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

[Torie]

Well, there are about 32 Labour held seats where the Tories + UKIP had a majority of the vote, and about 45 if one tacks on 50% of the LD vote to the total. One can assert that the bulk of the UKIP vote is not available to the Tories, but that post election Ashcroft poll suggests otherwise, and about half if I recall correctly have voted Tory before. Most of the seats appear to me unsurprisingly to be in the Midlands or the north of England, but my knowledge of the constituency names is of course somewhat limited. It would be great to map these, but that is beyond my skill level.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It's an irrelevant statistic. It's as bad as when people used to add together Labour and Alliance totals in the 1980s.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Fair to say that they didn't have a good night.

[ChrisDR68]

Slight understatement lol

You'd have to assume that this is the SNP's peak so provided Scotland stays within the UK during the next 5 years (which is by no means certain) they stand a chance of regaining several of their old seats north of the border.

Only a couple of seats in the south west are in range though (in their supposed heartland). Most seats there are now pretty solidly Conservative.

A couple of their lost seats in south west London are possible and a few other seats dotted around the country including rural Wales but that's generally it.

At the very best they could maybe scrape 15-20 seats next time.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[Clyde1998]

You'd have to assume that this is the SNP's peak so provided Scotland stays within the UK during the next 5 years (which is by no means certain) they stand a chance of regaining several of their old seats north of the border.

Thing is though, while I think the SNP have peaked at UK elections, I can't see them losing many seats - unless there's a huge swing back the other way.

SNP Majorities:

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Who knows how stable those new majorities actually are though? I can see arguments either way.

[Clyde1998]

Who knows how stable those new majorities actually are though? I can see arguments either way.

Depends on how well they perform - even if they do well, some of the lower majority seats could be lost by the SNP.

[© tweed]

those 4 Sinn Fein MPs still get paid even though they don't go to Westminster, right?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yes. They even get expenses. And offices at Westminster.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

[Citizen (The) Doctor]

Yes. They even get expenses. And offices at Westminster.

So are they just empty....? Or do they have some sit-in protestors living there 24/7?

[Joe Republic]

Why is PC's support so unevenly distributed?

Oh, and why did Westmoreland & Lonsdale remain so heavily LD when it was a Tory seat until only ten years ago?  Is Farron just that popular?

[Lief 🗽]

I'm pretty sure the Sinn Fein MPs do not take their salaries, but like Al said they do take expenses, have offices in London, hire staff, etc. They don't vote, but they still do constituent service stuff and frequently visit London.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why is PC's support so unevenly distributed?

Because they poll much better with the Welsh speaking minority than the English speaking majority. In South Wales their support patterns often correlate to an extent with the amount of effort they put in; they have a habit of picking a couple of constituencies and throwing everything at them. This time it was the Rhondda as their leader is from there, last time it was Cynon Valley.

[Velasco]

FTR and excuse me for the off-topic, Chris Bryant (the Labour MP for Rhondda) speaks Spanish fairly competently. I ignore if he's fluent in Welsh.

[Peter]

Why is PC's support so unevenly distributed?

Oh, and why did Westmoreland & Lonsdale remain so heavily LD when it was a Tory seat until only ten years ago?  Is Farron just that popular?

Yes. Yes, he is.

I have travelled locally around the South East recently and seen very few political signs etc., even in the plausible Lab/C or LD/C marginals.  When I was in the Lake District (which is basically W&L) at Easter, I was simply met by the wall of YOU ARE IN LIB DEM COUNTRY signs. Immensely popular - remember that area supported Lib Dem in the European elections. The area has a strong Lib Dem presence in local government and has done for many years. Remarkably Farron has very successfully crystalised support in this VERY hostile environment.

[Peter]

Can someone more knowledgeable than me discuss whether the Cameron government will be able to last the entire five year term, assuming the usual by-election losses one would anticipate?  Can they assume support from the DUP and the handful of LDs?

The majority is large enough that it's loss over the course of the parliament is not certain, but is small enough that it is not unlikely. Whether it lasts for the full course of this parliament depends to a considerable extent on luck.

On the second point, certainly not. The DUP have no love for the Tories and would demand payment in exchange for votes. Lord knows with regards to the LibDems.

What "payment" might the DUP demand? They made reassuring noises during the election, stating that they were open to working with whomever to form a stable government, based on an informal arrangement, thinking their party too small for anything more formal.

In addition to Al's point of the DUPs demand simply being 0s on a cheque, I think the most likely support could come from the UUP - they are historically much closer - they fought 2010 on a joint ticket (though that may not have been actually advantageous for either) and its former leader David Trimble did turn Tory in the House of Lords. Sylvia Hermon may also be willing to support the Tories in key votes, but this would be harder for her due to her opposition to the aforementioned joint ticket.

[Bacon King]

FWIW, here is Lord Ashcroft's post election poll.

A third of LibDem support was just tactical votes

Edit: and Labour actually won voters who made up their mind on election day as well as those who made up their mind a few days before

Actually, per my math, more than 3/4 of the LD vote were tactical voters trying to stop another party. 19% of the electorate were tactical voters. A third of them (34%) voted LD, or a tad over 6% (6.46%). The LD's got 8% of the vote (7.9%). 6/8 = 75% (81.18% to be exact - 6.46%/7.9% = 81.18%). With the Greens out there and getting some traction, I suspect that there is a substantial possibility that the LD's will just disappear. There is political space for only so many parties at any one time. The LD's never made much sense to me in recent years anyway. They had no real raison d'être. They have next to none now.

I am assuming that this poll has at least some nexus with reality of course.

No need to do math, it says the exact number in the poll itself. Look at question six, on the bottom right of the first page of the summary. When prompted with, "Here are some reasons people have given for deciding on the party they voted for. Which three were the most important in your decision?" it shows that 34% of LD voters said "I voted tactically to stop another party from winning" (and looking in the detailed results shows that 22% of LD voters even said it was their #1 reason).

One can assert that the bulk of the UKIP vote is not available to the Tories, but that post election Ashcroft poll suggests otherwise, and about half if I recall correctly have voted Tory before.

I would argue that Ashcroft's poll offers no rationale that UKIP voters can in any way be lumped in with Tory voters like you've done. It says 40% claim to be former Conservative voters but it also says 25% are traditionally supporters of Labour; page 14 of the detailed results shows that only 37% of 2015 UKIP voters were 2010 Tory voters. I honestly doubt that the Conservative Party could realistically win over very many of the UKIP voters who haven't voted for them in the past, especially considering there's probably a significant class divide there. Even if Labour fails to win them back, I imagine they're much more likely to either keep casting protest votes or become disillusioned non-voters than they are vote Conservative.

[Torie]

FWIW, here is Lord Ashcroft's post election poll.

A third of LibDem support was just tactical votes

Edit: and Labour actually won voters who made up their mind on election day as well as those who made up their mind a few days before

Actually, per my math, more than 3/4 of the LD vote were tactical voters trying to stop another party. 19% of the electorate were tactical voters. A third of them (34%) voted LD, or a tad over 6% (6.46%). The LD's got 8% of the vote (7.9%). 6/8 = 75% (81.18% to be exact - 6.46%/7.9% = 81.18%). With the Greens out there and getting some traction, I suspect that there is a substantial possibility that the LD's will just disappear. There is political space for only so many parties at any one time. The LD's never made much sense to me in recent years anyway. They had no real raison d'être. They have next to none now.

I am assuming that this poll has at least some nexus with reality of course.

No need to do math, it says the exact number in the poll itself. Look at question six, on the bottom right of the first page of the summary. When prompted with, "Here are some reasons people have given for deciding on the party they voted for. Which three were the most important in your decision?" it shows that 34% of LD voters said "I voted tactically to stop another party from winning" (and looking in the detailed results shows that 22% of LD voters even said it was their #1 reason).

One can assert that the bulk of the UKIP vote is not available to the Tories, but that post election Ashcroft poll suggests otherwise, and about half if I recall correctly have voted Tory before.

I would argue that Ashcroft's poll offers no rationale that UKIP voters can in any way be lumped in with Tory voters like you've done. It says 40% claim to be former Conservative voters but it also says 25% are traditionally supporters of Labour; page 14 of the detailed results shows that only 37% of 2015 UKIP voters were 2010 Tory voters. I honestly doubt that the Conservative Party could realistically win over very many of the UKIP voters who haven't voted for them in the past, especially considering there's probably a significant class divide there. Even if Labour fails to win them back, I imagine they're much more likely to either keep casting protest votes or become disillusioned non-voters than they are vote Conservative.

I doubt there is that much of a class divide with UKIP voters. More on them is here, here, and here. They strike me as just the type of voter that the Dems have tanked with in the US - older, white, more male, working working or lower middle class, not particularly well educated, not in a union or making their living off government, not living in big cites, and uncomfortable with persons of color and immigration. We shall see.

[Phony Moderate]

Some of the ordering is different, but Ogmore is almost identical to 2010.

[Phony Moderate]

Something that needs to be asked is: Has FPTP ever had a more epic failure? 1983 is nothing in comparison to this.

[ChrisDR68]

Something that needs to be asked is: Has FPTP ever had a more epic failure? 1983 is nothing in comparison to this.

I worked beautifully for the Conservatives as people switched from the Lib Dems to UKIP to allow the Tories to sweep away most of the Lib Dem MP's in the south of England and give them their majority.

It really couldn't have worked better for them.

[Famous Mortimer]

Something that needs to be asked is: Has FPTP ever had a more epic failure? 1983 is nothing in comparison to this.

What? This is how FPTP works in general.

[Diouf]

Something that needs to be asked is: Has FPTP ever had a more epic failure? 1983 is nothing in comparison to this.

One of the least proportional outcomes in UK history. Around the same level as 1983 and 1931