Adopt a Constituency

[bullmoose88]

Bullmoose: Bury South would seem to fit best (actually none of Bury proper is in the seat, it should actually be called Prestwich & Radcliffe...) although the cheaper homes were built for cotton mill workers rather than steelworkers (this being Lancashire after all) and the area isn't doing as well economically as Bucks county.
The seat has a high Jewish population (by U.K standards) and is a pretty safe Labour seat nowadays.

Earl: need to know one thing; is part of the seat a mostly gentrified inner city area, or is it all suburban?

Ugh...a safe labour seat :-p

yeah...even Bucks old suburbs do really well...lots of new commerical ventures etc...

[minionofmidas]

Yes...but striking the entire population off the voting lists due to property requirements sounds...extreme.
Probably an effect of extreme poverty (think Highland clearances) in combination with local rules on land tenure being somewhat at odds with the Acts describing who can vote (whatever that was called, pre-1832).

Also, qualifications varied throughout England. There were open boroughs (in which any male adult present at the time of the election could vote), freeman boroughs (in which all freemen could vote), Scot and Lot boroughs (in which only ratepayers could vote), burgage boroughs (in which property qualifications existed), and corporation boroughs (in which the city corporation/ council chose the MP).

Disenfranchisement of residents was not unique to Bute. For example, in 1824, Edinburgh had over 100,000 residents, but only 33 were qualified to vote. In 1780, about 6,000 voters returned a majority of the members of Parliament.

We're talking about a county seat though, not a borough seat.
Edinburgh in the 18th century must have been one of the worst hellholes ever in existence upon the planet, from what I hear.
As late as 1824 though? That surprises me. Maybe the borough didn't include the New Town?

[Emsworth]

We're talking about a county seat though, not a borough seat.

Quite so. I think, however, that just about all Scottish constituencies, both county and borough, were in the pockets of patrons.

[Hatman 🍁]

Bullmoose: Bury South would seem to fit best (actually none of Bury proper is in the seat, it should actually be called Prestwich & Radcliffe...) although the cheaper homes were built for cotton mill workers rather than steelworkers (this being Lancashire after all) and the area isn't doing as well economically as Bucks county.
The seat has a high Jewish population (by U.K standards) and is a pretty safe Labour seat nowadays.

Earl: need to know one thing; is part of the seat a mostly gentrified inner city area, or is it all suburban?

It's mostly suburban. Few places in Canada can be considered "inner city" at least not by American terms.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's mostly suburban. Few places in Canada can be considered "inner city" at least not by American terms.

By inner city I don't mean ghetto; I mean more a very urban area, part of the orginal urban core basically.

[Hatman 🍁]

It's mostly suburban. Few places in Canada can be considered "inner city" at least not by American terms.

By inner city I don't mean ghetto; I mean more a very urban area, part of the orginal urban core basically.

Then, it's not the urban core. It's not quite suburbia either. It's inbetween Much of the area was first built after WW2, which probably doesnt compare well to the uK .  I would classify it as inner suburbs, with some outersuburbs in the south.  There are some rural regions in the far south of the district too.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So a predominantly middle class (U.K definition), inner suburban seat with a fairly large minority population but a small Jewish population?
Should be able to find somewhere.
Wait a sec...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Birmingham Hall Green would seem to fit best (although, weirdly, nowhere really fits all that well).
It's mostly inter-war suburbia, is mostly middle class and has the lowest minority population of the Brum seats (not including Sutton Coldfield o/c) but still much higher than the national average (17% of the seats population is from a minority group).
It used to be a safe Tory seat (60% in 1970) but fell to Labour for the first time since '45 in 1997; and by a large margin.
The majority (over 20% in 2001) will probably fall, but Labour would be very unlikely to lose the seat.

[Hatman 🍁]

Birmingham Hall Green would seem to fit best (although, weirdly, nowhere really fits all that well).
It's mostly inter-war suburbia, is mostly middle class and has the lowest minority population of the Brum seats (not including Sutton Coldfield o/c) but still much higher than the national average (17% of the seats population is from a minority group).
It used to be a safe Tory seat (60% in 1970) but fell to Labour for the first time since '45 in 1997; and by a large margin.
The majority (over 20% in 2001) will probably fall, but Labour would be very unlikely to lose the seat.

Thanks. I should let you know that my riding has the highest Arab population in Ontario- possibly in Canada.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I should let you know that my riding has the highest Arab population in Ontario- possibly in Canada.

Only part of the U.K with more than a tiny Arab population is in Westminster LBC (in the part in the Regents Park & Kensington North seat IIRC) but that's inner city. Interestingly there's a fairly large Jewish community in the same area and there's very little trouble between the two.

Hall Green (like all the Brum seats) does have a large Muslim population; mostly Pakistani though.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Al and Lewis once said my area was like Cambridge.

I said Cambridge 50 odd years ago IIRC. Areas changed a lot with silicon fen and all that.

Trying to find a good fit for your area is pretty hard actually. Stirling perhaps?

[minionofmidas]

A little too remote perhaps. But yeah...not bad at all.