UK By-elections thread, 2021-

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Has/Will there be any polling in any of the by-elections because the results would be interesting.

By-election polls are fairly rare and don't have the best reputation (constituency level sampling being hard) but I suppose someone might commission one.  The Lib Dems actually commissioned some constituency polls themselves before the last General Election, presumably to get some numbers for bar charts, so I suppose they might.  (But they didn't in Chesham & Amersham.)

There was a lib dem internal poll that showed them in striking distance in Chesham & Amersham. Might have helped them consolidate the non-tory vote.
https://www.cityam.com/exclusive-polling-puts-lib-dems-four-points-behind-tories-in-chesham-and-amersham-by-election/

[YL]

Has/Will there be any polling in any of the by-elections because the results would be interesting.

By-election polls are fairly rare and don't have the best reputation (constituency level sampling being hard) but I suppose someone might commission one.  The Lib Dems actually commissioned some constituency polls themselves before the last General Election, presumably to get some numbers for bar charts, so I suppose they might.  (But they didn't in Chesham & Amersham.)

There was a lib dem internal poll that showed them in striking distance in Chesham & Amersham. Might have helped them consolidate the non-tory vote.
https://www.cityam.com/exclusive-polling-puts-lib-dems-four-points-behind-tories-in-chesham-and-amersham-by-election/

I don't really count leaked internals, but indeed they did.  (There was another one earlier which had a larger Tory lead.)  I don't think we know when the polling for the Con 45 LD 41 one was done, but if it really was a proper poll and as close to the election date as implied in the article it was, well, not very accurate.

The ones they did before the last General Election were released properly and were done by Survation.  They also weren't very good, for various reasons.

[Blair]

Someone keeps posting rubbish about betting odds for North Shropshire by election on Twitter and it turns out they’re a former Lib Dem MP. Just embarrassing

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Someone keeps posting rubbish about betting odds for North Shropshire by election on Twitter and it turns out they’re a former Lib Dem MP. Just embarrassing

What else are they supposed to be doing ?

[Continential]

Someone keeps posting rubbish about betting odds for North Shropshire by election on Twitter and it turns out they’re a former Lib Dem MP. Just embarrassing

They should join the hellhole known as voteuk.

[Secretary of State Liberal Hack]

Someone keeps posting rubbish about betting odds for North Shropshire by election on Twitter and it turns out they’re a former Lib Dem MP. Just embarrassing

They should join the hellhole known as voteuk.

[njwes]

Given the by-election that occurred on the 25th for the North Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner, I was curious:

Is there any real difference among the different parties' Commissioner candidates in terms of actual positions/agenda/ideology etc? Particularly the Labour candidates versus the Conservative candidates. Or is the party label sort of incidental?

[CumbrianLefty]

Someone keeps posting rubbish about betting odds for North Shropshire by election on Twitter and it turns out they’re a former Lib Dem MP. Just embarrassing

They should join the hellhole known as voteuk.

If that is a "hellhole", what is most of the web?

[Blair]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59435987

First time I've seen vox-pop praise for Keir in well a while.

I'm starting to suspect the Conservative majority will almost certainly be below 8,000- I've heard some labour activists say it feels similar to Chesham and Amersham in that safe conservative voters are not happy. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Well, considering that national polling right now has the government down between six and nine points on the last election and more at the worse end of that than the better, then that's what you'd expect to find.

[YL]

Someone keeps posting rubbish about betting odds for North Shropshire by election on Twitter and it turns out they’re a former Lib Dem MP. Just embarrassing

I assume you mean Matthew Green, former MP for Ludlow and one of two people to ever be a Lib Dem MP for a Shropshire constituency.  If so he seems to have moved on from betting odds, maybe because the Lib Dems now think they've convinced people that they're the challengers.  He's using the phrase "the Tory from Birmingham" a lot.

BTW betting odds haven't been great at predicting the last two by-elections.  They had the Tories clear favourites in Batley & Spen, and while it was close enough that that wasn't a terrible reflection, they had them at something like 16 to 1 on the day before Chesham & Amersham, and still clear favourites after polls had closed.

[YL]

Some Tory jitters/expectation management (*) coming out of Old Bexley & Sidcup:
https://twitter.com/breeallegretti/status/1465824002069479426

(*) delete as appropriate

[Property Representative of the Harold Holt Swimming Centre]

https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1465813823814836230?ref_src=twsrc%5Et...

[Leading Political Consultant Ma Anand Sheela]

https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1465813823814836230?ref_src=twsrc%5Et...

Fake news, a clued-in LD activist I know says no postal votes had been opened when that was posted.

[YL]

https://twitter.com/electpoliticsuk/status/1465813823814836230?ref_src=twsrc%5Et...

Fake news, a clued-in LD activist I know says no postal votes had been opened when that was posted.

If the numbers are real, the claim is that they're from canvassing of postal voters, not opening of postal votes.  There is also a claim that the numbers coming out of Chesham & Amersham were better for the Tories at the same point in the campaign.

I suspect the numbers are real, but without knowing more about how they were obtained it's not clear what to make of them.  On the face of it they are pretty bad for the Tories: postal voters are likely to lean Tory, and by-election campaigns tend to develop momentum over time.  But if people who refuse to tell a Lib Dem how they are voting are simply excluded the picture could change a lot...

FWIW I suspect the Tories are in genuine trouble there, but we'll see.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I've no idea what's going on down there (I live at the other end of the county and direct links are limited), but the LibDems in this part of the world have a playbook and it generally involves intense fishing for Labour tactical voters. In other words: this is something to put on leaflets to encourage that to happen and should be understood in that light and no other.

[Tintrlvr]

I've no idea what's going on down there (I live at the other end of the county and direct links are limited), but the LibDems in this part of the world have a playbook and it generally involves intense fishing for Labour tactical voters. In other words: this is something to put on leaflets to encourage that to happen and should be understood in that light and no other.

I do agree with that; it's no coincidence that LDEM+LAB is very narrowly > CON in that poll result.

That said, I've seen some musings online that the Lib Dems only release this sort of data when they actually win by-elections, and you don't see this kind of ramping when they come short, i.e., they know more about their chances of winning than they let on and only message this strongly when they genuinely think they're going to win.

[rc18]

It always seems to be taken as a given that the Lib Dems know what's going on, and yet I've been at a count for a seat they were genuinely targeting where they flooded the venue with tons of activists. They seemed convinced they had a strong chance of winning all the way through the night.

They lost by around 10,000 votes...

That will forever be seared into my memory, and why I would take Lib Dem claims with a dollop of salt. Especially given that was a far easier constituency to canvas than North Shropshire, and had a decent existing Lib Dem voter base.

[CumbrianLefty]

Presumably that was in a general election, though? Slightly different dynamic there.

[rc18]

Presumably that was in a general election, though? Slightly different dynamic there.

Yes it was at a GE, but we're talking about the quality of their data. They had the benefit of lots of previous canvassing reports so will have had far better data than what will be available in North Shropshire, and still managed to get it totally wrong.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That said, I've seen some musings online that the Lib Dems only release this sort of data when they actually win by-elections, and you don't see this kind of ramping when they come short, i.e., they know more about their chances of winning than they let on and only message this strongly when they genuinely think they're going to win.

I've been around for long enough to know that this really isn't true - although it's possible that the last line there is. Quite a lot of hyped-up LibDem challenges in by-elections have amounted to a significant increase in support and yet still a clear defeat, while near-misses have been as common as spectacular victories. By-elections are strange things: sometimes it is very, very clear what is happening, but quite often all of the campaigns involved are blind to how things are going for everyone else.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

FWIW I suspect the Tories are in genuine trouble there, but we'll see.

It's interesting because while every single indicator bar one suggests that they'll win easily, that exception (i.e. the circumstances of the by-election) is a potentially very dangerous one. People who follow elections for years often end up getting jaded and insist that circumstances never matter, but that's nonsense: quite often they don't, but sometimes they do and the result is serious trouble for the defending party. We had a good example of that earlier this year, admittedly in a constituency that, unlike North Shropshire, had only ever been an absolute rock-solid fortress of a seat for one period in its history. So we shall see.

[CumbrianLefty]

FWIW I suspect the Tories are in genuine trouble there, but we'll see.

It's interesting because while every single indicator bar one suggests that they'll win easily, that exception (i.e. the circumstances of the by-election) is a potentially very dangerous one. People who follow elections for years often end up getting jaded and insist that circumstances never matter, but that's nonsense: quite often they don't, but sometimes they do and the result is serious trouble for the defending party. We had a good example of that earlier this year, admittedly in a constituency that, unlike North Shropshire, had only ever been an absolute rock-solid fortress of a seat for one period in its history. So we shall see.

I know what you are saying, but if - IF - the worst comes to pass for the Tories two weeks from now I suspect their choice of candidate will also be seen as a significant factor (as was indeed the case for them in C&A, and Labour in Hartlepool for that matter)

[YL]

That said, I've seen some musings online that the Lib Dems only release this sort of data when they actually win by-elections, and you don't see this kind of ramping when they come short, i.e., they know more about their chances of winning than they let on and only message this strongly when they genuinely think they're going to win.

I've been around for long enough to know that this really isn't true - although it's possible that the last line there is. Quite a lot of hyped-up LibDem challenges in by-elections have amounted to a significant increase in support and yet still a clear defeat, while near-misses have been as common as spectacular victories. By-elections are strange things: sometimes it is very, very clear what is happening, but quite often all of the campaigns involved are blind to how things are going for everyone else.

I don't think any party really knows what's going on as well as some people think, in General Elections too.  (See both 2015 and 2017, in lots of constituencies.)  In Chesham & Amersham, I think the Lib Dems were taken by surprise by how easily they won, though I think at least some of them were quite confident they would win.  Meanwhile the Tory who briefed Laura Kuenssberg had even less idea what was going on, though some Tories who briefed other news organisations were worried.

On your last point, I imagine that a Lib Dem win would be quite dependent on some habitual Tory voters just not voting, or perhaps voting for another right-wing party as a protest, and the Lib Dems aren't likely to have a good idea of the extent of that.

[Blair]

Not sure if it's been proven but it was long said that the nature of how the MP departed could make a difference; I think MPs who've passed away are very broadly, less likely to lose, compared to ones who've been kicked out for being a crook. (with the obvious caveats)

My experience is that the Lib Dems do genuinely have a better idea in by-elections compared to General Elections- where they've had a pretty awful record at targeting in GEs for a number of factors, mostly that there chances are very dependent on how the two larger parties vote.

I think the danger is always people saying 'figure X shows we're going to win'- even experienced organisers who've worked the seat before can only really make an educated guess & that's based on previous results. For example in Batley & Spen if you'd told Labour in 2020 that their candidate would do awfully in Batley you'd be very worried (but Kim Leadbeater did historically very well in Spen Valley & in other parts that have been hostile to Labour) 

I would still be very surprised if the Tories lose; unlike Amersham there is still a Labour vote that will even on a bad day & with tactical voting get a figure that could save the Conservatives. It's been noted that both parties have an unofficial pact; something that was the case in the summer by-elections.

That said, I've seen some musings online that the Lib Dems only release this sort of data when they actually win by-elections, and you don't see this kind of ramping when they come short, i.e., they know more about their chances of winning than they let on and only message this strongly when they genuinely think they're going to win.

I've been around for long enough to know that this really isn't true - although it's possible that the last line there is. Quite a lot of hyped-up LibDem challenges in by-elections have amounted to a significant increase in support and yet still a clear defeat, while near-misses have been as common as spectacular victories. By-elections are strange things: sometimes it is very, very clear what is happening, but quite often all of the campaigns involved are blind to how things are going for everyone else.

This was the case I think in Whitney in 2016; it was written off when it started & didn't get a lot of coverage- but the Lib Dems I think reduced the majority down to 5,000. It was a sign that remain voters were willing to move & played out in a number of similar seats & local wards in 2017.