UK parliamentary by-elections 2014

[Filuwaúrdjan]

There's an article about Heywood & Middleton on the Guardian website by Helen Pidd (do they have anyone else who can cover Northern by-elections?).  Its premise seems to be that Labour's mistake was not turning themselves into some sort of UKIP-lite.  Possibly the one thing to be said for it is that it isn't as bad as the comments below it.

Yes that is a... strange... piece. Bizarrely - given, you know, her job - doesn't mention the grooming scandal which was clearly at least a factor. Though bizarre comment pieces and dubious analysis traditionally accompanies by-elections of a certain sort, so maybe we shouldn't be surprised.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It does feel like a 'when' rather than 'if' situation, yeah.

[Joe Republic]

Assuming Reckless wins as well, how likely is it that we start seeing more Tory defections?

[YL]

Assuming Reckless wins as well, how likely is it that we start seeing more Tory defections?

Very hard to say.  I'm sure there are a few Tories who are tempted, but whether they decide to jump is another matter; some of them are in UKIP-unfriendly seats (like Enfield Southgate, as mentioned above) so probably won't unless they're standing down or planning to move constituency.  Farage also talks about possible Labour defections, but I'm not sure whether anyone really believes him.

BTW the Tories are supposedly going to move the writ for Rochester & Strood next week, with polling day on 6 November.  They're also going for a postal open primary (as opposed to an open hustings followed by a vote, which is what they did in Clacton) to select their candidate.

[You kip if you want to...]

One annoying thing I've seen people claiming is that UKIP are winning over 2010 LDs based on Heywood.

The problem in Heywood is that Labour probably won over plenty of 2010 LDs, but probably lost plenty of their own 2010 voters in equal measure.

[EPG]

It's likely that Ukip picked up some 2010 Lib Dems, of course, but there's no evidence for or against any given number of switchers from that by-election.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

A lot of people - and particularly in 'ordinary' places like this - voted LibDem because they were not one of the main two parties rather than because of any ideological commitment to liberal causes or whatever. There's no reason to assume that such people would not find UKIP a tempting option in a by-election.

Looking at past local voting patterns in the constituency (perhaps not a massively reliable guide but whatever), we notice that the LibDems were strongest in the northern end of the constituency; the North ward of Heywood town (which they actually held in 2014; Labour performed pretty poorly in Heywood in the 2014 locals, possibly due to the grooming scandal), Castleton (where Labour has done well post 2010), Bamford, and Norden. In the latter two wards Labour are strikingly weak (they are natural Tory territory and in local polls have reverted to type). The LibDems occasionally won seats in parts of Middleton but were weaker there by 2010.

But here's the thing. In 2010 the BNP polled 3,239 votes in Heywood & Middleton. Combined with the UKIP vote from that year (and no, I'm not claiming that the parties were/are ideological soulmates) that's 4,454 votes. Bickley polled 11,016 in the by-election. Obviously not all of those 4,454 people voted (and maybe some didn't vote for Bickley), but that's a pretty solid by-election kernel all the same.

Additional note while I'm at it: in raw terms the Labour vote didn't hold up that badly (marginally worse than in most other by-elections in this parliament, but nothing to indicate heavy electoral bleeding), better than I'd thought at first actually. Of course all right is not really all right in this type of by-election; you want to poll more votes than a classic insurgent candidate could possibly manage. In this seat that would be somewhere around 13,000.

[YL]

BTW the Tories are supposedly going to move the writ for Rochester & Strood next week, with polling day on 6 November.  They're also going for a postal open primary (as opposed to an open hustings followed by a vote, which is what they did in Clacton) to select their candidate.

The Tories have indeed moved the writ, but the actual date is 20 November, which gives them time to complete the open primary process.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

(Part of) an interesting post from another forum by someone with links to the constituency:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[YL]

Rochester & Strood sounds quite nasty.  There are reports of push polling (anti-Reckless) and the like.  There are also some suggestions from the purple corner that the Tory primary was a ruse to get round spending limits.

[YL]

ComedyResults poll in Rochester & Strood: UKIP 43 Con 30 Lab 21 LD 3 Green 3

[YL]

The Tory primary result has been announced, and it was quite close: Kelly Tolhurst (described as a "local businesswoman") won with 50.44% to Anna Firth's 49.56%.  5688 ballots were returned, but the party aren't saying how many of them were valid votes.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/23/rochester-byelection-tories-select-local-businesswoman-kelly-tolhurst

[YL]

Rochester & Strood has drawn the candidates out of the woodwork, 13 of them:

Mike Barker (Independent) [1]
Christopher JustQCharley Challis (Independent) [2]
Hairy Knorm Davidson (OMRLP)
Jayda Fransen (Britain First) [3]
Stephen Goldsborough (Independent) [4]
Clive Gregory (Green) [5]
Geoff Juby (Lib Dem)
Naushabah Khan (Labour)
Nick Long (People Before Profit)
Dave Osborn (Patriotic Socialist Party) [6]
Mark Reckless (UKIP)
Charlotte Rose (Independent) [7]
Kelly Tolhurst (Conservative)

[1] Appears to have asked George Galloway to allow him to stand as a Respect candidate, but not to have received a reply.  Googling for information about him is not helped by the fact that he shares a name with a Republican who has stood for election in or near Rochester, New York.
[2] http://justqcharley.blogspot.co.uk/
[3] Using a registered description of "Vote British!" rather than the party name
[4] Features on a Guardian YouTube video saying he's starting something called the Christian Democratic Movement for World Peace UK.
[5] "Green Party - Say No to Racism" on the ballot paper
[6] Got precisely two votes in a recent council by-election in Essex.  The party is ... odd.
[7] Also stood in Clacton

[YL]

Another Survation poll for Rochester & Strood: UKIP 48 Con 33 Lab 16 Green 2 LD 1

[SNJ1985]

New poll shows NHS is the top priority in Rochester & Strood:

http://www.kentnews.co.uk/news/new_poll_shows_nhs_is_the_top_priority_in_rochester_strood_1_3828739

[DL]

Another Survation poll for Rochester & Strood: UKIP 48 Con 33 Lab 16 Green 2 LD 1

A couple of weeks ago, people in this thread ridiculed me when i suggested that Labour voters would never vote tactically for the Tories to stop UKIP and that on the contrary Labour voters were more likely to vote tactically for UKIP if they think that UKIP is the party best able to kick the Tories in the face in this byelection...turns out i was right!

[EPG]

New poll shows NHS is the top priority in Rochester & Strood:

http://www.kentnews.co.uk/news/new_poll_shows_nhs_is_the_top_priority_in_rochester_strood_1_3828739

This agrees with national polling suggesting immigration and the NHS as more significant than the economy. The Conservatives face a problem in that their advantage over Ed+Ed is based in part on much stronger economic competence ratings, as well as much stronger personal approval ratings. As unemployment falls and incomes grow, the economy matters less and other issues become more salient.

However, it is worth noting that this poll was financed by a trade union to promote support levels for its NHS policy. If improperly asked, this question could bias results of other questions.

[King of Kensington]

It also seems that a lot of former Labour voters have been won over by hard right populism.  Even the idea of voting "strategically" for UKIP is a disturbing trend.

[Phony Moderate]

It also seems that a lot of former Labour voters have been won over by hard right populism.  Even the idea of voting "strategically" for UKIP is a disturbing trend.

There have been certain signs recently that UKIP is turning into a mere generic populist party.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

In by-elections there is a very strong tendency for voters to rally around parties perceived to be in with a shot of winning.

[njwes]

Why are those on the left side of the political spectrum always so shocked and surprised when they realize that huge portions of their voting base are also attracted to and willing to support right-wing populism? That's been the case for generations.

[DL]

There is a long history of "third parties" doing very well in byelections in the UK on the strength of representing a "protest vote". If the Tories had won a majority in 2010 and the Lib Dems had been sitting in opposition for the last 4 years in all likelhood the Lib Dems would be polling in the mid 20s and would be easily winning byelections in strongly Conservative seats like this one.

[King of Kensington]

Why are those on the left side of the political spectrum always so shocked and surprised when they realize that huge portions of their voting base are also attracted to and willing to support right-wing populism? That's been the case for generations.

Shocked and surprised, no.  Right-wing populist parties have been more effective at tapping into people's anger, while the social democrats present themselves as far more "respectable" and are seen as part of the establishment.  The line about left-wing "elites" has been very effective, and does have an element of truth to it. 

[Kraxner]

Why are those on the left side of the political spectrum always so shocked and surprised when they realize that huge portions of their voting base are also attracted to and willing to support right-wing populism? That's been the case for generations.

They underestimate how socially conservative the working class are and only vote for the left due to economic issues.

In fact, social liberalism was not a huge component of left wing parties until the last quarter century.

[politicus]

Why are those on the left side of the political spectrum always so shocked and surprised when they realize that huge portions of their voting base are also attracted to and willing to support right-wing populism? That's been the case for generations.

They underestimate how socially conservative the working class are and only vote for the left due to economic issues.

In fact, social liberalism was not a huge component of left wing parties until the last quarter century.

Very much depend whee you are. The 60s influenced SDs a lot in Western European countries.

[You kip if you want to...]

There is a long history of "third parties" doing very well in byelections in the UK on the strength of representing a "protest vote". If the Tories had won a majority in 2010 and the Lib Dems had been sitting in opposition for the last 4 years in all likelhood the Lib Dems would be polling in the mid 20s and would be easily winning byelections in strongly Conservative seats like this one.

If the Tories had won a majority, I could see an 'anti-establishment, we still agree with Nick' narrative leading to an LD surge, rather than UKIP.