UK General Election - May 7th 2015 (The Official Election Day & Results Thread)

[afleitch]

Notice that the SNP majorities in the central belt are generally stronger than their old base.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The result in Hereford (LibDem MP 1997-2010 and a longtime target and local government base beforehand) is quite something... Con 52.6, UKIP 16.8, Labour 12.8, LDem 10.6, Green 7.2

That's minus 30.5 for the LibDems.

Sheffield Central:

Lab 55.0 (+13.7)
Green 15.8 (+12.1)
Con 11.1 (+1.0)
LD 9.7 (-31.2)
UKIP 7.5 (+5.9)

The Lib Dems were only 165 votes behind Labour in 2010.

Brent Central had a -35.8 fall for the Lib Dems and Edinburgh South -30.3.

[YL]

The result in Hereford (LibDem MP 1997-2010 and a longtime target and local government base beforehand) is quite something... Con 52.6, UKIP 16.8, Labour 12.8, LDem 10.6, Green 7.2

That's minus 30.5 for the LibDems.

Sheffield Central:

Lab 55.0 (+13.7)
Green 15.8 (+12.1)
Con 11.1 (+1.0)
LD 9.7 (-31.2)
UKIP 7.5 (+5.9)

The Lib Dems were only 165 votes behind Labour in 2010.

Brent Central had a -35.8 fall for the Lib Dems and Edinburgh South -30.3.

Yes, I think Brent Central was the worst: a seat they held where they came third with less than 10% of the vote.  I think it must also have been the best Labour increase, +20.9.  (Hallam was +19.7.)

[Peter]

Where is the successor to F & S T? ie. Where is the smallest majority in the country?

[YL]

Where is the successor to F & S T? ie. Where is the smallest majority in the country?

The smallest I've found are 27 in Gower and 41 in Derby North.

[ChrisDR68]

This election result was similar to 1987 in at least 3 ways:
1.Although the share of the vote for both Labour and Conservative was lower in 2015 than in 1987, in both elections the gap between the 2 parties was around 7%.

2.Although the final seat result in this election was 331-232 while in 1987 it was 336-271, if you gave Labour the 40 seats back from the largely even more left wing SNP this election would be 331-272.

3.In both 1987 and 2015 the polls were pretty much tied with most analyists predicting that Labour would have the slightly better possibility of forming a government.

I think you mean 1992 not 1987

[136or142]

This election result was similar to 1987 in at least 3 ways:
1.Although the share of the vote for both Labour and Conservative was lower in 2015 than in 1987, in both elections the gap between the 2 parties was around 7%.

2.Although the final seat result in this election was 331-232 while in 1987 it was 336-271, if you gave Labour the 40 seats back from the largely even more left wing SNP this election would be 331-272.

3.In both 1987 and 2015 the polls were pretty much tied with most analyists predicting that Labour would have the slightly better possibility of forming a government.

I think you mean 1992 not 1987

Oops, thanks for the correction.

[ObserverIE]

Spreadsheet based on data scraped from BBC website here (hat-tip to https://twitter.com/stanno/status/596721840728514560).

[Iosif]

It looks like this is what happened:

Tories bled votes to UKIP in the South in seats they had large majorities so not enough to actually lose seats.
Labour bled votes to UKIP in the North in seats they had large majorities so not enough to actually lose seats.
Labour bled votes to the Greens in the South in seats they had large majorities so not enough to actually lose seats.
Labour bled all their votes and seats in Scotland to the SNP.
The Lib Dems collapsed. Votes and seats went roughly 70% to Tories and 30% to Labour in England and Wales and 100% to SNP in Scotland.
The Tories and Labour swapped marginals in equal numbers (Labour won London, Tories elsewhere).

The results was largely a wash from 2010 except the Lib Dems collapsed and the Tories benefited the most, hence their narrow majority. Labour lost seats because they lost more seats to the SNP than they gained from the Lib Dems.

[jaichind]

On question I always had about the election process in UK is: When the candidates get up on that podium do they know the results ahead of time?  It seems they do not other than possible leaks to them unofficially.   But then I hear about requests for recounts in case someone at the border to losing deposit or the results are very close.  So are those recounts automatic or do they ask the candidates?  If they ask the candidates then are they not disclosing the results to them before announcing them at the podium?

[Hydera]

Quick-and-dirty constituency map (colored according to margin of victory), 'cause what else was I going to do with my Friday night?

It looks like this is what happened:

Tories bled votes to UKIP in the South in seats they had large majorities so not enough to actually lose seats.
Labour bled votes to UKIP in the North in seats they had large majorities so not enough to actually lose seats.
Labour bled votes to the Greens in the South in seats they had large majorities so not enough to actually lose seats.
Labour bled all their votes and seats in Scotland to the SNP.
The Lib Dems collapsed. Votes and seats went roughly 70% to Tories and 30% to Labour in England and Wales and 100% to SNP in Scotland.
The Tories and Labour swapped marginals in equal numbers (Labour won London, Tories elsewhere).

The results was largely a wash from 2010 except the Lib Dems collapsed and the Tories benefited the most, hence their narrow majority. Labour lost seats because they lost more seats to the SNP than they gained from the Lib Dems.

If Boris Johnson becomes the next leader of the conservative party, then assuming the economy doesnt go rotten in five years and they actually hold the referendum and somehow manage to slow immigration. A bulk of those UKIP votes might go to the tories in 2020 which would give them a commanding plurality and another slightly bigger majority.

[Barnes]

On question I always had about the election process in UK is: When the candidates get up on that podium do they know the results ahead of time?  It seems they do not other than possible leaks to them unofficially.   But then I hear about requests for recounts in case someone at the border to losing deposit or the results are very close.  So are those recounts automatic or do they ask the candidates?  If they ask the candidates then are they not disclosing the results to them before announcing them at the podium?

Yes, all of the candidates are informed of the result before the declaration.

[ChrisDR68]

The results was largely a wash from 2010 except the Lib Dems collapsed and the Tories benefited the most, hence their narrow majority. Labour lost seats because they lost more seats to the SNP than they gained from the Lib Dems.

The funny thing about this general election is that the Conservative and Labour popular vote barely changed. The reason why the Tories failed to win a majority in 2010 was because of the large number of Liberal Democrat seats. If the Lib Dems had had a similar number of seats in 1992 John Major would have failed to win a majority in that election too.

My feeling is that a majority of the protest vote that the Lib Dems hoovered up in 2005 and 2010 switched en masse to UKIP (and to a lesser degree to the SNP and Greens). That meant the Tory vote which stayed steady was enough to take all those Lib Dem seats in the south.

The fortunes of the Lib Dems is largely dependent on the gap between themselves and the Conservatives:

1992 - a gap of 24% - Lib Dems win 20 seats
2005 - a gap of 10% - Lib Dems win 62 seats
2010 - a gap of 13% - Lib Dems win 57 seats
2015 - a gap of 28% - Lib Dems win 8 seats

The difficulty for the Lib Dems is that they are competing with the SNP, UKIP and the Greens for largely the same protest votes.

In 2005 these parties polled in insignificant numbers. In 2015 this changed radically meaning the road back to recovery for them will be very long, very hard and very slow.

[jaichind]

On question I always had about the election process in UK is: When the candidates get up on that podium do they know the results ahead of time?  It seems they do not other than possible leaks to them unofficially.   But then I hear about requests for recounts in case someone at the border to losing deposit or the results are very close.  So are those recounts automatic or do they ask the candidates?  If they ask the candidates then are they not disclosing the results to them before announcing them at the podium?

Yes, all of the candidates are informed of the result before the declaration.

That takes all the fun of it.  What is great about the existing system is be able to see what the facial reaction of the candidates to the results as they hear it.  What you are saying takes the fun out of that. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

We can be sure that a substantial number of people who voted LibDem in 2010 voted UKIP in 2015, particularly in rural and old industrial areas.

[Phony Moderate]

UKIP did very well in Romford, despite the fact that the Tory MP is a UKIPer in all but name.

[rob in cal]

Anyone find a nice tidy list of the top thirty or so closest seats in terms of victory margin?

[jaichind]

Ukip gained a shock council poll victory today at Thanet, Kent - where former party leader Nigel Farage earlier failed to win a Westminster seat. With some results still to declared it has already returned 31 out of 56 councillors, taking control of the authority.

[Peter]

Anyone find a nice tidy list of the top thirty or so closest seats in terms of victory margin?

Constituency - Result - Majority - %
Derby North   CON GAIN FROM LAB   41   0.1
Gower   CON GAIN FROM LAB   27   0.1
Chester, City of   LAB GAIN FROM CON   93   0.2
Croydon Central   CON HOLD   165   0.3
Ealing Central & Acton   LAB GAIN FROM CON   274   0.5
Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk   SNP GAIN FROM LD   328   0.6
Ynys Mon   LAB HOLD   229   0.7
Vale of Clwyd   CON GAIN FROM LAB   237   0.7
Bury North   CON HOLD   378   0.8
Brentford & Isleworth   LAB GAIN FROM CON   465   0.8
Morley & Outwood   CON GAIN FROM LAB   422   0.9
Halifax   LAB HOLD   428   1
Wirral West   LAB GAIN FROM CON   417   1
Fermanagh & South Tyrone   UUP GAIN FROM SF   530   1
Thurrock   CON HOLD   536   1.1
Plymouth Sutton & Devonport   CON HOLD   523   1.1
Ilford North   LAB GAIN FROM CON   589   1.2
Cambridge   LAB GAIN FROM LD   599   1.2
Eastbourne   CON GAIN FROM LD   733   1.4
Newcastle-under-Lyme   LAB HOLD   650   1.5
Brighton Kemptown   CON HOLD   690   1.5
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale & Tweeddale   CON HOLD   798   1.5
Bolton West   CON GAIN FROM LAB   801   1.6
Weaver Vale   CON HOLD   806   1.7
Telford   CON GAIN FROM LAB   730   1.8
Barrow & Furness   LAB HOLD   795   1.8
Wolverhampton South West   LAB GAIN FROM CON   801   2
Lewes   CON GAIN FROM LD   1083   2.1
Hampstead & Kilburn   LAB HOLD   1138   2.1
Belfast South   SDLP HOLD   906   2.3

[Torie]

Anyone find a nice tidy list of the top thirty or so closest seats in terms of victory margin?

Here is it ranked by vote margin.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Results by percentage majority in London.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Here's a fun detail: Labour up 9.5 (to 22. in North West Norfolk. People who can remember the last election will know the explanation for this.

[Torie]

Here's a fun detail: Labour up 9.5 (to 22. in North West Norfolk. People who can remember the last election will know the explanation for this.

Wiki is just so fabulous. But really, what he said is what a considerably majority of the voters there thought.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It appears Cameron actually implemented Netanyahu campaign strategy applied to Scotland and well it worked.

Indeed...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not entirely sure, but surely in practice it would be a yes. I do know that 10% of the parliamentary party must nominate a candidate before they can get onto the ballot: which, this time, means self-nomination, lol.