UK Local & Assembly Elections 2022

[fishfoodie]

Not looking good for the DUP, & other Dinosaur deniers.

NI reporting the polls being very busy, & that can't be good for them, after Jeffery got filleted in the Leaders debate, & the Tories pulled the rug out from their claims they would suspend the NIP .... again.

Fool me once; shame on you
Fool me twice; shame on me

Fool me a 43rd time; for the love of God, can someone please put them out of my misery !!

[C69]

The Shinners being the main Party and the Unionists losing a majority of votes in NI would be cataclysmic.
Those Catholics are breeding like rabbits

A United Ireland soon?

[fishfoodie]

What voting system do the UK use for local elections ?

Do you use an STV or similar, as I assume when your casting a vote for multiple Councillors, that's the logical system

[tabascoboy]

What voting system do the UK use for local elections ?

Do you use an STV or similar, as I assume when your casting a vote for multiple Councillors, that's the logical system

Last time here it was vote for any two candidates on the poll. First (two) past the post - and kicked out the two incumbent Tories for Greens

Scottish system seems to be different where you rank your choices 1,2,3 etc

[fishfoodie]

And lo & behold the Unionists on BBC NI are falling over them selves to pretend that the NIP is a serious issue, & that they are justified in not forming an Executive on the strength of it.

They have to know that if they don't form an Executive to deal with the Cost of Living crisis, & the Health Service; they'll be completely fucking obliterated in a subsequent vote, because people won't forgive & forget

[petej]

Breaking news the Tories will be fine.

[Gumboot]

I hope the Tories get completely fucking humped. Bunch of cunts, the lot of 'em.

[I like neeps]

And lo & behold the Unionists on BBC NI are falling over them selves to pretend that the NIP is a serious issue, & that they are justified in not forming an Executive on the strength of it.

They have to know that if they don't form an Executive to deal with the Cost of Living crisis, & the Health Service; they'll be completely fucking obliterated in a subsequent vote, because people won't forgive & forget

I love the smell of a constitutional crisis in the morning.

[I like neeps]

Bad night for the Tories (but not as bad as it could have been). Bad night for Labour too - people clearly aren't enthusiastic about Starmer's complete lack of ideas or passion.

Good night for the Lib Dems.

[Slick]

Bad night for the Tories (but not as bad as it could have been). Bad night for Labour too - people clearly aren't enthusiastic about Starmer's complete lack of ideas or passion.

Good night for the Lib Dems.

Giggling quite hard at the Conservatives losing Westminster after my FiL Daily Mail inspired rant the other night- they live in Westminster

[Margin__Walker]

Bad night for the Tories (but not as bad as it could have been). Bad night for Labour too - people clearly aren't enthusiastic about Starmer's complete lack of ideas or passion.

Good night for the Lib Dems.

Giggling quite hard at the Conservatives losing Westminster after my FiL Daily Mail inspired rant the other night- they live in Westminster

This one made me laugh this morning. They had to get the labour paper candidate out of bed as it looked like he might actually win

[Kawazaki]

Bad night for the Tories (but not as bad as it could have been). Bad night for Labour too - people clearly aren't enthusiastic about Starmer's complete lack of ideas or passion.

Good night for the Lib Dems.

I always think whenever the LDs do well in a vote it's due mainly as a protest vote by people who are a little bit more arsed than those that just don't bother to vote at all.

[Paddington Bear]

Bad night for the Tories (but not as bad as it could have been). Bad night for Labour too - people clearly aren't enthusiastic about Starmer's complete lack of ideas or passion.

Good night for the Lib Dems.

I always think whenever the LDs do well in a vote it's due mainly as a protest vote by people who are a little bit more arsed than those that just don't bother to vote at all.

Round here (Lib Dem Council) the two parties desperately try to out NIMBY the other. Both knocked on the door offering to build fewer homes than the other. Depressing really.

[shaggy]

Bad night for the Tories (but not as bad as it could have been). Bad night for Labour too - people clearly aren't enthusiastic about Starmer's complete lack of ideas or passion.

Good night for the Lib Dems.

I always think whenever the LDs do well in a vote it's due mainly as a protest vote by people who are a little bit more arsed than those that just don't bother to vote at all.

Round here (Lib Dem Council) the two parties desperately try to out NIMBY the other. Both knocked on the door offering to build fewer homes than the other. Depressing really.

Our local Lib Dem have been out on the streets for weeks, they have visited us more than half a dozen times and we get leaflets almost every day (over 20 now). It is bordering on harassment.

[JM2K6]

Labour's little pact with the Lib Dems suggests that "a bad night for Labour", when they've so far improved on an already strong position despite not campaigning in some seats, is an odd call

[I like neeps]

Labour's little pact with the Lib Dems suggests that "a bad night for Labour", when they've so far improved on an already strong position despite not campaigning in some seats, is an odd call

Not really, when you can't batter this government and you're one hope of govt is an agreement with the Lib Dems. It's eh not great?

[_Os_]

Bad night for the Tories (but not as bad as it could have been). Bad night for Labour too - people clearly aren't enthusiastic about Starmer's complete lack of ideas or passion.

Good night for the Lib Dems.

That seems to be the line the media are pushing. Doesn't really stack with the numbers.

So far the Tories have lost 132 council seats net, and lost 6 councils (4 to Labour, and 2 to No Overall Control/NOC) whilst holding 18 and winning no new councils. The Tory soundbite talking point they're all repeating like robots is "gains in Hartlepool, Nuneaton", there's not much movement in either which means they're about where they were in 2018. I can't see how Hartlepool (which has elected far right parties/candidates to its council recently) still being NOC, and the only movement being independents losing 2 and Tories adding 2, is some massive Tory win.

The only place with a Labour majority that Labour have lost so far, was Kingston-upon-Hull (-2 Labour councillors) to the Libdems. Outside places where Labour had a majority going in (where it was unlikely they would lose and so were less contested), they've only had a net loss of councilors in Amber Valley (-4 councillors), Nuneaton & Bedworth (-1), Sheffield (-1), Thurrock (-1), Wirral (-2). Meanwhile these councils that were NOC (and therefore probably more contested) going in, Colchester/Cumberland/Derby/Hart/Portsmouth/Southend-on-Sea/Stockport/Tandridge, have had no net loss of Labour councillors or gained Labour councillors, whilst the Tories have a net loss of councillors in all of them.

There's some talk of Labour's vote share being down outside London, but Labour seem to be getting the votes where it matters more than the Tories are which is what matters in the UK electoral system. So far the Tories are in a position that's worse than where they were in 2018, Labour in a position much better than where they were in 2018. It's hard to spin Labour winning 4 councils directly from the Tories, as "both doing badly", but the UK media are somehow managing to do it.

Libdems I haven't looked at yet. 2019 was a good general election for them in terms of votes but they didn't translate that into seats (and therefore not a good election for them), added 1.3 million votes in 2019 compared to 2017 and had the biggest vote swing in their favour compared to the other parties. Could just be that they're holding their previous gains.

[JM2K6]

Labour's little pact with the Lib Dems suggests that "a bad night for Labour", when they've so far improved on an already strong position despite not campaigning in some seats, is an odd call

Not really, when you can't batter this government and you're one hope of govt is an agreement with the Lib Dems. It's eh not great?

This isn't a general election. The Tories have taken a battering so far and both Labour and Lib Dems have made gains. Labour already had a very strong position - it's not like a GE where Labour are having to work from a weak position. These elections are not a direct proxy for the general election.

[Paddington Bear]

The government is unpopular, Labour are gaining some ground, Tories can still have plenty of optimism about their GE chances seems to be the reality?

[petej]

Labour's little pact with the Lib Dems suggests that "a bad night for Labour", when they've so far improved on an already strong position despite not campaigning in some seats, is an odd call

Not really, when you can't batter this government and you're one hope of govt is an agreement with the Lib Dems. It's eh not great?

This isn't a general election. The Tories have taken a battering so far and both Labour and Lib Dems have made gains. Labour already had a very strong position - it's not like a GE where Labour are having to work from a weak position. These elections are not a direct proxy for the general election.

Yep. Labour are working from the position of 2018 so Johnson is doing a bit worse than Theresa May's gov.

[salanya]

I think the media spin on anything political is shocking in this country. (talking the main media channels here)

There is little solid political discourse or full review including context.
Just rehashing what the Tory mouthpieces spout, that Keir Starmer is boring and do the Lib Dems even still exist?! (apparently that passes for humour)

Democracy depends on the quality of information the voters receive. That quality has been poor for a good while now.

[I like neeps]

Labour's little pact with the Lib Dems suggests that "a bad night for Labour", when they've so far improved on an already strong position despite not campaigning in some seats, is an odd call

Not really, when you can't batter this government and you're one hope of govt is an agreement with the Lib Dems. It's eh not great?

This isn't a general election. The Tories have taken a battering so far and both Labour and Lib Dems have made gains. Labour already had a very strong position - it's not like a GE where Labour are having to work from a weak position. These elections are not a direct proxy for the general election.

According to the beeb outside of London Labour's vote share is down on 2018. So it's .. not great!

[fishfoodie]

The government is unpopular, Labour are gaining some ground, Tories can still have plenty of optimism about their GE chances seems to be the reality?

That will depend on the messages they've been getting on the doorsteps the last few weeks; & if they were Cost Of Living, Partygate, the Economy etc, then the Tory MPs shouldn't be feeling at all comfortable, because unless they fix these, they'll be getting it in the neck, for the utter, utter uselessness of this Government.

They got two By-Elections coming up, & Sue Grays report, so they're going to get an unrelenting set of bad news, until they turn things around, & that requires real Leadership.

[JM2K6]

Not really, when you can't batter this government and you're one hope of govt is an agreement with the Lib Dems. It's eh not great?

This isn't a general election. The Tories have taken a battering so far and both Labour and Lib Dems have made gains. Labour already had a very strong position - it's not like a GE where Labour are having to work from a weak position. These elections are not a direct proxy for the general election.

According to the beeb outside of London Labour's vote share is down on 2018. So it's .. not great!

Because people are voting Green, which is a positive. Labour have lost less than the Tories (so far).

And honestly, in some places these are actually genuine votes on local issues. Not everything is going to be a referendum on the government.

(Would also say there's a long way to go before we have the full picture!)

[tabascoboy]

...

And honestly, in some places these are actually genuine votes on local issues. Not everything is going to be a referendum on the government.

...

No local elections this year in my constituency, but last year's was clearly all about local issues first and foremost ( Tories out, Greens in )

[JM2K6]

...

And honestly, in some places these are actually genuine votes on local issues. Not everything is going to be a referendum on the government.

...

No local elections this year in my constituency, but last year's was clearly all about local issues first and foremost ( Tories out, Greens in )

I felt bad about casting my vote yesterday purely as a reaction to the government. I imagine a lot of people simply don't know/care anything about their local councillors and mayors. I briefly entertained the idea that maybe the Americans have it right with their obsessive attention to their legal and political systems at every level, but then remembered that the American legal and political systems are batshit insane and it's a country of genuine lunatics so maybe our "eh, whatever" approach isn't so bad...

[derriz]

I dunno how this is seen as a "not bad" result for the Tories. It could be interpreted that way, if they were starting from a strong position but they're not - the losses are relative to previously v poor results in the previous local elections which occurred during Teresa May's unpopular watch.

[tabascoboy]

Heavy losses predicted for Tories in Scotland
David Wallace Lockhart

BBC political correspondent

A Scottish Conservative source said the situation north of the border “is not looking good” and pointed the finger of blame at the prime minister.

The source predicted “heavy losses” for the Tories in Scotland and insisted “it’s all down to Partygate and Boris”.

They added that people who would normally back the the Tories were “understandably, and rightly, angry” and had opted to stay home rather than vote.

However, other Scottish Tories who spent the day on the doorstep suggested the situation in Westminster wasn’t a dominant issue, and voters were more concerned with local factors.

Scottish Labour seems relatively confident about coming second in terms of vote share. But it feels like a totemic moment – such as becoming the largest party on Glasgow City Council once again – remains slightly out of reach.

The main question for the SNP is just how big a margin of victory they secure. Sources say turnout will be key here.

[fishfoodie]

I dunno how this is seen as a "not bad" result for the Tories. It could be interpreted that way, if they were starting from a strong position but they're not - the losses are relative to previously v poor results in the previous local elections which occurred during Teresa May's unpopular watch.

You have to wonder if the Torygraph saying that they would lose 800 seats, which never seemed likely, wasn't just them preemptively polishing the turd of the actual end result

[dpedin]

This isn't a general election. The Tories have taken a battering so far and both Labour and Lib Dems have made gains. Labour already had a very strong position - it's not like a GE where Labour are having to work from a weak position. These elections are not a direct proxy for the general election.

According to the beeb outside of London Labour's vote share is down on 2018. So it's .. not great!

Because people are voting Green, which is a positive. Labour have lost less than the Tories (so far).

And honestly, in some places these are actually genuine votes on local issues. Not everything is going to be a referendum on the government.

(Would also say there's a long way to go before we have the full picture!)

Lots of tactical voting going on to get rid of Tories. Still early to draw conclusions, however LDs and Labour both with gains with lots of the Tory losses going to the LDs. Labour went into election on back of good showing in 2018 (they had 50% of the popular vote I think) and had 50% more seats up for election than the Tories so were always going to struggle to make huge gains relatively speaking. However the main drift from Tories seems to be to the LDs, perhaps seen as a softer option for disgruntled Tories, with an increase in Greens as well. Awaiting Wales, NI and Scottish results which I suspect won't be good news for the Tories either. I can see in excess of 200 losses for the Tories by the end of the day.

It looks like the tactical voting messages got through to many and they have voted to the best alternative in order to reduce the Tory vote. Focus needs to be on Tory losses rather than Labour wins given tactical voting.

[_Os_]

Labour's little pact with the Lib Dems suggests that "a bad night for Labour", when they've so far improved on an already strong position despite not campaigning in some seats, is an odd call

Not really, when you can't batter this government and you're one hope of govt is an agreement with the Lib Dems. It's eh not great?

This isn't a general election. The Tories have taken a battering so far and both Labour and Lib Dems have made gains. Labour already had a very strong position - it's not like a GE where Labour are having to work from a weak position. These elections are not a direct proxy for the general election.

It's quite a good barometer for a general election, polling shows 40%-50% of UK voters bring national issues into a local election and include that in their choice of who to vote for.

As for neeps' point. Almost every flavour of Labour and Libdem has opposed the Tories over many years. About 30%-35% of the UK population is just determined to vote Tory until death, it's simply part of their identity and whatever anyone else says makes little impression on them. At some point blaming opposition parties for that stops making sense. Labour are doing well so far in absolute terms and very well relative to tribal voting patterns. It's interesting how Labour winning formerly long standing Tory councils is hand waved away by the UK media ("It's London!") like it's nothing, before they return to their "red wall" obsession and attempts to claim the Tories are doing well. Anyone moving away from their tribal voting pattern is huge, if the Tories lose parts of their tribal voting base in southern England then they're not winning a general election. Ironically given the coverage, the Tories so far have almost no gains in southern England outside London and quite a lot of losses.

[JM2K6]

Not really, when you can't batter this government and you're one hope of govt is an agreement with the Lib Dems. It's eh not great?

This isn't a general election. The Tories have taken a battering so far and both Labour and Lib Dems have made gains. Labour already had a very strong position - it's not like a GE where Labour are having to work from a weak position. These elections are not a direct proxy for the general election.

It's quite a good barometer for a general election, polling shows 40%-50% of UK voters bring national issues into a local election and include that in their choice of who to vote for.

As for neeps' point. Almost every flavour of Labour and Libdem has opposed the Tories over many years. About 30%-35% of the UK population is just determined to vote Tory until death, it's simply part of their identity and whatever anyone else says makes little impression on them. At some point blaming opposition parties for that stops making sense. Labour are doing well so far in absolute terms and very well relative to tribal voting patterns. It's interesting how Labour winning formerly long standing Tory councils is hand waved away by the UK media ("It's London!") like it's nothing, before they return to their "red wall" obsession and attempts to claim the Tories are doing well. Anyone moving away from their tribal voting pattern is huge, if the Tories lose parts of their tribal voting base in southern England then they're not winning a general election. Ironically given the coverage, the Tories so far have almost no gains in southern England outside London and quite a lot of losses.

2018: Labour 35% of the vote share, Tories 35% of the vote share. 2019 GE: Labour wins the fewest seats in a GE since 1935.

I don't think it is a good barometer except in the most basic and immediate of ways. Especially as the political map for councils is often completely different to that for MPs. On top of that, people feel safer making protest votes in local elections and others simply don't give a shit about voting - both of these change dramatically when it's the government of the country at stake.

edit: 2014 local elections - Labour and Conservatives both made gains. Labour ended up with 2121 councillors and 82 councils. Tories, 1364 and 41 (a huge difference). GE result in 2015? Tories gain 24 seats, going up to 330; Labour lose 256, going down to 232. It's largely meaningless except as a rough barometer of how annoyed the electorate might be at this precise moment.

[_Os_]

2018: Labour 35% of the vote share, Tories 35% of the vote share. 2019 GE: Labour wins the fewest seats in a GE since 1935.

I don't think it is a good barometer except in the most basic and immediate of ways. Especially as the political map for councils is often completely different to that for MPs. On top of that, people feel safer making protest votes in local elections and others simply don't give a shit about voting - both of these change dramatically when it's the government of the country at stake.

edit: 2014 local elections - Labour and Conservatives both made gains. Labour ended up with 2121 councillors and 82 councils. Tories, 1364 and 41 (a huge difference). GE result in 2015? Tories gain 24 seats, going up to 330; Labour lose 256, going down to 232. It's largely meaningless except as a rough barometer of how annoyed the electorate might be at this precise moment.

You're getting caught up in vote share, when a UK general election doesn't use a PR system, so vote share is a bit meaningless (mentioned this in my first post on the thread). If you're just looking at total vote share you're going to see what you're seeing which is nothing. For vote share to matter as a barometer a UK general election, the UK would need to be a single PR constituency. The other problem with vote share is it's not looking at the absolute numbers so details can be lost.

People being what they are, don't move their vote around that much. If someone votes for a party in one type of election they're more likely to vote for the same party in another type of election, and if they're voting in a local election they're more likely to vote in a general election. If you pick one constituency you know well, and do an analysis at ward level (councils don't map to constituencies, wards do) compared to previous elections (both general elections and local elections), overlaying that ward level data with the demographics from the wards. Then you can build an accurate enough picture.

For an ordinary person this will take a few hours and they can only do it with a constituency they know well (which may or may not be a weather vane constituency, in other words they could do it and still learn nothing).

But lets say there's a constituency where the Tory MP has a 3k majority. In this election the Tory majority in working class/lower middle class wards shrinks in absolute terms (these wards were being won with 1500 votes in 2021 and 2018, but are now being won with 750). Meanwhile in middle class/upper class wards with thin Labour majorities, there's now a high turnout and Labour are now winning 2k votes (whereas before they were getting 1000-1500) and in those wards all the other parties combined are getting a few hundred votes, and something similar is happening in wards that are majority not white (regardless of their class). In that example you can immediately see the Tory is unlikely to keep the seat when a general election comes.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

It's a bad election to read much into. Voter turnout is low, and the wrong seats were being contested this year. If people really want to project on the back of it then fine, but it's only a marginally better starting point than reading tea leaves or gutting some chickens to intuit secrets from their entrails

[salanya]

Boris is learning his lesson: 'focusing on the things that matter to people' - such a visionary genius


Oh, and he's blaming the economic artichokes.

Yes, that's a literal quote.

[JM2K6]

2018: Labour 35% of the vote share, Tories 35% of the vote share. 2019 GE: Labour wins the fewest seats in a GE since 1935.

I don't think it is a good barometer except in the most basic and immediate of ways. Especially as the political map for councils is often completely different to that for MPs. On top of that, people feel safer making protest votes in local elections and others simply don't give a shit about voting - both of these change dramatically when it's the government of the country at stake.

edit: 2014 local elections - Labour and Conservatives both made gains. Labour ended up with 2121 councillors and 82 councils. Tories, 1364 and 41 (a huge difference). GE result in 2015? Tories gain 24 seats, going up to 330; Labour lose 256, going down to 232. It's largely meaningless except as a rough barometer of how annoyed the electorate might be at this precise moment.

You're getting caught up in vote share, when a UK general election doesn't use a PR system, so vote share is a bit meaningless (mentioned this in my first post on the thread). If you're just looking at total vote share you're going to see what you're seeing which is nothing. For vote share to matter as a barometer a UK general election, the UK would need to be a single PR constituency. The other problem with vote share is it's not looking at the absolute numbers so details can be lost.

People being what they are, don't move their vote around that much. If someone votes for a party in one type of election they're more likely to vote for the same party in another type of election, and if they're voting in a local election they're more likely to vote in a general election. If you pick one constituency you know well, and do an analysis at ward level (councils don't map to constituencies, wards do) compared to previous elections (both general elections and local elections), overlaying that ward level data with the demographics from the wards. Then you can build an accurate enough picture.

For an ordinary person this will take a few hours and they can only do it with a constituency they know well (which may or may not be a weather vane constituency, in other words they could do it and still learn nothing).

But lets say there's a constituency where the Tory MP has a 3k majority. In this election the Tory majority in working class/lower middle class wards shrinks in absolute terms (these wards were being won with 1500 votes in 2021 and 2018, but are now being won with 750). Meanwhile in middle class/upper class wards with thin Labour majorities, there's now a high turnout and Labour are now winning 2k votes (whereas before they were getting 1000-1500) and in those wards all the other parties combined are getting a few hundred votes, and something similar is happening in wards that are majority not white (regardless of their class). In that example you can immediately see the Tory is unlikely to keep the seat when a general election comes.

But the point is that Labour are in a completely different position when it comes to local councils, so trying to analyse the possible impact for a general election is not comparing apples to apples in the first place. And given that Labour has undoubtedly had great nights before in local elections only to get thumped in a GE not long after, even trying to map wards is going to give a deceptive picture.

It just isn't the case that it matches up that easily.

[_Os_]

It's a bad election to read much into. Voter turnout is low, and the wrong seats were being contested this year. If people really want to project on the back of it then fine, but it's only a marginally better starting point than reading tea leaves or gutting some chickens to intuit secrets from their entrails

It's much more significant than polling, something which shapes political debate and decisions.

If we take one of the media talking points "Labour have only done well in London". The only net gains the Tories have in southern England outside London are Plymouth (+2 from 19 contested) and Fareham (+2 from 16 contested), if you count Nuneaton as southern England then +2 from 17 contested there. Tabulating all the Labour/Libdem/Green gains in southern England outside London would take me more time than I'm willing to put into it. But the narrative in the media is Labour have only done well in London, which really is "gutting some chickens to intuit secrets from their entrails".

Tories/Labour/Libdems will all be putting this data into their models to help work out where they're strong and weak. In some places it won't show a lot, in other places it will.

[C69]

Great for Labour if the Lib Dems take seats in Tory marginals.
If their voters use their wasted votes in these areas at the GE then the Tories are screwed. This is the crux, disaffected Tories will vote LD and in key marginals the Labour voters should flip a few to the LDs.

As JMK says, the other narratives are quite odd.
A strong LD party is much better for Labour.
There will be a pact not overt and obvious but a pact none the less.
Tbh highlighting the pact may be a disaster for the Tories, lets hope tactical voting increases.

[_Os_]

But the point is that Labour are in a completely different position when it comes to local councils, so trying to analyse the possible impact for a general election is not comparing apples to apples in the first place.

Obviously it's not an apple and an apple. But you're still painting in brushstrokes that are too broad for me. I think you get my general point and just disagree, so I won't make any further long posts to try and convince you it can be a good indicator sometimes.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

It's a bad election to read much into. Voter turnout is low, and the wrong seats were being contested this year. If people really want to project on the back of it then fine, but it's only a marginally better starting point than reading tea leaves or gutting some chickens to intuit secrets from their entrails

It's much more significant than polling, something which shapes political debate and decisions.

If we take one of the media talking points "Labour have only done well in London". The only net gains the Tories have in southern England outside London are Plymouth (+2 from 19 contested) and Fareham (+2 from 16 contested), if you count Nuneaton as southern England then +2 from 17 contested there. Tabulating all the Labour/Libdem/Green gains in southern England outside London would take me more time than I'm willing to put into it. But the narrative in the media is Labour have only done well in London, which really is "gutting some chickens to intuit secrets from their entrails".

Tories/Labour/Libdems will all be putting this data into their models to help work out where they're strong and weak. In some places it won't show a lot, in other places it will.

It's more significant than polling in that people will now take seats as local councillors. It's perhaps not such a good indicator of a GE, polling should still be better for that if done well