On the last thread, the number 111 is a Nelson, or “one eye, one arm, one ball” (allegedly). Australia are superstitious about 87, or 13 short of a century.
Oh dear Jack - sounds as if your ARSE will be redundant if PB is running its own polls.
This from the Telegraph:
Another spy in the constituency, a veteran of crazy Scottish by-elections in which the unpredictable so often occurs, says that although Labour should win, they are not oozing confidence: “There’s nobody about, in terms of voters, as it’s the Glasgow fair holiday. The streets are pretty empty.”
What is worrying Labour in Scotland is the memory of the Hamilton by-election in 1999, when the party was still fresh in office and not yet unpopular. Labour had a majority from the 1997 general election of 15,878 and the contest should have been a doddle.
…. Canvas returns showed no sign of an earthquake and they expected a reduced but solid majority for Bill Tynan (standing after George Robertson had left to head up Nato).
And then the night arrived. Astonishingly, news came through from Hamilton that a recount was underway. Cue wild Labour panic and then relief when they won narrowly. And the majority in a close scrape they didn’t see coming? A mere 556. When turnout is low and the Nats are well organised a lot can go wrong, or right (if you want to break up the Union).
by
The Ghost of Harry Flashman
July 23rd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
8. Interesting - I think unless a move against Brown is made very quickly then it will not affect him in the short term. Even a defeat, it is all about momentum. If a challange is to be made; it would have to be started before Monday.
The Tories would have to go full on about calling an election immediatly due to internal Labour party divisions and possibly request a recall of parliament due to Labour’s inability to govern in the national interest.
The commentariat seem convinced Labour will win. On their recent record of being out of touch with us, the great electorate out there, Labour will lose.
The same goes for their assertion that Brown will not be further damaged - because he is already so damaged - and so there will be no real effect on his staying or going.
The second view is wrong as the panic in the PLP is palpable and losing Glasgow East will make those Scottish MPs who have thought themselves safe from the terrors of the English electorate, feel as under threat as their colleagues south of the border.
If they ditched Brown in the reces surely they’d have to recall Parliament ? We’d look like a Banana republic. Is the Queen leaving the country this summer ? He’ll just stagger onto Conference. Wait till the october slew of polls resets its self after all big 3 have happend. thats the time to panic
And of course with England its also multiples of 111 - 222 and 333. I suspect they would feel the same about 444 and 555 but get there so rarely that they haven’t been able to develop a proper fear of those yet
“According to internal polling, the Scottish Nationalists have made huge inroads into Labour’s 13,500 majority from the 2005 General Election and are now less than a thousand votes behind.”
Morus, we would absolutely love it if you could come to the Scottish National Party annual national conference! They are great events. You ain’t seen nothing til you’ve seen an Alex Salmond speech to national conference
The Scottish economy grew by just over 2% in the year to March, according to the latest Gross Domestic Product figures.
John Swinney, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth, said:
“Scotland’s recent growth record, relative to that of the UK, gives cause for continued confidence in our economic performance.
“Growth in the Scottish economy has matched or surpassed that of the UK in each of the past three quarters - the first time that has happened for many years.
“Last week’s labour market statistics showed rising employment, record low unemployment and higher activity rates.”
Icarus I voted twice on the winner question to see if it were possible. The second time though I voted Tory as that won’t effect the main race. That is why there appear to be at least two lunatics who think the Tories can win in Glasgow East.
35. Leaving aside the substance of the issue, Diane Abbott is going to wind the unionists up no end by saying women from Northern Ireland have to “travel to the UK”!
35,37,39,40. Whatever happened to that nice poster “ramp alert” ?
by
The Ghost of Harry Flashman
July 23rd, 2008 at 3:27 pm
38. Alan, you know as well as I do that the SNP MPs never vote on exclusively English, Welsh or Northern Irish legislation. We respect the right, and the abilities, of other peoples to govern themselves.
43. So, you are not an avid reader of the Mail on Sunday nor the Scottish Sun then SBS. Never mind, you can catch up in today’s belated reports in the Herald.
49. Wish I could! Not sure that lil ole me weilds that much power with the high heid yins though
Are you waiting for an invite? I thought that you took the right track with applying to the US conventions. Surely such an application to the SNP annual conference, or the Con, Lab, LD or Plaid ones too for that matter, would be looked upon sympathetically?
52 - You’re right Stuart, I should be more proactive about it. Do you happen to know when it is this year?
I’d happily do nothing but go to political events from now until I retire, but I’m not sure my job will allow that, and I am pretty certain my credit card can’t manage 5 UK party conferences on top of a trip to Denver!
I cast a contrarian vote for Labour and was surprised to see that Labour is actually leading by a whisker in PB voting. I’m certainly no expert in Scottish voting but perhaps the “Labour can’t win anything” hysteria has gone a bit too far. In the most Labour of Labour hinterlands, as this constituency appears to be, there must be a solid rump of voters who would vote Labour even if the world were coming to an end and Labour were to blame for it.
58. There was a voter interviewed on the news this morning who said something to the effect of “all politicians are rubbish, so I vote Labour”, as if a vote for Labour was some kind of abstention! That’s the problem in a nutshell - in some areas of Glasgow the SNP have to work three times as hard for every vote. Fortunately, they seem fully prepared to work three times as hard, so there’s not much doubt there’ll be a considerable swing from Labour to the SNP. Whether it’ll be enough for outright victory is anyone’s guess.
Stuart, what is the SNP using as its eve of poll leaflet? Is it Gordon Brown with Maggie T, Margaret Curran and her bogus Old Serviceman or David Marhsall and his daughter Christina?
56- Why not? It hardly stands as the most outrageous prediction that man has ever made (even though I’m on the record as predicting something else). Stuart Dickson gave perfectly cogent reasons why he thought the Tories would come third in the last thread. I imagine that others have found his analysis persuasive.
71. Don’t p**s off big insurance companies. People get less for rape and GBH in NuLab’s Britain.
by
The Ghost of Harry Flashman
July 23rd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
72 - Politicalbetting divides into two groups: those in transmit mode and those in receive mode. If there were a market in such things, I would bet that those in receive mode make more money.
Umpire David Shepherd used to be very superstitious about “nelsons” (111, 222, 333 etc) and would hop around on one leg until the score moved on. It was suggested that whilst on a nelson, certain batsmen would decline the easy single just to add to the merriment!
81. All supporters of the batting team should keep at least one foot off the ground while the score is 111 or a multiple thereof. Only try it with two feet if you’re sitting down.
Ole Shep, being a cricketer of character in his time and a bloody good umpire, does the gentlemanly and scrupulously fair thing of doing it whichever side is batting.
I’m expecting the LibDem vote to collapse (to the Nationalists) and the Tories to hold steady or slightly increase. Therefore, I expect the Tories to come third.
It’s strange that on PB if an SNP supporter predicts the Tories will be 3rd in Glasgow East and beat the LibDems into 4th place everyone accepts it but if a Tory dares to suggest it, the proverbial “head is bitten off”
As long as Davena Rankin can hold her deposit I think she will have done well and anything more is a bonus. A realistic target for the Tories in Glasgow East is to secure a councillor in 2012 (assuming the council elections are delayed a year as has been suggested to take them away from the next Holyrood election).
by
The Ghost of Harry Flashman
July 23rd, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Not withstand that I am no fan of PM B Browne, I could not understand the wall to wall unanimous poor reviews, from the English, Israeli and what international media, of PM Browne recent visit to Israel.
However listening to Barak Obama looking really statesman like, now in Sederot giving unequivocal support to Israel, but also the bitter pill, however he did it from the front line of Sederot. Contrast that to PM Browne that made a fool of himself barely able to say three words in Hebrew. Then going to the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) and talking down to bedfellow that don’t disagree with him.
He does not just get it, it further proves wrong those that say in private Browne is a “big political beast” charming individual. In truth he is highly intelligent, that it where it stops, he is simply a makeweight, who has both never had nor does he understand normal life, he is no persons, person.
Not withstand that I am no fan of PM B Browne, I could not understand the wall to wall unanimous poor reviews, from the English, Israeli and what international media, of PM Browne recent visit to Israel.
However listening to Barak Obama looking really statesman like, now in Sederot giving unequivocal support to Israel, but also the bitter pill, however he did it from the front line of Sederot. Contrast that to PM Browne that made a fool of himself barely able to say three words in Hebrew. Then going to the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) and talking down to bedfellow that don’t disagree with him.
He does not just get it, it further proves wrong those that say in private Browne is a “big political beast” charming individual. In truth he is highly intelligent, that it where it stops, he is simply a makeweight, who has both never had nor does he understand normal life, he is no persons, person.
We talked about Romney yesterday, who was almost universally panned here as a lousy choice. I joined in that criticism. But Pawlenty, I believe, would be a solid choice and is perhaps as good as McCain could do. He’s young, but not so young as to make McCain look ridiculously old. He has six years of experience as governor of what has been becoming a swing state in recent presidential elections and is a solid and experienced politician with a pleasant style and presentation. I hope McCain is serious about Pawlenty and would encourage him to make this selection if I were in a position to do so. As to whether McCain is really leaning this way, though, I won’t venture a guess.
83 - Whilst I would never normally contradict Rod on stats, I believe the safest seat in the whole HoC is a Labour MP called Tom Clarke in CC&B - about the 19,500 mark I think, and the only person with a safer seat than Gerry Adams.
I don’t know by percentage - maybe then it is somewhere else, like Bootle.
Politics.co.uk, coming after MRUK in the Sunday Times, BPIX in the Mail on Sunday, UrbanLife on Monday in the METRO, PSO as per Mike’s thread the other day - why this sudden rash of rogue pollsters?
Nick Palmer, if you’re reading, a short bill wouldn’t go amiss, to prohibit the publishing of party-named voting intention polls in media outlets of over 100,000 readership unless the pollster abides by the minimum standards set by the BPC.
It would be funny if PB predicts the outcome more accurately than the delphic oracle used by 100 of the great and the good (loud cough) on another website.
Shame about the pop up Win Holiday In Florida, it took ages to kill it off.
101. While CC&B has the largest numerical majority, as you say, it is normal to rank seats by percentage majority, where CC&B ranks as 8th safest, quite some way behind Bootle.
CC&B 50.90% majority
Bootle 63.84% majority
We rank the marginals by %, so I don’t see a reason not to rank the safe seats in the same way…
I had expected him to pass up the opportunity given the utter disgust he seemed to have for the whole business of politics at the end of his term as governor, and he didn’t disappoint. Sorry Jesse fans, maybe next time.
101. Your link doesn’t work - but if it’s the poll I mentioned on a thread yesterday that gives SNP 51%, then it needs to be read carefully. It is *not* a constituency poll or poll of voting intention, it’s a poll of political pundits giving their opinions.
If you’re trying to link to a different beastie, ignore the above.
107 - Is that how they talk about safest marginals?
In no way meant as a contradiciton, because that makes a great deal of sense, but I must be honest, when I’m talking about ’safe’ or ‘toast’ I never speak in any other terms other than majority in number of votes.
I’ve always thought it was a curiosity of the American system that they talk about districts by vote share (%), whereas we talk in votes, perhaps because our constituencies are much less populous.
If I had a 10,300 majority and 41% of the vote I would feel a good deal safer than if I had a 6,100 majority and 51% of the vote, but again that could just be what I’m used to. I supose I’ve always considered vote share to be far more linked to turnout than to support level, but I can see the other side too.
Since this thread (which was supposed to be about a MORI poll), but has degenerated into Lib-Dem futures; let me say this: I believe that the LD’s will now be squeezed into near oblivion in the next 5 years. Will only get 19-20 seats in the next election, and the BNP will rise as the third party by 2015. Any takers?
120 - I’m usually pretty good with my TDF betting, but I stayed well away this year as I didn’t like either Evans or Menchov’s chances, I didn’t know who to back either.
Great stage today, Sastre did a brilliant job and his attack was brutal.
119 - Perhaps, but I think it is more due to the fact that because of size of congressional districts (let alone state-wide elections), the number of votes (and therefore majority measured in votes) can vary massively, so that metric would be fairly meaningless year to year. In the UK, smaller constituencies, with fairly static turnout means that this number varies less, even if the vote shares change drastically.
I suspect both tend towards a measure that is less volatile, so that models can be built and the data can be said to be as intelligible as possible.
125 - Ah, that makes more sense than just winner’s vote share.
If you have a full list Rod, that’d be very useful to add to the spreadsheet that I keep with all the majorities in votes! I’m happy to share it with anyone who wants it (when I get back to my other computer) as its a useful quick reference guide.
124- Morus, in the U.S., the sizes of congressional districts, while large, are also pretty similar from state to state across the nation. But it seems that in the UK, the populations of your constituencies vary widely (apparently largely to the detriment of the Tories). While comparing majorities within a constituency from election to election might be useful, it is not very useful to compare majorities from constituency to constituency given the disparities in populations, is it?
On that note, do you think the UK will ever require that all constituencies have the same, or almost the same, population in order to give some semblance of the “one person, one vote” fairness concept that is a cornerstone of modern American election law?
128. I think there is a requirement for constituencies to be roughly the same size, unless there are sound geographical reasons for that not beiong the case (ie. Isle of Wight). The other exception is Wales, which has in-built over-representation. The same used to be true of Scotland, but constituency sizes were brought into line with England for the 2005 election.
Afterall if Harperson gets the sisters to oppose a reduction of a few weeks, just think of the injustice in being denied abortions just becauase you live in NI.
128 “On that note, do you think the UK will ever require that all constituencies have the same, or almost the same, population in order to give some semblance of the “one person, one vote” fairness concept that is a cornerstone of modern American election law? ”
They do attempt to get the constituencies to be of similar size, subject to trying to maintain community and geographical cohesion.
Constituencies like the Isle of Wight (over 100,000) and the Western Isles (20,000 or so) are the exception.
The problem with majorities is in part a function of differential turnout - the middle class seats generally have higher turnout than inner city ones. It is that which works to the detriment of the Tories. Also there was a long term trend towards people leaving urban areas and moving to suburbs and hence the Electoral commission were always playing catch up.
Anthony Wells has his list of marginals on the new boundaries, although the media will use the Rallings and Thrasher figures, which are not yet online, although they promise they will be soon…
I’ve just found out a fact I wasn’t aware of. Apparently the largest recorded majority for an MP in a General Election is 36,230. Anyone know who the MP was?
128. “On that note, do you think the UK will ever require that all constituencies have the same, or almost the same, population in order to give some semblance of the “one person, one vote” fairness concept that is a cornerstone of modern American election law?”
Ha! How many more Senate seats does Florida have than Montana?
128 - 132. Surely one of the main reasons for small constituencies, and the reason they work against the Tories, is the population movement out of inner-city seats within the lifetime of a Parliament.
I went to Hugh Baird College in Bootle for 2 years. I recall being the only Tory in my A-level Sociology class of around 25. The other 24 were quite cool about it, they thought is was quaint rather than offensive!
I also recall crossing a picket line at the college when some of the students went on strick over some nonsense or other.
138. Yes, that thought occurred to me as well! And when has ‘one person, one vote’ ever applied to anyone for ANY congressional elections in Washington DC?
100. Pawlenty is much better on paper than he is on TV. The guy comes over as a total creep. McCain desperately needs someone with charisma. Mark Sanford would be excellent, although he shot himself in the foot on that Blitzer interview. Rob Portman is also much better than Pawlenty. And then there’s Charlie Crist, if the GOP can get over the gay issue.
Largest majority
The largest majority received by an individual is also Sir Cooper Rawson, reelected with a majority of 62253 at Brighton in 1931. The largest majority received by a woman is 38823 by the Countess of Iveagh elected MP for Southend in 1931.
137. That was John Major’s majority in Huntingdon in 1992.
However, it was not the largest.
Sir Cooper Rawson had a majority of 62,253 at Brighton in 1931, although it was a double member seat, while George Currie had a 50,734 majority at North Down in 1959.
Major’s 36,230 majority may be the highest for a mainland, single-member constituency…
138- I was talking about the House of Representatives. The same principle of one person, one vote is also applied in state house and senate chambers throughout the country. The Senate is a result of a Constitutional compromise. I don’t see why, though, there should be such disparity in the UK between constituencies in terms of population.
Bootle is going to get some bits of the present Crosby constituency next time around is it not? Even parts like Waterloo and Litherland ar much less solid Labour than Bootle itself, so it may not be Labour’s safest seat next time around.
From Scotsman (I think) “Aside from this, there were some good soundbites, the best of which was uttered by the Liberal Democrat candidate, Ian Robertson. He said: “If this is a two-horse race, then both horses should be put down and we should start again.”
First, Crist is now engaged to a woman, so if he is indeed gay, the GOP is buying itself more problems than he can handle by placing him on a presidential ticket.
But really, do you think the GOP would choose to use this year’s presidential ticket as the perfect place to deal with and “get over” the gay issue?
Seaforth is rock-solid Labour, and the bits of Waterloo/Crosby going into Bootle probably won’t make a huge difference, but it’s conceivable it could lose the top spot…
152. “I don’t see why, though, there should be such disparity in the UK between constituencies in terms of population”
I really don’t think there is, except for the largely unavoidable reasons that people have already given. And not only is the US Senate not representative, but the electoral college for presidential elections also gives greater weight to votes from smaller states (apart from its inherent general silliness as a system in any case).
In my view the only true way of making ‘one person, one vote’ a meaningful concept in a praliamentary system is to introduce proportional representation.
152. I do appreciate the situation of the Senate compromise, but I still think its a disgrace to democracy. UK constituencies are generally designed to be the same size based on the previous census, but obviously a lot of migration can happen over a decade. Also places like Wales and Scotland have historically got more seats than they deserve as part of a similar sort of compromise (though nowhere near as extreme as the Senate). The UK also has a genuinely independent electoral commission, meaning we don’t have anywhere near as much gerrymandering as many other countries. (There was some in Northern Ireland for a while, but I believe this has been stopped.)
160- Proportional representation is indeed the best way to do it because of the marginalization of minority voices that inevitably occurs in first past the post systems, not to mention the gerrymandering. But at least one person, one vote is a step in the right direction. The District of Columbia also has cogent historical reasons for its lack of voting representation in the House or Senate, as does the existence of the electoral college. Your points are valid exceptions, but there is still a rule to which they are exceptions.
131- jackW- these US Rasmussen polls are all over the place.
By the way will your ARSE make a spectacular viewing tomorrow. I am getting all excited and trembly at the prospect of such an exhibition. If so, what time?
BTW- when we are discussing your ARSE why do I always get images of Mr Burns from the Simpsons in my head?
161- It is true that gerrymandering of House seats is virtually uncontrolled in the U.S. except in those states that have created independent redistricting commissions. It isn’t easy to take the politics out of politics.
156. I mean get over the idea that the bloke might be gay, which seems to be the only reason not to pick Crist. I’m not expecting the fundamentalist right to come to terms with modern biology yet. Heck, they’re still having problems with the Origin of Species (1859!).
166- I’m not making an “our system is better than your system argument,” although this seems to be what the discussion is becoming. I’m merely asking about population discrepancies between constituencies. Where is the love for those poor folks marooned on the Isle of Wight!
169- What about picking a guy who might be gay but is going through the motions of marrying a woman anyway? I’m not saying he’s gay, but if he is, this is a world of trouble.
170. But splitting the IOW in two would be no better, since both new seats would be way under quota…
It’s only the 4 island seats that cause real apportionment problems in the UK.
172- The reform you speak of addresses an area that is constitutionally left to state control, so it could only be addressed at the federal level by constitutional amendment. That process is one in which the President has no say, so Obama would be poorly placed to attempt to advance such a reform. He could lobby for it, but would have no real role in making it happen. It would take two-thirds of the Senate and House, as well as three-fourths of the state legislatures, to enact such a reform. It won’t happen. The best hope is that more states will gradually enact independent redistricting by commission.
Stars & Stripes - I take much less issue than most (including Robert Dahl) over the lack of proportionality in both the Senate and (as a consequence) the Electoral College. I agree that the only fair comparison is the House of Representatives.
But even there, there is variation of a similar ilk to in the UK.
There is still a stipulation that each state must have at least one Congressman (At-large), and that Congress has fixed the number of Representatives at 435.
So Wyoming At-large has only 493,782 citizens (2000 census), whereas Montana’s At-Large (they just missed a second Congressman) has 902,195 citizens.
are we to comment here or just vote?
two new Glasgow East stories
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/iain_martin/blog/2008/07/23/glasgow_east_labour_edgy_on_eve_of_byelection
and
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/852711/the-latest-from-glasgow-east.thtml
Ave it is clearly online - the Tories have received one vote to win Glasgow East!
Interesting a Labour win and the Tories in third according to the recieved wisdom so far!
On the last thread, the number 111 is a Nelson, or “one eye, one arm, one ball” (allegedly). Australia are superstitious about 87, or 13 short of a century.
5 - Labour and SNP dead heat!
Latest Rasmussen Tracker :
McCain 45% .. Obama 47%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
I wonder which is more politically damaging to GB personally? A win by less than a couple of hundred votes or a defeat?
Very low turnout owing to half the skint voters blaming the British government and the other half blaming the Scottish government.
Oh dear Jack - sounds as if your ARSE will be redundant if PB is running its own polls.
This from the Telegraph:
Another spy in the constituency, a veteran of crazy Scottish by-elections in which the unpredictable so often occurs, says that although Labour should win, they are not oozing confidence: “There’s nobody about, in terms of voters, as it’s the Glasgow fair holiday. The streets are pretty empty.”
What is worrying Labour in Scotland is the memory of the Hamilton by-election in 1999, when the party was still fresh in office and not yet unpopular. Labour had a majority from the 1997 general election of 15,878 and the contest should have been a doddle.
…. Canvas returns showed no sign of an earthquake and they expected a reduced but solid majority for Bill Tynan (standing after George Robertson had left to head up Nato).
And then the night arrived. Astonishingly, news came through from Hamilton that a recount was underway. Cue wild Labour panic and then relief when they won narrowly. And the majority in a close scrape they didn’t see coming? A mere 556. When turnout is low and the Nats are well organised a lot can go wrong, or right (if you want to break up the Union).
10 Icarus. Beware of second rate ARSE’s !!
Meanwhile ….
New Monmouth University Poll for New Jersey :
McCain 28% .. Obama 42%
http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080722/NEWS/807220373
SNP into 3.2 on Betfair from 3.7 earlier..
8. Interesting - I think unless a move against Brown is made very quickly then it will not affect him in the short term. Even a defeat, it is all about momentum. If a challange is to be made; it would have to be started before Monday.
The Tories would have to go full on about calling an election immediatly due to internal Labour party divisions and possibly request a recall of parliament due to Labour’s inability to govern in the national interest.
The commentariat seem convinced Labour will win. On their recent record of being out of touch with us, the great electorate out there, Labour will lose.
The same goes for their assertion that Brown will not be further damaged - because he is already so damaged - and so there will be no real effect on his staying or going.
The second view is wrong as the panic in the PLP is palpable and losing Glasgow East will make those Scottish MPs who have thought themselves safe from the terrors of the English electorate, feel as under threat as their colleagues south of the border.
SNP closing fast on Mike’s poll. Can we bet on the result of Mike’s poll?
As you can vote as many times as you like in Mike’s poll its accuracy may be dubious.
BBC Weather - Glasgow tomorrow:
“Thursday’s predominant weather is forecast to be heavy showers.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/5day.shtml?id=1946
Met Office - Glasgow tomorrow:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/uk/st/glasgow_forecast_weather.html
re 16. Same goes for elections in Birmingham I recall
18.
17. Oh dear - turnout <25% ?
It’s tighter than a gnat’s chuff.
19. Nope, it’ll not be quite that bad. Around about the high 20’s or low 30’s?
18 Mike S but will you end up in court? Hope not.
What’s the turnout going to be in Mike’s poll? How many regulars and how many lurkers will bother to vote?
If they ditched Brown in the reces surely they’d have to recall Parliament ? We’d look like a Banana republic. Is the Queen leaving the country this summer ? He’ll just stagger onto Conference. Wait till the october slew of polls resets its self after all big 3 have happend. thats the time to panic
I will stick to 30+% turnout but with a high cull of ballots rejected by the returning officer.
Mike S you might be quoting Glasgow East after tomorrow, after all Birmingham is a little passe now, isn’t it?
Vote soon, vote often and vote Curran. But which one?
5
And of course with England its also multiples of 111 - 222 and 333. I suspect they would feel the same about 444 and 555 but get there so rarely that they haven’t been able to develop a proper fear of those yet
24. I wonder if the Motherwell & Wishaw by-election will be held before or after the Labour Conference?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/2447945/Glasgow-East-by-election-Labour-mounts-canvassing-frenzy.html
“According to internal polling, the Scottish Nationalists have made huge inroads into Labour’s 13,500 majority from the 2005 General Election and are now less than a thousand votes behind.”
That seems to match what others have been saying.
27. I’ve always wondered what the third ‘1′ was for (I guessed correctly though) - TMS were always too polite to say.
Morus’ poll over at Daily Kos. Result so far:
Labour to win with a majority of over 5000
0% 0 votes
Labour to win with a majority of between 2000 and 4999
6% 3 votes
Labour to win with a majority of less than 500
6% 3 votes
SNP to win with a majority of less than 500
26% 13 votes
SNP to win with a majority of between 500 and 1999
22% 11 votes
SNP to win with a majority of 2000 or more
8% 4 votes
http://morus.dailykos.com/
Morus, we would absolutely love it if you could come to the Scottish National Party annual national conference! They are great events. You ain’t seen nothing til you’ve seen an Alex Salmond speech to national conference
Oops, missed one:
Labour to win with a majority of between 500 and 1999
16% 8 votes
Fraser nelson hedging his bets over on coffee house.
SNP now ahead and near as damn it 200 votes - I trust no pbers have voted more than once!!!
“MPs have tabled an amendment to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill to give women in Northern Ireland the same abortion rights as in Britain.
The 1967 Abortion Act was never enacted in Northern Ireland.
The amendment was tabled on the last day of the parliamentary session and MPs will not debate the amendment until the Autumn at the earliest.
All the Northern Ireland parties with MPs at Westminster oppose moves to extend abortion rights.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7520856.stm
34. Obviously I don’t want to vote more than once.Its just that because veryone else is its my responsibility to ensure balance. you understand ?
The Scottish economy grew by just over 2% in the year to March, according to the latest Gross Domestic Product figures.
John Swinney, Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth, said:
“Scotland’s recent growth record, relative to that of the UK, gives cause for continued confidence in our economic performance.
“Growth in the Scottish economy has matched or surpassed that of the UK in each of the past three quarters - the first time that has happened for many years.
“Last week’s labour market statistics showed rising employment, record low unemployment and higher activity rates.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7521179.stm
35. Presumably SNP MPs will be abstaining on that amendment, Stuart?
The BBC is continuing to peddle its Labourite myths:
“The by-election was triggered by the resignation of the sitting Labour MP, David Marshall, on health grounds.”
Aye right!
forgot the link
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7520111.stm
Icarus I voted twice on the winner question to see if it were possible. The second time though I voted Tory as that won’t effect the main race. That is why there appear to be at least two lunatics who think the Tories can win in Glasgow East.
I wish.
35. Leaving aside the substance of the issue, Diane Abbott is going to wind the unionists up no end by saying women from Northern Ireland have to “travel to the UK”!
39 - so what is it if not health grounds?
41. At this rate turn-out will be higher in the pb poll than in the election itself!
35,37,39,40. Whatever happened to that nice poster “ramp alert” ?
38. Alan, you know as well as I do that the SNP MPs never vote on exclusively English, Welsh or Northern Irish legislation. We respect the right, and the abilities, of other peoples to govern themselves.
43. *Alleged* expense irregularities!
43. So, you are not an avid reader of the Mail on Sunday nor the Scottish Sun then SBS. Never mind, you can catch up in today’s belated reports in the Herald.
31 - If you can sort out a pass Stuart, I might well come along - thanks for the tip!
Witan - If you saw a big red button with a sign - “Under no circumstances press this button” - I am sure you would press it!
Went for Labour then Tory.
Wouldn’t be surprised if Lib Dems came third. Would be more shocked if the SNP won.
Reasoning for a Tory third is that Lib Dem voters are more likely to slide along to their fellow lefties, I think.
May be close but I still think Labour will win this, perhaps by a larger margin than expected (ie a couple of thousand).
49. Wish I could! Not sure that lil ole me weilds that much power with the high heid yins though
Are you waiting for an invite? I thought that you took the right track with applying to the US conventions. Surely such an application to the SNP annual conference, or the Con, Lab, LD or Plaid ones too for that matter, would be looked upon sympathetically?
48 - thanks!
Over 250 voting visitors in an hour? Must be the most popular blog in the hemisphere.
One thing I forgot to mention about the by-election debate last night is that Margaret Curran even resorted to that vintage New Labour cliché “a lot done, a lot still to do” (© Alistair Campbell 2001).
Can’t believe people seriously think the Tories are going to come third here.
52 - You’re right Stuart, I should be more proactive about it. Do you happen to know when it is this year?
I’d happily do nothing but go to political events from now until I retire, but I’m not sure my job will allow that, and I am pretty certain my credit card can’t manage 5 UK party conferences on top of a trip to Denver!
I cast a contrarian vote for Labour and was surprised to see that Labour is actually leading by a whisker in PB voting. I’m certainly no expert in Scottish voting but perhaps the “Labour can’t win anything” hysteria has gone a bit too far. In the most Labour of Labour hinterlands, as this constituency appears to be, there must be a solid rump of voters who would vote Labour even if the world were coming to an end and Labour were to blame for it.
BTW, expect an unusually high vote for the Socialists, the candidate has the same surname as the Labour one. No doubt some idiots will get it wrong.
Betfair odds a bit stuck - can’t be much movement from the mainstream bookies.
Perhaps some Labour supporters are Socialists!
61. Pffft, yeah right.
59. Yes that would be funny if the SNP won by a margin that was within the Socialist candidates vote! Labour would go berserk!
I always remember the Litral Democrat in some Euro-elections depriving the LD’s of a Euro-seat in 1994!
Only about £4,500 matched today on Betfair. Am counting on the odds narrowing - I am on the SNP at 2.8.
58. There was a voter interviewed on the news this morning who said something to the effect of “all politicians are rubbish, so I vote Labour”, as if a vote for Labour was some kind of abstention! That’s the problem in a nutshell - in some areas of Glasgow the SNP have to work three times as hard for every vote. Fortunately, they seem fully prepared to work three times as hard, so there’s not much doubt there’ll be a considerable swing from Labour to the SNP. Whether it’ll be enough for outright victory is anyone’s guess.
46. That’s what I thought, Stuart - just wondered why you bothered posting about it.
56. Why not? They were third in Baillieston in the Scottish Elections in 2007 (though actually there were more ‘Uncertain or Blank’ votes).
59. Depends what you mean by ‘wrong’.
Apparently the SSP are delivering leaflets saying ‘Vote for the left Curran not the right Curran!’
Stuart, what is the SNP using as its eve of poll leaflet? Is it Gordon Brown with Maggie T, Margaret Curran and her bogus Old Serviceman or David Marhsall and his daughter Christina?
56- Why not? It hardly stands as the most outrageous prediction that man has ever made (even though I’m on the record as predicting something else). Stuart Dickson gave perfectly cogent reasons why he thought the Tories would come third in the last thread. I imagine that others have found his analysis persuasive.
O/T Tour d France - have these two any chance of staying away ?
63 - I believe it gifted the seat to that man of integrity in both financial and moral spheres, Giles Chichester MEP. So that’s nice.
Canoe man and wife get 6 years each. What good will prison do. They pinched less than some MPs!
“I imagine that others have found his analysis persuasive.” A pb first!!!
Interesting piece in the Torygraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/2447945/Glasgow-East-by-election-Labour-mounts-canvassing-frenzy.html
71 per year!
71. Don’t p**s off big insurance companies. People get less for rape and GBH in NuLab’s Britain.
72 - Politicalbetting divides into two groups: those in transmit mode and those in receive mode. If there were a market in such things, I would bet that those in receive mode make more money.
Glasgow east ladbrokes change
2/7 Labour (from 4/11)
9/4 SNP (from 15/8)
77. All the money for Labour then ??
Can you tell where the money is coming from Shadsy - I mean geographically. Is there much business in the Glasgow shops?
Umpire David Shepherd used to be very superstitious about “nelsons” (111, 222, 333 etc) and would hop around on one leg until the score moved on. It was suggested that whilst on a nelson, certain batsmen would decline the easy single just to add to the merriment!
80. I never understood that superstition. Isn’t it the batsmen who are supposed to be worried by the nelson and not the umpire?
Coffee House speculates on further humiliations that may be heaped on our Glorious Leader:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/852371/will-brown-lose-the-obama-pr-war.thtml
If Glasgow East is only the 25th safest seat for Labour, what’s the safest?
81. All supporters of the batting team should keep at least one foot off the ground while the score is 111 or a multiple thereof. Only try it with two feet if you’re sitting down.
Ole Shep, being a cricketer of character in his time and a bloody good umpire, does the gentlemanly and scrupulously fair thing of doing it whichever side is batting.
I’m expecting the LibDem vote to collapse (to the Nationalists) and the Tories to hold steady or slightly increase. Therefore, I expect the Tories to come third.
Is there anywhere I can bet on a LD lost deposit?
83. Bootle
83. Knowsley or Broxtowe.
83-I’m sure some Labour MP’s would say that there isn’t a safe seat anymore!
78…i should read nothing into those price changes.
Wont Tory voters (Sid and Doris McBonkers) think that their job is to defeat the Labour party and therefore vote Nationalist?
86
Is there such a thing as a SAFE Labout seat???.
91…the Troll’s perhaps?
69- fascinating stage. it looks like Sastre can make it.
It’s strange that on PB if an SNP supporter predicts the Tories will be 3rd in Glasgow East and beat the LibDems into 4th place everyone accepts it but if a Tory dares to suggest it, the proverbial “head is bitten off”
As long as Davena Rankin can hold her deposit I think she will have done well and anything more is a bonus. A realistic target for the Tories in Glasgow East is to secure a councillor in 2012 (assuming the council elections are delayed a year as has been suggested to take them away from the next Holyrood election).
83/87. Bootle has been Labour’s safest seat at each of the past 3 elections…
93. And take the yellow jersey - amazing.
Not withstand that I am no fan of PM B Browne, I could not understand the wall to wall unanimous poor reviews, from the English, Israeli and what international media, of PM Browne recent visit to Israel.
However listening to Barak Obama looking really statesman like, now in Sederot giving unequivocal support to Israel, but also the bitter pill, however he did it from the front line of Sederot. Contrast that to PM Browne that made a fool of himself barely able to say three words in Hebrew. Then going to the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) and talking down to bedfellow that don’t disagree with him.
He does not just get it, it further proves wrong those that say in private Browne is a “big political beast” charming individual. In truth he is highly intelligent, that it where it stops, he is simply a makeweight, who has both never had nor does he understand normal life, he is no persons, person.
Not withstand that I am no fan of PM B Browne, I could not understand the wall to wall unanimous poor reviews, from the English, Israeli and what international media, of PM Browne recent visit to Israel.
However listening to Barak Obama looking really statesman like, now in Sederot giving unequivocal support to Israel, but also the bitter pill, however he did it from the front line of Sederot. Contrast that to PM Browne that made a fool of himself barely able to say three words in Hebrew. Then going to the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) and talking down to bedfellow that don’t disagree with him.
He does not just get it, it further proves wrong those that say in private Browne is a “big political beast” charming individual. In truth he is highly intelligent, that it where it stops, he is simply a makeweight, who has both never had nor does he understand normal life, he is no persons, person.
95. Amazing to think that my fiend and neighbour, the late Simon Mahon won it by only 1438 votes in 1955!
S.Mahon.Labour……..19,020..51.96%
H.Jones.Conservative..17,582..48.04%
Electorate: 48,381; Turnout: 75.65%;
Majority: 1,438 (3.93%)
Here is an article mentioning some buzz around Pawlenty as a McCain VP possibility:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/07/23/is-mccain-inching-towards-pawlenty/
We talked about Romney yesterday, who was almost universally panned here as a lousy choice. I joined in that criticism. But Pawlenty, I believe, would be a solid choice and is perhaps as good as McCain could do. He’s young, but not so young as to make McCain look ridiculously old. He has six years of experience as governor of what has been becoming a swing state in recent presidential elections and is a solid and experienced politician with a pleasant style and presentation. I hope McCain is serious about Pawlenty and would encourage him to make this selection if I were in a position to do so. As to whether McCain is really leaning this way, though, I won’t venture a guess.
83 - Whilst I would never normally contradict Rod on stats, I believe the safest seat in the whole HoC is a Labour MP called Tom Clarke in CC&B - about the 19,500 mark I think, and the only person with a safer seat than Gerry Adams.
I don’t know by percentage - maybe then it is somewhere else, like Bootle.
POLLING Anyone else seen this:
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/opinion-former-index/legal-and-constitutional/politics-co-uk-poll-spells-trouble-labour-1232929.htm
Politics.co.uk, coming after MRUK in the Sunday Times, BPIX in the Mail on Sunday, UrbanLife on Monday in the METRO, PSO as per Mike’s thread the other day - why this sudden rash of rogue pollsters?
Nick Palmer, if you’re reading, a short bill wouldn’t go amiss, to prohibit the publishing of party-named voting intention polls in media outlets of over 100,000 readership unless the pollster abides by the minimum standards set by the BPC.
96- But he needs to do more to have a chance to balance Evans superirity in saturday’s time travel.
It would be funny if PB predicts the outcome more accurately than the delphic oracle used by 100 of the great and the good (loud cough) on another website.
Shame about the pop up Win Holiday In Florida, it took ages to kill it off.
102. He’s going away from the YJ with each km.
Sastre is going further ahead - now over 2 mins.
97/98…Obama is a statesman. Brown leads the New Labour coalition of misfits….enough said.
101. While CC&B has the largest numerical majority, as you say, it is normal to rank seats by percentage majority, where CC&B ranks as 8th safest, quite some way behind Bootle.
CC&B 50.90% majority
Bootle 63.84% majority
We rank the marginals by %, so I don’t see a reason not to rank the safe seats in the same way…
106. More people have already voted for Obama than Brown.
Speaking of Minnesota politicians, maybe you Jesse Ventura fans didn’t see that he opted to not run for the Senate seat there:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/07/jesse-ventura-w.html
I had expected him to pass up the opportunity given the utter disgust he seemed to have for the whole business of politics at the end of his term as governor, and he didn’t disappoint. Sorry Jesse fans, maybe next time.
I’ve voted for the SNP to win and the Lib-Dems to come third.
Time will tell.
Forgive my ignorance but what is CC&B?
Presumably the massive changes in Bootle are due to population shifts, housing clearances , etc.
101. Your link doesn’t work - but if it’s the poll I mentioned on a thread yesterday that gives SNP 51%, then it needs to be read carefully. It is *not* a constituency poll or poll of voting intention, it’s a poll of political pundits giving their opinions.
If you’re trying to link to a different beastie, ignore the above.
A classic quote from Alex Salmond and one which Fridays national press will surely use as headlines
“Glasgow East can be the epicentre of a political earthquake.
“There is already a tremor taking place across the constituency – tomorrow we could feel the full force of a political earthquake.”
110 snap
111. Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill
111. No, they just hate Tories…
111 Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill
107 - Is that how they talk about safest marginals?
In no way meant as a contradiciton, because that makes a great deal of sense, but I must be honest, when I’m talking about ’safe’ or ‘toast’ I never speak in any other terms other than majority in number of votes.
I’ve always thought it was a curiosity of the American system that they talk about districts by vote share (%), whereas we talk in votes, perhaps because our constituencies are much less populous.
If I had a 10,300 majority and 41% of the vote I would feel a good deal safer than if I had a 6,100 majority and 51% of the vote, but again that could just be what I’m used to. I supose I’ve always considered vote share to be far more linked to turnout than to support level, but I can see the other side too.
Interesting.
118 - “I’ve always thought it was a curiosity of the American system that they talk about districts by vote share (%), whereas we talk in votes”
Is that because they are a much more two-party system than us?
104- Sastre is in yellow, but I doubt he can keep within 1mn30sec of Evans in the time trial. We’ll see, but I would bet everything on EVans now!
Since this thread (which was supposed to be about a MORI poll), but has degenerated into Lib-Dem futures; let me say this: I believe that the LD’s will now be squeezed into near oblivion in the next 5 years. Will only get 19-20 seats in the next election, and the BNP will rise as the third party by 2015. Any takers?
119- That seems reasonable.
120 - I’m usually pretty good with my TDF betting, but I stayed well away this year as I didn’t like either Evans or Menchov’s chances, I didn’t know who to back either.
Great stage today, Sastre did a brilliant job and his attack was brutal.
119 - Perhaps, but I think it is more due to the fact that because of size of congressional districts (let alone state-wide elections), the number of votes (and therefore majority measured in votes) can vary massively, so that metric would be fairly meaningless year to year. In the UK, smaller constituencies, with fairly static turnout means that this number varies less, even if the vote shares change drastically.
I suspect both tend towards a measure that is less volatile, so that models can be built and the data can be said to be as intelligible as possible.
118. It’s always been given in terms of % majority, which (kind of) standardizes marginality irrespective of constituency size or turnout.
It’s a bit of a simplification, but has worked pretty well for 60+ years as a forecasting tool…
Comment from our resident Jock, over a lager in the taverna:
“When the bloody Tories were in power, Glasgow East wasn’t a fit place for animals to live. Now it is.”
125 - Ah, that makes more sense than just winner’s vote share.
If you have a full list Rod, that’d be very useful to add to the spreadsheet that I keep with all the majorities in votes! I’m happy to share it with anyone who wants it (when I get back to my other computer) as its a useful quick reference guide.
124- Morus, in the U.S., the sizes of congressional districts, while large, are also pretty similar from state to state across the nation. But it seems that in the UK, the populations of your constituencies vary widely (apparently largely to the detriment of the Tories). While comparing majorities within a constituency from election to election might be useful, it is not very useful to compare majorities from constituency to constituency given the disparities in populations, is it?
On that note, do you think the UK will ever require that all constituencies have the same, or almost the same, population in order to give some semblance of the “one person, one vote” fairness concept that is a cornerstone of modern American election law?
Jindal ruled himself out today
Isaby reports that Margaret Curran refuses to move in to the constiuency if elected
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/jonathan_isaby/blog/2008/07/23/another_reason_for_labour_edginess_in_glasgow_east
When can the dancing in the streets begin, or what time is the declaration in Glasgow East?
New Rasmussen poll for Florida :
McCain 47% .. Obama 49%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/florida/election_2008_florida_presidential_election
128. I think there is a requirement for constituencies to be roughly the same size, unless there are sound geographical reasons for that not beiong the case (ie. Isle of Wight). The other exception is Wales, which has in-built over-representation. The same used to be true of Scotland, but constituency sizes were brought into line with England for the 2005 election.
Advance notice of DUP split with Labour if the Labour feminista drive this amendment through.
http://tinyurl.com/6cx4f5
Afterall if Harperson gets the sisters to oppose a reduction of a few weeks, just think of the injustice in being denied abortions just becauase you live in NI.
128 “On that note, do you think the UK will ever require that all constituencies have the same, or almost the same, population in order to give some semblance of the “one person, one vote” fairness concept that is a cornerstone of modern American election law? ”
They do attempt to get the constituencies to be of similar size, subject to trying to maintain community and geographical cohesion.
Constituencies like the Isle of Wight (over 100,000) and the Western Isles (20,000 or so) are the exception.
The problem with majorities is in part a function of differential turnout - the middle class seats generally have higher turnout than inner city ones. It is that which works to the detriment of the Tories. Also there was a long term trend towards people leaving urban areas and moving to suburbs and hence the Electoral commission were always playing catch up.
Keele University keeps a good list of all elections [although these are of course the old boundaries]
http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/ge05/maj.htm
Anthony Wells has his list of marginals on the new boundaries, although the media will use the Rallings and Thrasher figures, which are not yet online, although they promise they will be soon…
New PPP poll for Virginia :
McCain 44% .. Obama 46%
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Virginia_722.pdf
I’ve just found out a fact I wasn’t aware of. Apparently the largest recorded majority for an MP in a General Election is 36,230. Anyone know who the MP was?
128. “On that note, do you think the UK will ever require that all constituencies have the same, or almost the same, population in order to give some semblance of the “one person, one vote” fairness concept that is a cornerstone of modern American election law?”
Ha! How many more Senate seats does Florida have than Montana?
128 - 132. Surely one of the main reasons for small constituencies, and the reason they work against the Tories, is the population movement out of inner-city seats within the lifetime of a Parliament.
111 / 116
I went to Hugh Baird College in Bootle for 2 years. I recall being the only Tory in my A-level Sociology class of around 25. The other 24 were quite cool about it, they thought is was quaint rather than offensive!
I also recall crossing a picket line at the college when some of the students went on strick over some nonsense or other.
138. Yes, that thought occurred to me as well! And when has ‘one person, one vote’ ever applied to anyone for ANY congressional elections in Washington DC?
137 - John Major. Do I win the cuddly toy?
137. I’d guess a NI Unionist when there were only 12 seats in NI?
137 Frank Booth - I think it was Sir Cooper Rawson, who was MP for Brighton many years ago. I don’t recall the year though
100. Pawlenty is much better on paper than he is on TV. The guy comes over as a total creep. McCain desperately needs someone with charisma. Mark Sanford would be excellent, although he shot himself in the foot on that Blitzer interview. Rob Portman is also much better than Pawlenty. And then there’s Charlie Crist, if the GOP can get over the gay issue.
137 — John Major had a big ‘un.
137 John Major in Huntingdon in 1992?
137 / 142 / 143
from Wikipedia (so it must be true!):
Largest majority
The largest majority received by an individual is also Sir Cooper Rawson, reelected with a majority of 62253 at Brighton in 1931. The largest majority received by a woman is 38823 by the Countess of Iveagh elected MP for Southend in 1931.
139. Yes, and a general migration from the North to the home counties.
137. That was John Major’s majority in Huntingdon in 1992.
However, it was not the largest.
Sir Cooper Rawson had a majority of 62,253 at Brighton in 1931, although it was a double member seat, while George Currie had a 50,734 majority at North Down in 1959.
Major’s 36,230 majority may be the highest for a mainland, single-member constituency…
137 - UK or just GB? The Ulster Unionists used to rack up majorities in the 50,000 range in the 1950s.
138- I was talking about the House of Representatives. The same principle of one person, one vote is also applied in state house and senate chambers throughout the country. The Senate is a result of a Constitutional compromise. I don’t see why, though, there should be such disparity in the UK between constituencies in terms of population.
@Rod 116.
Bootle is going to get some bits of the present Crosby constituency next time around is it not? Even parts like Waterloo and Litherland ar much less solid Labour than Bootle itself, so it may not be Labour’s safest seat next time around.
129. Was it a denial denial though?
From Scotsman (I think) “Aside from this, there were some good soundbites, the best of which was uttered by the Liberal Democrat candidate, Ian Robertson. He said: “If this is a two-horse race, then both horses should be put down and we should start again.”
145- “If the GOP can get over the gay issue.”
First, Crist is now engaged to a woman, so if he is indeed gay, the GOP is buying itself more problems than he can handle by placing him on a presidential ticket.
But really, do you think the GOP would choose to use this year’s presidential ticket as the perfect place to deal with and “get over” the gay issue?
573 votes cast - allowing for SBS and a few other multi voters that will be over 500 people on here this afternoon.
9 people think the Tories will win, and 2 for the LD’s.
Mike- didn’t know that you had put a pbCOM link into Broadmoor.
153. Litherland is already in Bootle.
Seaforth is rock-solid Labour, and the bits of Waterloo/Crosby going into Bootle probably won’t make a huge difference, but it’s conceivable it could lose the top spot…
152. “I don’t see why, though, there should be such disparity in the UK between constituencies in terms of population”
I really don’t think there is, except for the largely unavoidable reasons that people have already given. And not only is the US Senate not representative, but the electoral college for presidential elections also gives greater weight to votes from smaller states (apart from its inherent general silliness as a system in any case).
In my view the only true way of making ‘one person, one vote’ a meaningful concept in a praliamentary system is to introduce proportional representation.
152. I do appreciate the situation of the Senate compromise, but I still think its a disgrace to democracy. UK constituencies are generally designed to be the same size based on the previous census, but obviously a lot of migration can happen over a decade. Also places like Wales and Scotland have historically got more seats than they deserve as part of a similar sort of compromise (though nowhere near as extreme as the Senate). The UK also has a genuinely independent electoral commission, meaning we don’t have anywhere near as much gerrymandering as many other countries. (There was some in Northern Ireland for a while, but I believe this has been stopped.)
151. I must just have been thinking of the mainland then.
158 tyson. Only two Lib Dems in Broadmoor …. Madness !!!!!
160- Proportional representation is indeed the best way to do it because of the marginalization of minority voices that inevitably occurs in first past the post systems, not to mention the gerrymandering. But at least one person, one vote is a step in the right direction. The District of Columbia also has cogent historical reasons for its lack of voting representation in the House or Senate, as does the existence of the electoral college. Your points are valid exceptions, but there is still a rule to which they are exceptions.
131- jackW- these US Rasmussen polls are all over the place.
By the way will your ARSE make a spectacular viewing tomorrow. I am getting all excited and trembly at the prospect of such an exhibition. If so, what time?
BTW- when we are discussing your ARSE why do I always get images of Mr Burns from the Simpsons in my head?
152 - “one person , one vote” it may be, but squeezed into partisanly-gerrymandered constituencies - I’ll take our Boundary Commission, thanks!
OK, who’s the 2% of you who think the Tories are going to win tomorrow?!
I’ll put my money on Nessie swimming up the Clyde tomorrow morning instead!
161- It is true that gerrymandering of House seats is virtually uncontrolled in the U.S. except in those states that have created independent redistricting commissions. It isn’t easy to take the politics out of politics.
156. I mean get over the idea that the bloke might be gay, which seems to be the only reason not to pick Crist. I’m not expecting the fundamentalist right to come to terms with modern biology yet. Heck, they’re still having problems with the Origin of Species (1859!).
166- I’m not making an “our system is better than your system argument,” although this seems to be what the discussion is becoming. I’m merely asking about population discrepancies between constituencies. Where is the love for those poor folks marooned on the Isle of Wight!
168. Bi-partisan gerrymandering is the norm in the US, is it not? Both parties conspire to make as many seats as safe as possible.
168. Seems to me a good thing to force through at the federal level in the first six months of an Obama administration. Doubt it’ll happen though.
169- What about picking a guy who might be gay but is going through the motions of marrying a woman anyway? I’m not saying he’s gay, but if he is, this is a world of trouble.
171. It’s done state by state. So swing states tend to do bipartisan gerrymandering, where solid red or blue ones just aim to screw the other party.
173. Could always claim he’s bi.
168/170 - http://rangevoting.org/GerryExamples.html “takes the politics out of politics” pretty neatly (if a little geekily!)
170. But splitting the IOW in two would be no better, since both new seats would be way under quota…
It’s only the 4 island seats that cause real apportionment problems in the UK.
New thread on the Norfolk Blogger’s piece on the future direction for the Lib Dems
172- The reform you speak of addresses an area that is constitutionally left to state control, so it could only be addressed at the federal level by constitutional amendment. That process is one in which the President has no say, so Obama would be poorly placed to attempt to advance such a reform. He could lobby for it, but would have no real role in making it happen. It would take two-thirds of the Senate and House, as well as three-fourths of the state legislatures, to enact such a reform. It won’t happen. The best hope is that more states will gradually enact independent redistricting by commission.
179. The Supreme court could do it in theory though, if the right case came along.
Stars & Stripes - I take much less issue than most (including Robert Dahl) over the lack of proportionality in both the Senate and (as a consequence) the Electoral College. I agree that the only fair comparison is the House of Representatives.
But even there, there is variation of a similar ilk to in the UK.
There is still a stipulation that each state must have at least one Congressman (At-large), and that Congress has fixed the number of Representatives at 435.
So Wyoming At-large has only 493,782 citizens (2000 census), whereas Montana’s At-Large (they just missed a second Congressman) has 902,195 citizens.
App