UK By-elections thread, 2021-

[Conservatopia]

If anybody still cares the SDP appear to have been campaigning with a Tank.

Literal tankies.

I've heard various (and usual) rumblings that its not looking great for Labour; but it certainly doesn't feel the same way that Copeland felt- although that seat was a lot more marginal & had the issue of Sellafield

The (Tory) anecdotes I've been getting range from "spectacular victory" to "easy Labour hold".  Interestingly most of the people I have seen saying Labour will win think it will be more down to lack of Tory campaign investment in Hartlepool in the past rather than a good Labour performance.  Apparently Ben Houchen is wildly popular too with a lot of crossover support and the hope is he could pull us over the line.

For now I'm still predicting a relatively comfortable Labour hold.

[CumbrianLefty]

Though it may or not be significant that Labour people are starting to brief "think we will do it".

[beesley]

Apparently Ben Houchen is wildly popular too with a lot of crossover support and the hope is he could pull us over the line.

I've heard the same, which surprised me at first because I didn't expect him to be so well-known. The Labour candidate is not incredible but a bit of a non-entity too.

In your area I've heard that Labour expect to win the West of England mayoral race. I suppose even if Bowles was running it would make little difference based on what you've said.

Not sure whether I support metro mayors, to be honest. As a supporter of devolution and regionalism I want them to go further with it but that will not happen under this government.

[Conservatopia]

Apparently Ben Houchen is wildly popular too with a lot of crossover support and the hope is he could pull us over the line.

I've heard the same, which surprised me at first because I didn't expect him to be so well-known. The Labour candidate is not incredible but a bit of a non-entity too.

In your area I've heard that Labour expect to win the West of England mayoral race. I suppose even if Bowles was running it would make little difference based on what you've said.

Not sure whether I support metro mayors, to be honest. As a supporter of devolution and regionalism I want them to go further with it but that will not happen under this government.

Yes the swing of Somerset from Tory to LD has really complicated our path to victory here.  Furthermore we are running a non-entity, although Tim Bowles was a no-name too (my former councillor) and he won.  Tim Bowles had little impact anyway, merely counterbalancing Marvin Rees (mayor of Bristol).

I don't like the metro mayors.  My view on devolution is double-or-nothing.  Either Canadian-style federalism (yes please) or no devolution at all for England.  To that end I also support the ongoing abolition of County, District and Borough councils and their replacement with large Unitary Authorities.  For example I wrote to the govt in support of One Somerset.

The metro mayors are just this weird, patchwork halfway post between centralism and federalism.  And I don't want to go all Gordon Brown but I believe federalism is what we need.

[beesley]

I don't like the metro mayors.  My view on devolution is double-or-nothing.  Either Canadian-style federalism (yes please) or no devolution at all for England.  To that end I also support the ongoing abolition of County, District and Borough councils and their replacement with large Unitary Authorities.  For example I wrote to the govt in support of One Somerset.

The metro mayors are just this weird, patchwork halfway post between centralism and federalism.  And I don't want to go all Gordon Brown but I believe federalism is what we need.

Fully agree with most of it. As you may have seen I am a supporter of federalism and regionalism more generally (Wessex Parliament when?) I'm not sure about large unitary authorities but they're better than some of the small district councils and their little power. I would keep community councils and their little power but have unitaries/metropolitan boroughs everywhere. In Somerset's case the district council boundaries are rather meaningless in my view and the government merged the two district councils that were geographically logical. The thing is with Metro Mayors is that across large areas they can be a more powerful force than the office affords and I believe in the absence of a First Minister or equivalent that can be a good thing. I find posts like the Bristol Mayoralty somewhat ridiculous though, especially with a Metro Mayor and a unitary as well. I have a whole list of gripes with local government but that's for another time.

I realise I've derailed the thread so I'll mention something about Hartlepool: there is a rather perplexing situation with Liberty Steel that combines the traditional Labour industry and jobs platform with some of the scandals. The government aren't exactly celebrated for their support of steel but they are especially reluctant this time as it all ties in with Greensill and David Cameron. Of course, none of this could matter at all based on previous results and I doubt it does, but Keir Starmer seems to be pushing the issue in the hope that both issues become more salient and from what I've seen Labour are trying to make it an issue on the ground too.

[EastAnglianLefty]

Apparently Ben Houchen is wildly popular too with a lot of crossover support and the hope is he could pull us over the line.

I've heard the same, which surprised me at first because I didn't expect him to be so well-known.

This seems to be the conventional wisdom. Given that recent polling suggested only 40% of the electorate could name him, I'm a little sceptical of this.

[Conservatopia]

Apparently Ben Houchen is wildly popular too with a lot of crossover support and the hope is he could pull us over the line.

I've heard the same, which surprised me at first because I didn't expect him to be so well-known.

This seems to be the conventional wisdom. Given that recent polling suggested only 40% of the electorate could name him, I'm a little sceptical of this.

40% is pretty good when you consider how nebulous his role is and how few people can name even their MP.  And considering he only won about 10% of the electorate in 2017 (51% of 21% turnout) that's pretty good.

Still we'll see soon I guess

[Blair]

Though it may or not be significant that Labour people are starting to brief "think we will do it".

Interesting I seem to have missed this?

[beesley]

Though it may or not be significant that Labour people are starting to brief "think we will do it".

Interesting I seem to have missed this?

I typed in 'hartlepool labour win' into the Twitter search to have a look and instantly regretted it.

[Lord Halifax]

How credible is this?



https://www.survation.com/new-phone-poll-places-conservatives-on-course-for-hartlepool-win/

[Coldstream]

How credible is this?



https://www.survation.com/new-phone-poll-places-conservatives-on-course-for-hartlepool-win/

I don’t buy 12% combined for two independents.

[Pericles]

That Labour vote is 5 points lower than 2019, very hard to believe.

[mileslunn]

I think Tories favoured in Hartlepool but lets remember most polls predicted Brexit party would take Peterborough and Labour held it (lost Tories in general election).  Still would be a blow to Keir Starmer showing still trouble in Red Wall.  Nonetheless Boris has received a strong bounce due to successful vaccine roll out so in some ways is probably at high water mark.  Labour has a long way to go before returning to office but how recovery and Brexit goes is probably going to decide 2024 so polls right now are largely meaningless for next election.  

That being said both parties have advantages and disadvantages

Tory advantage: They have far more safe seats than Labour and pretty much have 250 seats in the bag without doing anything while Labour has only around 150-160 in the bag so strong head start.

Labour advantage: Labour doesn't need to win most seats, just ensure Tories + Unionist parties have less than half the seats as SNP and Liberal Democrats have already ruled out propping up Tories.

Tory disadvantage: Will have been in power for 14 years and generally most parties when in office that long face voter fatigue and desire for change stronger.

Labour disadvantage: Are pretty much dead in Scotland and without Scotland and 40 seats they got prior to 2015, their path to 326 extremely difficult.  Means winning in normally safe Tory seats like consistuency of Jacob Rees-Mogg.

[Lord Halifax]

How credible is this?

https://www.survation.com/new-phone-poll-places-conservatives-on-course-for-hartlepool-win/

I don’t buy 12% combined for two independents.

Sure, but I was mostly thinking about the huge Tory margin. I thought if there was one thing you could be relatively sure off it was that this would be quite close.

It's only a 301 sample and it's a phone poll so could be biased towards old folks using landlines, but not sure if that's the case.

[Blair]

Sam Lee, the independent with 6%, shared a post on her facebook saying she boycotts self-service machines... so it would be rather funny to see her get 6%.

[Blair]

The poll is grim & would really show that there's a rot deeper than just a popular government with a vaccine bounce- I mean the Conservative candidate is pretty much as close to a blank slate as you could get. 

[YL]

How credible is this?

Not very, but credible enough that the large lead makes me worried.

[beesley]

I would say that this is a poll with some problems: sample of only 301, looks to be out of date, and the telephone polling. It also goes against the 'consensus view of the ground' is but obviously that could also be wrong.

I would also say that this is still a very good poll for the Tories, as YL said: credible enough that I'd be concerned about the Tory lead.

Also, if it lines up with the other polling from the last few days then it's a mixed picture that we should only draw conclusions from with caution and after the results.

[ElectionObserver]

How credible is this?
https://cdn.survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/03181731/image-134.png

I think that it's a reasonable poll as constituency polls go, but it isn't hugely credible.

A few thoughts...
- Constituency polling in the UK has a terrible record. Some of them have been wildly inaccurate. That's due to many reasons, but small seat size and lack of experience by pollsters are two of the big ones.
- It's a poll of 301 people. That's a very small sample which is liable to a large margin of error even in a well conducted poll (+/- 5%). They actually polled 517 people. Then (unweighted) 464 people said they would vote, but 125 of them were 'undecided' and 32 'refused'. In total only 142 said they'd vote Conservative and 99 Labour.
- Survation only called landlines. Think who you know who answers landlines. Only my elderly grandmother would answer the phone and talk to a pollster. It's a very limiting, almost self-selecting, group.  It's now becoming more and more common for people to abandon landlines which I think would skew young and low income.
- This poll skewed pretty old in respondent age. Look at the tables. 57 people aged 18-34 responded which they weighted to 103. 145 responded who were 65+ which they weighted to 122. They weighted up the under 45s and down the 45+ age groups.
- It also skews wrong by party. They polled 124 2019 Labour voters, 155 2019 Conservative voters, 62 2019 Brexit Party voters and 32 others. Now they have weighted the numbers, but the raw unweighted sample is quite out-of-sync with the 2019 result when Labour got 39%, Conservatives 29%, Brexit 26% and others 8%.
- The data collected is a little dated at a week and a half old.

That said, I wouldn't like to be Keir Starmer or the Labour candidate right now.

[Property Representative of the Harold Holt Swimming Centre]

Constituency polling is crap in general, yes. Survation are putting their (respectable, by UK standards) reputation on the line here.

The "Others" figures are even less believable than the size of the Tory lead, tbh.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yes, there's basically no reason to take it particularly seriously (the questionable details are bad enough, but the effective sample size of three hundred is...), but you obviously wouldn't want to see numbers like that if you were the defending party regardless.

[CumbrianLefty]

How credible is this?
https://cdn.survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/03181731/image-134.png

I think that it's a reasonable poll as constituency polls go, but it isn't hugely credible.

A few thoughts...
- Constituency polling in the UK has a terrible record. Some of them have been wildly inaccurate. That's due to many reasons, but small seat size and lack of experience by pollsters are two of the big ones.
- It's a poll of 301 people. That's a very small sample which is liable to a large margin of error even in a well conducted poll (+/- 5%). They actually polled 517 people. Then (unweighted) 464 people said they would vote, but 125 of them were 'undecided' and 32 'refused'. In total only 142 said they'd vote Conservative and 99 Labour.
- Survation only called landlines. Think who you know who answers landlines. Only my elderly grandmother would answer the phone and talk to a pollster. It's a very limiting, almost self-selecting, group.  It's now becoming more and more common for people to abandon landlines which I think would skew young and low income.
- This poll skewed pretty old in respondent age. Look at the tables. 57 people aged 18-34 responded which they weighted to 103. 145 responded who were 65+ which they weighted to 122. They weighted up the under 45s and down the 45+ age groups.
- It also skews wrong by party. They polled 124 2019 Labour voters, 155 2019 Conservative voters, 62 2019 Brexit Party voters and 32 others. Now they have weighted the numbers, but the raw unweighted sample is quite out-of-sync with the 2019 result when Labour got 39%, Conservatives 29%, Brexit 26% and others 8%.
- The data collected is a little dated at a week and a half old.

That said, I wouldn't like to be Keir Starmer or the Labour candidate right now.

Also, most 2019 BXP voters claimed they were "100% certain to vote" (!) and they then broke for the Tories in *far* greater numbers than is usually the case in polls.

Having said that, any defeat for Labour here would be bad - big BXP vote or no big BXP vote.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Two things to note, neither of which should be seen as predictive, just as things to bear in mind. The first is that given the amount of resources that can now be concentrated on by-election campaigns (and that parties are happier to take the risk than they were) it seems likely that government by-election gains are not as generically freakish as they became after the early 1960s. The second is that this is really not a typical Northern post-industrial town politically. It has a long-term tendency towards electoral idiosyncrasy that in England at least can really only be matched by South Dorset (with a couple of other places - Mansfield for instance - moving up the list quite fast, admittedly) and a very distinctive local political culture.* An example to highlight would be that while in most constituencies that can be described as 'Northern' and 'post-industrial' Labour posted increases in vote-share and majority in 2015, both dropped back sharply in Hartlepool due to a very concerted UKIP challenge. It is a place apart, for better or worse.

_{*E.g. A big feature of North East politics for about fifty years now has been very strong grassroots female involvement in local Labour parties, which, to say the least, has not exactly been the case in Hartlepool.}

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

*E.g. A big feature of North East politics for about fifty years now has been very strong grassroots female involvement in local Labour parties, which, to say the least, has not exactly been the case in Hartlepool.

Looking at the council, I can't help but suspect that's part of the problem!

[Lord Halifax]

https://twitter.com/JoshHalliday/status/1389628163320393729