Witney By-Election: Tory Majority Slashed In David Cameron's Former Seat

[mikey4444]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37719170

This was never going to be a winnable seat for Labour. Its been held by high-profile Tories for many years (Hurd, Cameron) But to lose such a big majority can't easily be explained, even though the area voted to Remain in June.

But all just dues must go to the LibDems....coming second, with a huge 23.5% rise in their vote....well done !

[fiction-factory]

Doesn't this sort of thing happen in nearly every by election mikey- I can remember plenty of times when majorities were slashed, and often the Liberals/ Lib Dems/SDP achieved a result which suggested they were once again a major force in politics- but in the general election in just wasn't repeated. There all sorts of reasons- give the government a nudge, apathy/low turnout, complacency, tactical voting

[Cloverjo]

Yes, the LibDems seem to pick up votes in those traditional Tory areas when people are disillusioned but can't bring themselves to vote Labour.

It was the same here after the expenses scandal. We had a LibDem MP after our Tory MP was one of those implicated for being excessively greedy.

It's gone back to another Tory now though.

[Zacs-Master]

'Can't be easily explained'. It's actually a very common occurrence:

'Another type of protest vote that frequently happens is at by-elections, where an incumbent MP has either resigned or died. Because by-elections do not normally lead to a change in Government, the electorate feel more inclined to vote for the party they really want to, or make their voice heard through the ballot box. For this reason, incumbent Governments rarely win by-elections, as it is a chance for voters to express their disillusionment with the Governments’ policies. Hence Labour won quite a few by-elections in the aftermath of the 2010 election as voters protested the cuts brought in by the Conservative, Lib-Dem coalition.
http://www.tutor2u.net/politics/reference/protest-voting

[mikey4444]

I don't think the Tories were expecting that their majority would be slashed, by such a large amount

Its difficult to think of a higher profile seat for the Tory Party ....previous incumbent being a Tory Prime Minister, and also a prominent Cabinet Minister in the form of Douglas Hurd.

Very poor turnout...less than 50%.....maybe that is the reason, or maybe the Tories are not as popular as it was thought ?

[ichkeria]

Poor turnout part of the explanation, and also the fact that it's not Cameron, who was very popular. The Lib Dems I think WILL enjoy a renaissance in many places: for those who reject May's Tories and Corbyn's shambles there is nowhere else to go. And indeed with UKIP (a miserable 5th here) imploding, there may be even more hope.
As an aside, what sort of people heckle Jo Cox's successor? Revolting.

[ichkeria]

Cameron DID win the seat from Labour of course :-)

[mikey4444]

ichkeria....I agree about what happened at Batley. It speaks volumes that while all the main parties didn't contest Jo Cox's old seat, the National Front and the BNP did. Even UKIP stayed away.

I sometimes get some stick on here, for criticising the Far Right, but yesterdays antics says it all.

[EDDIE51]

I think it is mainly down to the fact that Cameron was personally very popular in the constituency and there was a lot of 'prestige' in being the seat of the Prime minister. The Conservatives have NEVER had less than 43% of the vote in that seat.

[Gromit]

By-Elections are oddities, and are not a good guide to what the rest of the country thinks.

1. The LibDems have been the traditional second place finishers in Witney. The were beaten by Labour in 2015, because the LibDem vote collapsed nationally, but they seem to have now been forgiven by the electorate in Witney. The result is similar to 2010 in Witney.

2. A bad result for Labour, even though they were not expected to do anything. Votes they gained in 2015 from the LibDems have all gone back.

3. A bad result for UKIP who saw their votes quartered from 2015. Perhaps the voters think their work is done, and they are no longer needed?

[ToraToraTora]

Labour lost ground too mikey, dig out your 1997 DVD and reminisce.

[ToraToraTora]

sorry, VHS!

[youngmafbog]

Well for once I agree gromit.

The reason you are slated for criticism the far right is because you accuse people of being far right (eg UKIP) when they are not. You also fail to condme the far left who are just as bad.

[youngmafbog]

Yeah, all labour victories should fit on a SP VHS. Mickey probably had Betamax though.

[mikey4444]

Gromit...how is this a bad result for Labour ? This wasn't a seat that it could win.

Labour's vote went down by only 2.2%, in a safe Tory seat, which isn't bad when you consider the trials and tribulations that the Party is facing at the moment. But the Tory vote went down by 15.2% !

I agree about UKIP though....they are an irrelevance.

[ichkeria]

In places like Witney Labour tends to have a core vote that doesn't really go anywhere. In a sense you probably can't really tell anything we didn't already know: they aren't going to be the disaffected people of Chipping Norton's choice of opposition

[Gromit]

Ymb,
Betamax was the superior format. But VHS were cheaper to make (= more profit) and Betamax could only record for 60 minutes compared to VHS 120 minutes.

[Gromit]

Mikey,
Labours vote sunk from 10K ayear ago, to 5.7k yesterday. Nearly halved. No matter how you try and spin it, that is a bad result.

[dannyk13]

It would appear , as no party made any gains, that the loss of votes was due to the low turnout, so probably there were more stay at home Tories.

[dannyk13]

^Except the Lib-Dems^

[Gromit]

DannyK,
The LibDems made gains. From below 4K up to 11.6K, that has to be a good result for them.