In all 38,700 people voted – 53 per cent of those who could have cast their ballots, down from 74 per cent in 2010.
The Conservatives’ candidate Robert Jenrick won with 17,431 votes or 44.9 per cent of the ballot, ahead of Ukip’s Roger Helmer on 10,028 votes, or 25.8 per cent.
And they’re not going to be able to put that sort of effort into a single seat at the GE.
As a rough pencil sketch UKIP on 15% or less nationally doesn’t change all that much. A few marginals will move one way or the other (don’t forget, UKIP does not draw all, perhaps even the majority, of its support from the Tory vote). If the national vote is above 20% then merry hell breaks loose. How FPTP works…..
One thing I noticed in my borough—the UKIP candidates did fairly badly in the strongly contested wards, but well in the “safe” wards, nearly taking the Leader’s ward (although he wasn’t up), I suspect that part of the affect they’re having is the over-concentration on the marginals that FPTP effectively requires means voters in safer seats are even more disillusioned.
It’s going to be a very weird election next year, part of me would love to be sat in a university somewhere studying it all and making some serious predictions. But most of me is looking at living in a 4-way marginal and wondering what tactic works best.
MatGB: But most of me is looking at living in a 4-way marginal
…so your current MP sits in the LibDem interest.
It’s not about changing the reality, it is about changing the perception.
If the establishment (and the BBC are part thereof) can get the meme firmly established that UKIP are a Euro-election only thing then they can forget about them (and Farage et al will be tilting at windmills in the increasingly federast Juncker-led Brussels), then things can sail on pretty much as normal (except with even fewer LD deposits regained.)
Although UKIP didn’t claim their first seat in the Newark by-election, they did perform very well with 26% of the vote from pretty much a standing start since the last election.
The Liberal Democrats came 6th and lost their deposit on a swing of -17%. I live in vain hope that next years general election will wipe the Liberal Democrats from the UK political landscape as their disreputable behaviour since 2010 has demonstrated that not only are they unfit to govern (albeit in a coalition), they are unfit even to serve as constituency MP’s.
The current “talks” about a possible 2015 Labour/Lib Dem coalition is a joke as I doubt their will be enough Lib Dem MP’s left in 2015 to form a cricket team, never mind form a coalition.
The phrase “‘… and the Liberal lost his deposit’ was an old music hall joke. I am pleased to see its revival and wish it all the best for the future in 2015 and beyond.
I voted UKIP at the recent elections (the Tories got in both locally and European-wise), though I only did so on the basis of the EU democratic deficit, disenchantment at the major parties, and revulsion at the way the metroleft kept slurring them as racists and bigots, as though that won the argument and enough had been said.
I will probably vote UKIP at the next election, but I doubt that UKIP will win a single seat. In fact, I fully expect to be part of a movement which will see Miliband in power, and I hope he utterly wrecks the country thereafter.
Yes, the Tories threw everything at Newark, but UKIP weren’t sitting on their arses either. It’s still not a general election.
Anyway we Euro-realists will still have to make a choice between a Cameron promise (ugh!) of a referendum, and the f*ck all offered by Militwat. Not much of a choice, but the former still offers more of a chance of getting out of the EU than the latter. Sorry chaps, it ain’t pretty but that’s the logic. Who do you hate more: the Tories or the EU?
VC – the Tories, I’m afraid.
The EU, but because they aren’t too keen on democracy I’ll have to settle for kicking Cameron to the curb.
Translation: Vote UKIP get Labour!
Alarm bells will be ringing in the Labour camp. Vote down 4.5 points on 2010. That’s the real story I think. Another triumph for pants Bryant.
The £500 deposit does seem rather unfair. Is it to discourage frivolous candidates or to protect the established parties? What does a £500 deposit achieve that a £100 deposit wouldn’t?
Vote UKIP get Labour?
So what?
@Andrew M
“The £500 deposit does seem rather unfair. Is it to discourage frivolous candidates or to protect the established parties?”
Surely £500 is nothing. They will spend substantially more than that in money, time, others volunteering, assuming they are serious.
And the winner gets a very nice salary, pension, expenses…. and in addition to all of the raw power, influence, kickbacks, consultancy fees (sorry, I meant “opportunity to serve the people”) that comes with being a Member of Parliament.
“If the national vote is above 20% then merry hell breaks loose.”
I think the next 12 months could be interesting. I don’t think this UKIP vote is simply going to “melt away” as Cameron hopes, as (at the core) Cameron has seriously pissed off far too much of what should have been a natural Conservative vote.
“merry hell” – now that would actually be a lot of fun..:)
> Who do you hate more: the Tories or the EU?
It’s a long game. The Tories could be a pretty good party without Cameron. With Cameron, never. Electing them next year would send them the clear message that Cameronism is a good idea — so, even when he goes, they’d look to get another one like him.
UKIP may not be the solution, but they could well be the mechanism that will causes the Tories to find a solution.
> I will probably vote UKIP at the next election, but I doubt that UKIP will win a single seat. In fact, I fully expect to be part of a movement which will see Miliband in power, and I hope he utterly wrecks the country thereafter.
I’m inclined to agree. We won’t get proper choice in our democracy without a genuine party of the right, and the Tories won’t swing right until Labour revive the Seventies.
BinG: “Translation: Vote UKIP get Labour!”
Yep, that’s it in a nutshell. To which the standard answer is “These Tories are just Labour by another name these days. There is no differecne, we might as well have the real thing as what we’ve got”
No! Labour is Labour. Labour is the party of the Richard Murphys and all his market/business/personal feedom hating comrades. When you go around saying “it’s as good as having Labour” you had better think about what you really mean and really believe. Because you won’t end up with “as good as Labour” or a gov’t you can shout that to, kidding yourself you believe it. No, you will get Labour, the real, genuine article.
The LibDems used to come 2nd in the majority of seats (their support was fairly equal everywhere). UKIP look like having the same if we get about 20% of the national vote. However, if we can get above that we become the contender almost everywhere. Most LD seats are ones where the Lab/Cons voted LD because they were the only ones who could shift the local Con/Labs. Like the LDs, UKIP support PR (perhaps more sincerely than the LDs now)
Ironman,
“No! Labour is Labour. Labour is the party of the Richard Murphys and all his market/business/personal feedom hating comrades.”
No they’re not. How different is Cameron from Labour?
Throughout the period from being elected as leader to the bank collapse, not once did David Cameron or George Osborne criticise the level of spending under either Blair or Brown.
Cameron nannies about what retailers are selling, the content of pop videos (saying there should be a licensing system, even though there is one already), what sorts of oranges WH Smith sells, the price that holiday companies charge at peak times. I remember the Blair era, and I don’t even remember Blair making such pronouncements.
It’s not just Cameron’s version of Conservatism that I don’t like. It’s also that I think he’s a ridiculous person.