Police Commisioner Elections : November 2012 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 16, 2024, 09:45:44 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Police Commisioner Elections : November 2012 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Police Commisioner Elections : November 2012  (Read 23472 times)
Pilchard
Rookie
**
Posts: 37
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -4.87

P P P
« on: October 18, 2012, 08:05:21 PM »

Not sure if people already know this, but I got a reply from the electoral commission confirming that these elections fall under the same rules as local elections, i.e. students registered at home and at university can vote at both addresses as long as they are in different police areas.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Anyway, the candidates so far seem uninspiring, underqualified, or both. Not quite sure what to do, even though the results in both areas are fairly certain. Maybe it's time to have a serious look at the Loonies.
Logged
Pilchard
Rookie
**
Posts: 37
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -4.87

P P P
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2012, 11:05:31 AM »

Cambridgeshire 1st preferences - Sir Graham Bright and Ed Murphy go through to second round (as well as my second preference vote). All 7 candidates held their deposit.

Con 23731 (25.9%)
Lab 17576 (19.2%)
UKIP 14504 (15.8%)
Ind (Ali) 12706 (13.9%)
Lib Dem 7530 (8.2%)
Eng Dem 7219 (7.9%)
Ind (Mohammed) 5337 (5.8%)
Rejected 2892 (3.2%)

By district:
Cambridge: L 31.6% - LD 17.9% - C 16.9% - Ali 12.9% - UKIP 8.1% - ED 4.4% - Mohammed 3.7% - Rejected 4.6%
Peterborough: L 22.5% - C 20.9% - Ali 16.0% - Mohammed 12.3% - UKIP 11.9% - ED 9.9% - LD 3.2% - Rejected 2.3%
East Cambs: C 32.3% - UKIP 17.2% - L 13.6% - Ali 12.6% - LD 10.6% - ED 7.2% - Mohammed 3.3% - Rejected 3.1%
South Cambs: C 29.4% - L 16.3% - UKIP 15.2% - Ali 14.1% - LD 11.0% - ED 6.3% - Mohammed 3.7% - Rejected 4.0%
Hunts: C 29.9% - UKIP 22.7% - Ali 15.1% - L 12.5% - ED 7.1% - LD 5.9% - Mohammed 3.8% - Rejected 2.9%
Fenland: C 30.6% - UKIP 22.2% - L 17.0% - ED 12.7% - Ali 8.2% - LD 4.1% - Mohammed 3.2% - Rejected 2.0%

Turnout: 15.25% (Pboro 17.45%, SCambs 15.9%, Hunts 15.31%, Cbridge 14.69%, Fenland 12.98%, ECambs 12.93%)
Logged
Pilchard
Rookie
**
Posts: 37
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -4.87

P P P
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2012, 02:22:12 PM »
« Edited: November 16, 2012, 02:24:22 PM by Pilchard »

Cambridgeshire 1st preferences - Sir Graham Bright and Ed Murphy go through to second round (as well as my second preference vote). All 7 candidates held their deposit.
<snip>

was there not supposed to be a Raving Loony?

Lord Toby Jug was mentioned as a candidate early on but didn't run in the end, not sure why. Maybe the deposit was just too much and they wanted to concentrate on the Manchester by-election.

After 2nd preferences - Sir Graham Bright (Con) 31640, Ed Murphy (Lab) 25114. Rather underwhelming win for the Tories I think.
Logged
Pilchard
Rookie
**
Posts: 37
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -5.16, S: -4.87

P P P
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2012, 02:33:58 PM »

Perhaps they realised that there was no point in running anyone as the elections were likely to be a big enough joke in their own right?

this sounds likely too - from Lord Toby Jug's twitter:

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 10 queries.