BREXIT (6 Viewers)

[magicbastarder]

i'm hearing theories that all the talk of the labour landslide is one reason why labour didn't jump as much as expected, and the turnout wasn't great; people planning to vote labour just got complacent.
it was posited as one reason starmer's vote dropped in his own constituency.
talking to a colleague based in newbury (who has never been much interested in politics), his attitude was 'i'll probably vote, even though it's a foregone conclusion'.

 

[Deadmanposting]

Yeah that doesn't really denote any real difference - there is a 3% section here that kinda had to go from unionist to SF, which is gonna crease a few people's sashes i'd say

View attachment 18912

I don't get you

What 3%?

 

[ann post]

I don't get you

What 3%?

DUP are down 8.5%, alliance 1.8 - about 10% drop

of that

7.6% is gone to TUV/Green/PBP

This leaves a mystery 2.4% that must have transferred from Unionist to SF.

It's maths, not opinion

 

[seanc]

Or just other people voting. Demographic changes?

 

[ann post]

Or just other people voting. Demographic changes?

From being there* a lot, i'd kinda say it's a bit more becoming like here - if the local TD is effective they are winning favour, rather than if the local TD is Unionist or Irish being the only factor which is what NI is growing out of, by possibly 3%

 

[magicbastarder]

DUP are down 8.5%, alliance 1.8 - about 10% drop

of that

7.6% is gone to TUV/Green/PBP

This leaves a mystery 2.4% that must have transferred from Unionist to SF.

It's maths, not opinion

Or else it could be shifts in and out of people out who didn't vote.
Its only maths if there has been a consistent 100% turnout.

 

[ann post]

Or else it could be shifts in and out of people out who didn't vote.
Its only maths if there has been a consistent 100% turnout.

NAh I'm talking about the people who did vote, which is 100% of voters.

 

[Deadmanposting]

Easton might be worth a percent there

 

[magicbastarder]

NAh I'm talking about the people who did vote, which is 100% of voters.

I don't know what you mean so. A 3% swing could be due to people who had voted before not voting, and people voting who had not voted before. You don't actually need any voters to have done a volte face to achieve that.

 

[hydromancer]

From being there* a lot, i'd kinda say it's a bit more becoming like here - if the local TD is effective they are winning favour, rather than if the local TD is Unionist or Irish being the only factor which is what NI is growing out of, by possibly 3%

Yeah I think so vote a for the individual candidate regardless of the party. If they are seen to have actually delivered or improved something for the constituency. The SDLP for example have two good MPs even if they are pro a united Ireland. Contrast to the DUP refusing to go to Stormont for two years which in the end achieved nothing.

 

[Kermit McDermott]

Jacob Rees Mogg says he is looking forward to spending more time with his children

Peter Theodore Alphege Rees-Mogg.
Mary Anne Charlotte Emma Rees-Mogg.
Thomas Wentworth Somerset Dunstan Rees-Mogg.
Anselm Charles Fitzwilliam Rees-Mogg.
Alfred Wulfric Leyson Pius Rees-Mogg.
Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher Rees Moog

 

[magicbastarder]

i had to google that to see if you were joking.

 

[Kermit McDermott]

Ah, its just an excuse to post all those ridiculous names

 

[magicbastarder]

kinda funny to see the candidate lists up north - one constituency had only five people standing.

 

[JohnnyRaz]

Jacob Rees Mogg says he is looking forward to spending more time with his children

Peter Theodore Alphege Rees-Mogg.
Mary Anne Charlotte Emma Rees-Mogg.
Thomas Wentworth Somerset Dunstan Rees-Mogg.
Anselm Charles Fitzwilliam Rees-Mogg.
Alfred Wulfric Leyson Pius Rees-Mogg.
Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher Rees Moog

Jaysus. I’d expect nothing less to be fair.

 

[magicbastarder]

Sixtus Dominic Boniface Christopher Rees Moog

maybe this was the inspiration for count binface.

 

[ann post]

I don't know what you mean so. A 3% swing could be due to people who had voted before not voting, and people voting who had not voted before. You don't actually need any voters to have done a volte face to achieve that.

You can only compare votes to previous votes, some people will die and some people will come of age to vote and a million other factors come into play - you can't factor in the non voters in any way, you can only deal with the number that exists on the day and how many people turn up on the day.

I'm not saying anything complicated. Last time the number was smaller, this time the number is bigger, that is an increase. It's nearly like a census, and you are asking why i'm not factoring dead people or people who don't exist yet - One year it's a value, and another year its another value, and you compare them to test the weather.

 

[magicbastarder]

i thought you were stating that people had actually jumped ship in an unexpected way. that there were voters who changed allegiance from unionist to SF.

 

[ann post]

Well yes i am - by about 2-3%

 

[magicbastarder]

oh. so you *were* saying that?
if you're comparing two elections several years apart, with turnouts of (say) 70%; there is no way you can state definitively that 3% of voters changed allegiance, due to a 3% swing.
it is *more* than feasible that the 30% of non-voters (which does not have to be the exact same 30% of people across both elections) could account for a 3% swing.
it's maths, not opinion.