UK local elections, May 2018

[cp]

Hmm, seems a bit underwhelming all around. No great gains for Labour and a few troubling losses. Tories do better than expected but still tenuous. Lib Dems have a good showing but not the anti-Brexit wave they hoped for.

For those wanting an idea of the larger significance of these results so far, the Thrasher Projection, which calculates what result the party's proportion of the local election vote seen tonight would result in if the whole country was voting in a GE, came up with these numbers:

Tories: 305
Labour: 261
SNP: 35
Lib Dem: 26
Others: 23

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/992287533600948229

This would mean the Tories would lose the ability to govern with a majority by teaming up with the DUP. Labour, however, would still be a few seats short, even with all the other non-Tory/DUP parties' support. In essence, the hungiest of hung parliaments.

[parochial boy]

The Greens have had a surprisingly good night.

I would instinctively have thought that Corbynism would kill them off, but anecdotally it does seem that they have a fairly decent appeal to a lot people who are very much not Labour/Corbyn supporters.

[Blair]

The Greens have had a surprisingly good night.

I would instinctively have thought that Corbynism would kill them off, but anecdotally it does seem that they have a fairly decent appeal to a lot people who are very much not Labour/Corbyn supporters.

'Tories on bikes' was one of the old sayings. In places like Sheffield they do at least offer an alternative to Labour cutting down the cities Trees. I don't know the specifics for each council; but I know in places that Labour have struggled, it has sometimes been related to a lackluster Labour administration.

Neither of my parents have ever voted Green in the GE, but they voted for them a handful of times in the local because of the One-Party state that is Lewisham.

[Pericles]

Hmm, seems a bit underwhelming all around. No great gains for Labour and a few troubling losses. Tories do better than expected but still tenuous. Lib Dems have a good showing but not the anti-Brexit wave they hoped for.

For those wanting an idea of the larger significance of these results so far, the Thrasher Projection, which calculates what result the party's proportion of the local election vote seen tonight would result in if the whole country was voting in a GE, came up with these numbers:

Tories: 305
Labour: 261
SNP: 35
Lib Dem: 26
Others: 23

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/992287533600948229

This would mean the Tories would lose the ability to govern with a majority by teaming up with the DUP. Labour, however, would still be a few seats short, even with all the other non-Tory/DUP parties' support. In essence, the hungiest of hung parliaments.

On those exact results, Labour could also get support from Plaid Cymru, maybe Sylvia Hermon(not sure) and the Greens(5 or 6 MPs in total currently), Labour+LibDem+PC+Green+SNP would add up to 327-328 seats. With 7 Sinn Fein MPs abstaining, that gives the governing coalition an 11 or 12-seat majority. Not very stable by any means but it would be mathematically possible for Labour to form a government, though slight shifts could make that a lot easier or enable the Tories to keep power and put Labour back to opposition.

[Blair]

The funny thing is that Labour did very well in both Westminster and Wandsworth (I think it was their best performance in 40 odd years) but they lost the spin war, whilst also doing poorly in other areas of the countries.

The Liberal Democrats did a lot better than anyone expected; of course this is where they have always historically done well, especially in places like Richmond where they're the only realistic opposition to the Tories. The party survived historically by having a very small parliamentary base which was balanced by strong local performances.

In terms of parliamentary maths Pericles- Sylvia Hermon is a devout NI unionist and would never support Corbyn due to his IRA links, and I expect the Lib Dems/SNP would both want referendums in exchange for support.

It would truly be a nightmare scenario

[Gary J]

I would have thought that, on the predicted national seat numbers, Corbyn would form a minority government. His likely preference would be not to make deals with anyone, but to dare the other parties to defeat him in Parliament.

Given that the Conservatives would probably be in the middle of a leadership election and that other parties probably could not afford a quick second general election, such a minority government would probably be able to exist for a few months. Of course Jeremy Corbyn is such a divisive figure, even within the Parliamentary Labour Party, that there would actually be a second general election within a few months anyway.

[Pericles]

Ah well, my bad on Hermon, I remember hearing that she could have supported a rainbow coalition in 2010 but forgot about Corbyn's IRA links. Still, a Labour government would be mathematically possible, but maybe not politically. Certainly it seems neither party has been able to break away. Then again, 2017's local elections weren't very predictive of the election a month later-and there isn't even an election next month. But maybe that was more due to the shifts in the campaign and how bad the Tory campaign was, and this does seem to be a useful indicator, if imperfect, on the political environment.

[Blair]

Ah well, my bad on Hermon, I remember hearing that she could have supported a rainbow coalition in 2010 but forgot about Corbyn's IRA links. Still, a Labour government would be mathematically possible, but maybe not politically. Certainly it seems neither party has been able to break away. Then again, 2017's local elections weren't very predictive of the election a month later-and there isn't even an election next month. But maybe that was more due to the shifts in the campaign and how bad the Tory campaign was, and this does seem to be a useful indicator, if imperfect, on the political environment.

Yep. Turnout was also 50% lower in general elections, and it's always difficult to take national results from an election where only 1/3 of the country voted.

The 2017 locals were pretty much in line with the polling, and show that the control result for 2017 (without the manifesto bomb, Maybot, Manchester etc) was a Tory Majority of 50-60 seats.

The spin from the Labour Leadership is that local elections are completely different; less coverage, less visibility for Corbyn, lower turnout.

As I've said in other threads, the real takeaway is that British Politics is much harder to model now. We've not only got UKIP's vote completely collapsing, but the Remain/Leave divide equally making people vote differently.   

[Silent Hunter]

Havering remains NOC:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cyd02rr91z8t/havering-london-borough-council

Rather annoyingly, the Resident who said he was standing down and then ran again as Tory kept his seat.

[Blair]

Ken Livingstone is on Sky News talking about Zionism and Hitler. Feels like early 2017 again.

[Dr Oz Lost Party!]

Conservatives now at a net of -1 seat

[Tintrlvr]

If you look only at results outside of London, it looks like a strong night for the Tories. If you look only at results in London, it looks like a disaster for the Tories. Inverse for Labour, of course.

I don't see how that's true at all? The results in London are much better for the Tories than even more sensible briefings suggested - o/c they were defending poor results in much of the city from 2014.

The Tories have lost a bunch of ground in London overall but generally gained ground outside of London. Measuring relative to "expectations" is a futile task, but measuring next to prior results is actually helpful.

[Oryxslayer]

If you look only at results outside of London, it looks like a strong night for the Tories. If you look only at results in London, it looks like a disaster for the Tories. Inverse for Labour, of course.

I don't see how that's true at all? The results in London are much better for the Tories than even more sensible briefings suggested - o/c they were defending poor results in much of the city from 2014.

The Tories have lost a bunch of ground in London overall but generally gained ground outside of London. Measuring relative to "expectations" is a futile task, but measuring next to prior results is actually helpful.

Yes, but nobody can deny that Labour have done a remarkably poor job of managing expectations. What looks like a average night or more or less a wash now looks like Lab loss. Wandsworth would have flipped easily under the expectations Labor were setting, but they couldn't capture that council.

[vileplume]

If you look only at results outside of London, it looks like a strong night for the Tories. If you look only at results in London, it looks like a disaster for the Tories. Inverse for Labour, of course.

I don't see how that's true at all? The results in London are much better for the Tories than even more sensible briefings suggested - o/c they were defending poor results in much of the city from 2014.

The Tories have lost a bunch of ground in London overall but generally gained ground outside of London. Measuring relative to "expectations" is a futile task, but measuring next to prior results is actually helpful.

Yes, but nobody can deny that Labour have done a remarkably poor job of managing expectations. What looks like a average night or more or less a wash now looks like Lab loss. Wandsworth would have flipped easily under the expectations Labor were setting, but they couldn't capture that council.

Ramping over Kensington & Chelsea where they never really stood a prayer was especially strange considering half the battle in these elections is controlling expectation management.

[_]

RED WAVE IS DEAD, MAY IN POWER FOR ANOTHER TERM /s

Nah overall seems like a wash, surprise for me is that the LibDems are doing alright overall, I thought after Farron they'd begin to collapse.

[jaichind]

I think LAB under-performed relative to some of their partisan's expectations but I think their performance was quite credible given their relative position when compared to 2014. 

[Tintrlvr]

If you look only at results outside of London, it looks like a strong night for the Tories. If you look only at results in London, it looks like a disaster for the Tories. Inverse for Labour, of course.

I don't see how that's true at all? The results in London are much better for the Tories than even more sensible briefings suggested - o/c they were defending poor results in much of the city from 2014.

The Tories have lost a bunch of ground in London overall but generally gained ground outside of London. Measuring relative to "expectations" is a futile task, but measuring next to prior results is actually helpful.

Yes, but nobody can deny that Labour have done a remarkably poor job of managing expectations. What looks like a average night or more or less a wash now looks like Lab loss. Wandsworth would have flipped easily under the expectations Labor were setting, but they couldn't capture that council.

Fair, but everyone forgets the expectations game a month later unless you *really* blow it (Theresa May 2017) such that it's more actual results that matter ultimately. (I'm not all that sympathetic to Labour and certainly not to Corbyn in any case.)

[Chief Justice Keef]

Looking from the perspective of a Yankee, why is this considered a big disappointment for Labour in the UK media? They've gained 57 seats so far while the Tories lost 25.

[GM Team Member and Senator WB]

Looking from the perspective of a Yankee, why is this considered a big disappointment for Labour in the UK media? They've gained 57 seats so far while the Tories lost 25.

they were polling quite a bit ahead. Basically expectations were high.

[jaichind]

Looking from the perspective of a Yankee, why is this considered a big disappointment for Labour in the UK media? They've gained 57 seats so far while the Tories lost 25.

I think there was a view among pro-LAB partisans  that there would be a massive LAB landslide over CON based on the LAB surge in London last year as well as Remain voters going en masse to LAB.  To some extent LAB did gain relative to 2014 in London but nowhere close what was hoped.

[Blair]

Looking from the perspective of a Yankee, why is this considered a big disappointment for Labour in the UK media? They've gained 57 seats so far while the Tories lost 25.

For context when these elections were last held in 2014 Labour gained 300 seats. Generally if the opposition is going to get a majority they need to be winning 700+ seats in the local elections.

Governments that are both unpopular and in office for ages like this one, should be getting whacked in the local elections. But ofc British politics is so chaotic atm (Brexit, historically unpopular leaders, return to two party system) it’s pretty hard to work out what these mean.

[Blair]

I don’t follow local politics closely at all (beyond a working knowledge of South London) but the best comparison would be trying to judge US politics based on state legislature elections (if you added an extra 2 parties for fun)

[EPG]

The Greens have had a surprisingly good night.

I would instinctively have thought that Corbynism would kill them off, but anecdotally it does seem that they have a fairly decent appeal to a lot people who are very much not Labour/Corbyn supporters.

I'd guess those Greens are Labour/Corbyn supporters in general elections, same as many of the Lib Dems.

[Silent Hunter]

So, I live in the only spot of white in London...

[YL]

Sheffield maps.  A tricky night for Labour, losing seats to both the Lib Dems and Greens, though picking one up from UKIP.  Labour are still fairly safely in control of the Council, though.

Winning party and lead:


Party shares: