Glasgow East by-election

[Verily]

For those keeping score at home, MSP Margaret Curran will be the Labour candidate. Which makes two Currans on the ballot, an amusing but probably irrelevant event.

They are in the same family or they only have the same family name?

Unrelated as far as I know. They were also both in the Scottish Parliament (for their respective parties) until Frances Curran lost re-election in the meltdown of the SSP in 2007.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Curran has been formally selected as Labour candidate.

[Verily]

Hamish Howitt has submitted his nomination papers even before he loses in Haltemprice and Howden tomorrow. (He's the anti-smoking bans campaigner.) There will also be an independent, Chris Creighton, on the ballot; I've no idea who he is. Also, the SSP will be running the extra description "Scottish Socialist Party (Abolish Council Tax)".

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I've thought for a while that that sort of thing should be banned. Of course all the parties do it... "Party X... Save Our Schools!", "Party X... Save Our Local Hospital"... and so on. Some ("Local Conservatives", say) have the potential be outright deceptive. And there's all the fun in Wales you get with optional bilingual descriptions... the key word is optional.

[afleitch]

Quick run down.

Margaret Curran. Probably the best MSP Labour has and will make their job of winning both votes and holding up turnout easier. A line will be drawn under her name for Scottish Labour leader however for the time being. Which will hurt Labour in the long term as a result

The YouGov Poll. Ignore. People are on holiday, and while I am pleased to see polling companies target by-elections, the demographics are so skewed in Glasgow East you just can't poll it even as part of a national poll. As for the national poll itself, the possibility of the SNP being ahead nationally in Westminster can be considered reasonable. The SNP as a party, simply by being the government regardless of its capability changed their image of a 'cannae win' outsider party overnight

Timing. Crafty at first glance. The week of the by-election is the Glasgow Fair holiday. Probably up to 1 in 4 voters will not be in the city that week. Except in Glasgow East, where long standing economic hardship coupled with the current climate will depress that number. It may hit turnout in the more middle class areas of the seat. And there are some, despite media reports to the contrary (it contains the north part of the Football Belt - where present and past Old Firm footballers live which gives an indication of the housing stock)

Result. I predict what can only be called an 'embarrasing Labour win' which will go largely unnoticed and will change the dynamics in Scottish politics not one jot. The SNP can of course win here. If they do then the story is very different.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Margaret Curran. Probably the best MSP Labour has and will make their job of winning both votes and holding up turnout easier.

I'm a little surprised they didn't go with her in the first place, considering that her majority in 2007 was actually significantly larger than 1999...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is presumably the idea.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Heh; it's always easier to stereotype than do even a little bit of basic research, isn't it.

Welcome back, btw

[Filuwaúrdjan]

ICM poll: Lab 47, SNP 33, LDem 9, Con 7, Oth. 4

The record of constituency polls is poor, the record of by-election polls is worse and I don't see this as being an easy area to poll under any circumstances. So treat wi' a salt mine or three.

[afleitch]

ICM poll: Lab 47, SNP 33, LDem 9, Con 7, Oth. 4

The record of constituency polls is poor, the record of by-election polls is worse and I don't see this as being an easy area to poll under any circumstances. So treat wi' a salt mine or three.

It looks better than the other poll with regard to the Tory and Lib Dem shares, but has probably been designed to look that way anyway. It's got the betting folk stirred a little which is predictable.

But yes, disregard.

[Verily]

ICM poll: Lab 47, SNP 33, LDem 9, Con 7, Oth. 4

The record of constituency polls is poor, the record of by-election polls is worse and I don't see this as being an easy area to poll under any circumstances. So treat wi' a salt mine or three.

It looks better than the other poll with regard to the Tory and Lib Dem shares, but has probably been designed to look that way anyway. It's got the betting folk stirred a little which is predictable.

But yes, disregard.

Someone did an interesting analysis of ICM's past vote recall for the poll which suggested that could be overwhelmingly skewing the poll to Labour if a lot of people are remembering their (more recent) Holyrood vote instead of their Westminster vote. Reweighted to account for both evenly, the poll gave Lab 43, SNP 41 (LD 10, Con 4).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

IMO you either trust a poll (and all its assumptions) or you don't. Messing with the figures to produce more pleasing results is something to be avoided.

[afleitch]

Also of note is that the SNP are using this as a 'dry run' for their campaign to unseat Gordon Brown in his own seat next time round. If they win this, put a little flutter on Gordon loosing his seat. It is still highly unlikely but certainly worth a bob or two in risk.

Much more likely is the probability of the SNP vote share overtaking that of Labour. Not perhaps as a result of a depresion in the Labour vote, but simply the transferral of the 'not Labour' vote from the Lib Dems to the SNP. While such a swing would be unlikely to dent Labours lead in seats (the SNP themselves are aiming for 12-15 seats) on closer inspection Labour losses in 'the right places' for the SNP and other parties is certainly a possibility. Not least, for the Tories wishing to scalp Alistair Darling (unless of course he is dropped from his post or even the Cabinet in a re-shuffle - it may just save him if the night is really bad for Labour)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

their campaign to unseat Gordon Brown in his own seat next time round.

Hubris, fantasy or delusion. Probably the first. If such an experiment were to be taken seriously it would also be an incredibly stupid waste of resources, especially as there are more than a few credible prospects of gains elsewhere. But reality always sets in sooner or later.

(would adding anything to that reduce my point I wonder. Probably. But even unpopular party leaders get an electoral boost at home these days. Of course the reverse is often true in "local" government elections, but then the nature of the publicity that council leaders get is quite different...)

[afleitch]

http://www.order-order.com/2008/07/exclusive-glasgow-east-labour-fakes-93.html

[afleitch]

Glasgow by-elections since 1945

12th Feb 1946: Glasgow Cathcart CON HOLD Labour Government

24th August 1946: Glasgow Bridgeton ILP HOLD Labour Government
This was upon the death of Jimmy Maxton. ILP vote collapsed and the Labour Party polled a close second

28th January 1948: Glasgow Camlachie CON GAIN from ILP Labour Government
An odd one this. The late Campbell Stephen won this seat for the ILP however joined the Labour Party shortly before his death. The then Manchester Guardian wrote Camlachie's chief warning is ... that a government candidate cannot even rouse the slums

30th September 1948: Glasgow Gorbals LAB HOLD Labour Government

25th November 1948: Glasgow Hillhead CON HOLD Labour Government

That was 5 by-elections in the one city in the 1945-50 government. It demonstrated nothing other than the ILP was a spent force.

25th October 1950: Glasgow Scotstoun CON HOLD Labour Government.

13th March 1958: Glasgow Kelvingrove LAB GAIN from CON Conservative Government

16th November 1961: Glasgow Bridgeton LAB HOLD Conservative Government

22nd November 1962: Glasgow Woodside LAB GAIN from CON Conservative Government

9th March 1967: Glasgow Pollock CON GAIN from LAB Labour Government

3rd October 1969: Glasgow Gorbals LAB HOLD Labour Government

8th November 1973: Glasgow Govan SNP GAIN from LAB Conservative Government
Swing 26.7% from LAB to SNP.

13th April 1978: Glasgow Garscadden LAB HOLD Labour Government

26th June 1980: Glasgow Central LAB HOLD Conservative Government Swing 13.95% from LAB TO SNP

25th March 1982: Glasgow Hillhead SDP GAIN from CON Conservative Government
The Tory candidate for this seat, Gerry Malone was of course involved in the 1997 Winchester re-run. He is also, somewhat embarrassingly, attended my old school.

2nd December 1982: Glasgow Queen's Park LAB HOLD Conservative Government

10th November 1988: Glasgow Govan SNP GAIN from LAB Conservative Government Swing: 33.1% from LAB to SNP

15th June 1989: Glasgow Central LAB HOLD Conservative Government Swing: 15.1% from LAB to SNP

23rd November 1999: Glasgow Anniesland LAB HOLD Labour Government Swing: 7% from LAB to SNP

[Silent Hunter]

Interesting. Good job, afleitch!

[afleitch]

Just back from Glasgow East.

Oh the things I wish I could tell you

[Verily]

Just back from Glasgow East.

Oh the things I wish I could tell you

Rumors are that postal turnout is somewhere between extremely and extraordinarily low (for the average const., that is, not Glasgow East specifically).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

If that wasn't the case it'd be a surprise...

[Verily]

If that wasn't the case it'd be a surprise...

True, but would you expect (total) turnout to be as low as 20-25%? That's the current estimate.

[afleitch]

If that wasn't the case it'd be a surprise...

True, but would you expect (total) turnout to be as low as 20-25%? That's the current estimate.

In an East End seat during the Glasgow Fair? Yes I probably would unfortunately. Now give us a suburban seat where the Tories are behind Labour and we'd get a different picture. Our lot are more motivated.

[afleitch]

Well hello...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4380787.ece

Good news if it holds.

[Verily]

Well hello...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4380787.ece

Good news if it holds.

Wouldn't high turnout (or, at least, exceptionally high turnout) be good for Labour? I would imagine the SNP want turnout to be just high enough that they get all of the angry people out to vote but not so high that the characteristically disinclined to vote urban Labour supporters start showing up.

[afleitch]

Well hello...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4380787.ece

Good news if it holds.

Wouldn't high turnout (or, at least, exceptionally high turnout) be good for Labour? I would imagine the SNP want turnout to be just high enough that they get all of the angry people out to vote but not so high that the characteristically disinclined to vote urban Labour supporters start showing up.

In a seat like Glasgow East it is probably neither good or bad for Labour or anyone else at the moment. Which is why half the Cabinet have visited - to test the waters. They cannot let the Labour ehatlands go the way of Glasgow East even if Labour win. A narrow Labour victory here is still a disaster.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The trouble with by-elections is that you can never tell for sure who "high" or low turnout benefits until the votes are counted; turnout (and voting) dynamics are so different from normal elections. And of course a high postal vote at this time of year could easily mean a very low turnout on the day of the election.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Re-reading the thread I noticed something I'd missed earlier...

The then Manchester Guardian wrote Camlachie's chief warning is ... that a government candidate cannot even rouse the slums

A line like that from a paper based in Manchester is really surprising. Labour only became the largest party in the slum districts of Manchester in the mid-to-late '30's IIRC. Of course the politics of the old slums (and the difference between them and more stable working class districts) is largely forgotten outside parts of academia these days, but surely not that early.