% swing to the Tories from Labour, very much in line with the national poll picture.
Then when asked for your forecast of the likely locals results in May, you inform us that local elections ‘are far too difficult to call’. Can these be the same local elections which ‘definitely’ show no signs of Conservative progress?
We should perhaps be grateful that you have made some effort to engage in debate rather than the usual abuse, but you are going to have to do better than this.
101. Too much of a sad weirdo to post under your real identity then?
answering my comment from the previous thread, plugging thr Telegraph’s figures into the CA calculator gives
SNP 44
Lab 38
C 18
LD 17
Gr 9
SSP 1
Others 2
but it’s infuriating that they don’t give the Others split. I’ve assumed (Gr 8%, SSP 2.5%, others 2.5%) as that will be the critical factor in whether the SNP can manage a two party coalition with the LD or not.
92 Ted My original forecast for last year was in fact quite pessimistic 175 Labour and 100 LibDem losses - see pb.com comp for 2006 . I did revise it at the last minute to I think 50 LibDem gains based on all the bad press Labour was getting in the campaign .
101. I have noticed this unless you metaphorically give them a blow job about their party they are not interested! This is Labour and the Lib Dems’s (The Labour MP seems a bit more constructive at times as is red flump).
People moan about the Tories but at least they engage!
The Lib dems go on about Trident or the tax system and you give a positive and detailed answer as to why things are not as simple as there party lines seem. They don’t reply - or if they do it is ..Fu***** bol*******, personnel abuse or comments about spelling. Talk about poor!!!
Chris A Do you take seriously the LD warning that they wouldn’t support the holding of a referendum during the lifetime of the Parliament, something over which it would be difficult for the SNP to compromise, I suppose. I had thought that there might be a ’save the union’ coalition which works arithmetically but I suspect the Conservatives would be extremely reluctant to prop up such an unpopular administration. Another possibility would be for the Unionist Parties to let the SNP run a minority administration for a while with or without the Greens, hoping it would quickly discredit itself.
104 - Sorry - said I didn’t have time to check but my memory was of lots of people posting on how the Cameron honeymoon was over (poor polls as well I think), that Labour was going to do OK and that LDs were fine. Feel a bit the same way this year - that expectations of Labour disaster might be rather overhopeful, more likely bad rather than wipeouts. Depends though on the news, events seem to be conspring against.
105. You just rant in the usual Tory way….plus you’re semi-literate.
105 If your level of personal abuse was rather less then I may debate with you but until then I will just ignore your ramblings .
100 Roger H , Excluding London as there are no elections there this year approx gains last year were Con Plus 180 Lab minus 180 LibDem minus 5 . In shire districts there were circa 60 Con gains from LibDem but 40 LibDem gains from Con .
103. Chris A. It’s Green 6%, SSP 2% and Tommy Sheridan’s Solidarity 2% in the list vote (from Anthony Wells website)
How low can Zimbabwe’s life expectancy go?
Is it true that David Milliband is on Any Questions tonite?
Does the programme go out live?
108.
Very “Liberal and progressive”; unless a poster agrees with you or your fellow “Liberal and progressive” posters your Tory Ranting.
I would rather be semi-literate than so stupid as to follow a political parties line or even a political party - when they are espousing dogmatic nonsense.
Try thinking for yourself sometimes, thinking is so important and it is something you would benefit from.
It is true I can write sarky posts but that is something spontaneous and it is called wit! The only Wit you seem to possess is that which is proceeded by “NIT” in other words Nit-wit!
Q: Say there is a SNP (+/- the Greens/SSP/etc) minorit government. What if their flagship policy of a referendum or indeed the preliminary White Paper is voted down. Would they resign?
[O/T: had Tony called a Euro (currency/constitution) referendum and lost would he have resigned? My guess is not. Any previous PM would have]
Is there a facility in the Devolution Act for early elections to be called? i.e. for The Scottish Parliament to be dissolved and new elections called for before the 4 years are up? Ditto in Wales/NI? Or would a new act of Parliament be needed?
113. The only wit you display is dim-wit.
113 Mr Day , just read your abusive post no 64 again and you should be able to see why no LibDem would want to debate anything with you whatsoever but then again you probably do not have the commonsense to work it out .
115. zzzzzzzzzz yawn- so boring.
109. Try looking at some posts on the previous thread today - I don’t think i was personally offensive to RedFlump? It is a poor excuse, that you deploy because you either don’t understand the issue or your party has not disrtubuted enough dogmatic nonsense for you to have a constructive point.
116. That was written after my comments on 2 and 5 by 33 & 11.
I actually said in 2. “the Lib dems might do all right in some places”.
What is abusive about that? So you can come on here and critise Cameron but if anyone ridicules Blair, Brown or Ming your being abusive. Think you might just have the intellegence to work that out.
When I saw the title of Sean’s article this week, I thought ‘this should be a laugh - after a couple of hours the thread will have degenerated into ranting and raging by the usual suspects’. What a remarkable prediction.
Probably a fair post on the topic Sean - although the big story last year was just how random some of the results were. Lots was decided on local issues, there seemed to be an anti-incumbency movement against poorly performing local authorities. That’s surely to be welcomed; that people decide who runs local services based on how they are doing, not purely based on how the Westminster village are presenting themselves.
As a result, I’m sure all the party leaders will be able to give a speech saying how well they have done from an area they have gained on May 4th. My gut feeling is that the LDs will sneak gains - we can only benefit from the exposure of the campaign, gaffes aside.
Would we have done better with Huhne? On reflection, we probably would, although I was Chris Huhne’s harshest critic on here in January last year. He has grown into his role as Environment Spokesman, and has led the LDs in pioneering green tax policies which are the flabour of the moment - Cameron has done little of substance but follow the LD lead. He will have another chance to go for the top job one day I’m sure.
Lastly, that’s some rogues gallery for the party next month - looking forward to meeting some of you then! I hope that we will be far more courteous to each other then than we have been on this thread, and applaud those who haven’t got involved with the current mud-slinging.
LOL!
What a happen occasion, Scally. We get to agree! 
121. Peter - I’m a bigger fan of yours than you know
England did very well to reach 266-7 (I recall listening to the radio at work,they had scored c.130odd off 32 overs,so they accelerated very well indeed-Ireland are 47-2 in their 12th over,so a solid England victory in the offing:wink:
118 You simply cannot tell the difference between criticism and abuse in your posts .
51 - I believe the poster at the top of the thread comes from the 1992 election, when the LDs DID lose Ceridigeon (and Pembroke North) in a surprisingly large swing. I think Geraint Howell - the sitting MP - came third, and Plaid came from nowhere.
My opinion on the LD performance is that it will be win some, lose some. There will probably be a net loss to the Tories, but some councils will buck that trend - like Richmond last year, or Windsor and Maidenhead four years ago.
I think Labour will have real trouble getting their vote out, and could be big, big losers. I guess the Tories will get more of their vote out than in recent years, and that will be crucial.
There will be a net LD gain, I am sure. We even managed that last year (a net gain - of one!) - and the party is in slightly less turmoil now.
Is this the last year we could see large Tory gains? They will have had four good years on the trot and there will be less left for them to gain.
125,Apart from Chris Patten losing Bath(my only cheer that night),that was judged one of the biggest shocks of the 92 GE
Mark Senior- Oh dear does the nasty man make you cry?
Depends what you denfine as criticism and abuse!!!
Unless somebody agrees with the Labour or Liberal parties line then you are being abusive - don’t talk wet. Ming is a dreadful leader, as brown will be. But on the same measure IDS and Hague were - get over it!!!
I don’t think many Labour folks dress up there critisism / Abuse of the tories in flowery lace and daisy’s so why should I. I am not even a member of the tories but if you comment on some of the poor aspects of the other parties you are ignored! Shunned! Told your ranting!
127 - I don’t think Patten losing Bath was much of a surprise.