Saturday, May 08, 2010

Did UKIP Do For Cameron ? They Did.

I looked at a few results at lunchtime yesterday - first to see how Labour's carpetbaggers did. Luciana Berger, the girl* who didn't know who Bill Shankly was, won by a mile.

Tristram Hunt, posh historian and BBC favourite, got in easily too - with the Lib Dems second. Gary Elsby, the Labour councillor who stood against him in protest, got 400 votes.

But in Stoke South Labour only won from the Tories by 4,000 votes. The BNP and UKIP got 5,000 between them.

And in Newcastle under Lyme Labour won from the Tories by just 1500 votes. UKIP got nearly 3,500. Strike one to UKIP.

On arriving home I see EU Referendum devoting a post to the "UKIP effect". They compare the Labour-Tory gap to the combined UKIP-BNP vote, which I think is a little unfair. IMHO at least half the BNP votes will be former Labour votes, whereas 90% of UKIP voters will be former Tories.

It'll be interesting to go through the results and see whether the UKIP effect has cost them the 30-odd seats they needed for a majority. The Guardian has the results as a downloadable spreadsheet.

Watch this space.

UPDATE - I make that 21 seats where the Tories came second and the UKIP vote was bigger than the vote difference between first and second place. The Tories were 20 seats short of a majority.

Seat Candidate Tory Vote
Bolton West "Williams, Susan" 18,235
Derby North "Mold, Stephen" 14,283
Derbyshire North East "Merriman, Huw" 15,503
Dorset Mid and Poole North "King, Nick" 20,831
Dudley North "Brown, Graeme" 14,274
Great Grimsby "Ayling, Victoria" 10,063
Hampstead and Kilburn "Philp, Chris" 17,290
Middlesbrough South and Cleveland East "Bristow, Paul" 16,461
Morley and Outwood "Calvert, Antony" 17,264
Newcastle-under-Lyme "Jenrick, Robert" 14,841
Plymouth Moor View "Groves, Matthew" 13,845
Solihull "Throup, Maggie" 23,460
Somerton and Frome "Rees-Mogg, Annunziata" 26,976
Southampton Itchen "Smith, Royston" 16,134
St Austell and Newquay "Righton, Caroline" 18,877
St Ives "Thomas, Derek" 17,900
Telford "Biggins, Tom" 14,996
Walsall North "Clack, Helyn" 12,395
Walsall South "Hunt, Richard" 14,456
Wells "Heathcoat-Amory, David" 23,760
Wirral South "Clarke, Jeff" 15,745

Now you can argue, and doubtless the Cameronians will, that without accepting the results of the cultural revolution (aka 'detoxifying the brand') they would not be anywhere near power. But as I said many a year back, there'd be a price to pay. They're paying it.

* Ms Berger : "You can't ask a girl a football question."


Kevin B said...

A few Tory supporters on the Speccie blog are complaining about UKIP costing them the outright victory. This commentator sums up my feelings about that, (especially the part I bolded).

Rhoda Klapp
May 8th, 2010 1:53pm

Nicholas, it is evident that when they chased the focus groups, the tories lost support from a lot of other people. They ended up with no decent policies. They have to live with that, it was a conscious decision. They called me a nutter for my opinion on the EU and climate change. Well, not me personally, but those who think like me. They could have thrown me a bone, and they did not. Do not blame me for not voting for them, they didn't want me.

dan said...

I think UKIP have done the Tories a favour. To deal with the deficit from a majority position, the Tories would have needed a 100 seat majority with big majorities in indvidual seats to keep them in for a second term (which it would need).
Imagine if Cam had the 327 seats your post suggests; he'd be trying to push through the most unpleasant programme for 60 years with his own headbangers holding him to ransom, never mind the opposition. Not ideal - would prefer that 100 seat maj (with Thatcher redux) but that ain't an option, sadly.

Ross said...

UKIP are self destructive at times, helping get a eurosceptic like David Heathcoate Amory beaten by a Lib Dem eurofanatic.

Laban said...

Dan - the dodgy electoral boundaries are one issue. If Labour had the Tories' percentage of the vote, they'd have had a majority of around 96 seats.

Anonymous said...

Laban, you should also checkout the poor performance of the Tory A-listers.
12 out of 27 or so failing to win despite being seats the Tories were expected to win.

dan said...

Yep that's a fair point Laban (though the Lib Dems' 22 per cent of the vote converting into 8 per cent of seats is equally unfair).
My dream scenario would have been any Tory majority followed, sad but inevitable as it is (in my view), by disconnection from Scotland and possibly Wales - but that was never going to happen. Still say a very small Con maj would have been nightmarish (though UKIP also let in some Lib Dems too).

Enery said...

Anyway who was Bill Shankly ?

Mark said...

Anon 12.28-
the poor performance of the 'A-listers' is also a personal blow for Cameron, and his 'detoxify at all costs' strategy. The failure of the most photogenic, and best connected (via marriage) A lister, namely Joanna Cash, must have been particularly galling for Call Me Dave.

Anonymous said...

22% getting only 8% seats is not unfair.

Its upto the candidiates to win on their own merit.
An MP should be who gains the most popular support in their constituency.
Whereas I would agree it is unfair if there is a 3 way split between LibLabCon, most constituencies are two horse races.

Also the LibDems are not a unified party, they win in the south west on one platform, while winning in some areas in the north on another.
They have structured themselves as a protest party, look at the LibDem win in Redcar for example, when its actually LibDem enviromental ideas that are the cause of the steel works closure.

Its very arrogant of the LibDems to believe that if we had PR they would continue to get the same percent of the vote.

Anonymous said...

UKIP are self destructive at times

Or even verging on the kamikaze.

Or is that joke in poor tatse?

Anonymous said...

Ive always assumed that UKIP were set up by the tories to soak up the euro sceptic vote. Sure there would be some collateral damage but maybe things went too far this time?

I do wonder if the BNP are a state run false flag operation. There to soak up other protest votes and corral them safely off from the mainstream. Build them up and then remote control detonation just when they get too big. Note how the BNP managed a series of untimely problems/own goals in the run up to the election.

Furthermore one has to wonder about the EDL and their origins in the murky world of state activity. They appeared out of nowhere just in time to create the spectre of right wing street violence to the detriment of the BNP.

Lefty types seem convinced that the EDL and BNP are one and the same but the EDL can only have hurt the BNP. Plus sidetracking some potential supporters. Follow the money (or the votes in this case).

We'll know if the EDL are for real if they continue to exist post-election. If there is any basis to my whacko conspiracy therory they will vanish as quietly and mysteriously as they first appeared.

Anyome remember Alam Bleasedale's GBH series? The state run mob of street activists, who in turn posed as a fake police squad.