Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Patrick Mercer to resign. By-Election incoming.

Guardian reporting Helmer's pop at the Mail that reported yesterday claims of his support for "gay cures"...

Today, on his blog, he's published an angry response, threatening to sue. It takes the form of a letter to the Mail on Sunday's political editor, Simon Walters. Here's an extract.

A few days ago I took time out of my busy by-election schedule for an interview with you. You raised the issue of homosexuality. I was reluctant to spend time on it, as it is not high on my agenda and it certainly doesn’t seem to exercise voters in Newark — it has never once been raised with me in the street or on the doorstep. And I am becoming increasingly frustrated by the media’s relentless obsession with a few tangential remarks on social issues from years ago, and reluctance to address the real issues of either the euro-elections or the Newark campaign. Nevertheless I answered your questions clearly and honestly.

So I was shocked to read your subsequent story, in which you assert that I “called for gay cures on the NHS”. This is a deliberate and defamatory lie. I said no such thing. You have deliberately and knowingly published a false and defamatory statement a few days ahead of a critical by-election, with the prima facie objective of influencing the outcome of that election. I understand that this represents an offence under electoral law.
 
Let’s be clear: I have never said that homosexuality is “an illness”, or that it can be “cured”. I have never asserted that homosexuals can be “turned”. I have never advocated “gay cures”. In particular I would vehemently oppose any move to offer “gay cures” on the NHS. No treatment should be offered on the NHS unless it is of proven clinical efficacy and demonstrable cost-effectiveness

rogerheaderblog.jpg
 
More here
The Conservatives are on course to hold onto Newark in the by-election on Thursday, according to a poll I have conducted in the constituency. I found the Tories on 42 per cent, with UKIP second on 27 per cent and Labour third on 20 per cent.

This represents a fall in vote share for all three established parties since the last general election: the Conservatives are down 12 points, Labour down two and the Liberal Democrats down 14 points on their 2010 score.
 
and methodologically...

This poll shows a bigger Tory lead than was found by Survation in their by-election poll published at the weekend. Interestingly, though, the two polls put UKIP within a point of each other. This would seem to suggest that the “spiral of silence adjustment”, used in my poll but not in Survation’s, made little difference in UKIP’s case. The adjustment works by re-allocating a proportion of those who refuse to state or claim they don’t know how they will vote to the party they voted for at the last election. It was introduced to help account for “shy” voters who were reluctant to admit their allegiance, a problem which had the effect of seriously skewing polls at previous elections. The similarity of the UKIP share in polls that did and did not use this adjustment suggests that there is nothing shy about the party’s voters; they do not coyly claim to be undecided.

This makes sense when you consider that most UKIP supporters say the chance to register their discontent is one of the main reasons for their decision. Seven in ten of those planning to vote for Roger Helmer on Thursday say they are making a general protest to show they are unhappy with all the parties; only 16 per cent of them say this was not a factor. More than six in ten UKIP supporters say they were sending a message that they were unhappy with their usual party – more than twice the proportion of Lib Dem voters (and three times the proportion of Labour voters) saying the same.
 
And his national polling:

LAB - 34% (+3)
CON - 25% (-4)
UKIP - 19% (+2)
LDEM - 6% (-2)

Blimey.
Yep...blimey indeed.
What do you make of Ashcroft's DK re-allocation for Newark? Am I being dumb, or can that only enhance the vermin as the hit 50%+ last time?
 
Yep...blimey indeed.
What do you make of Ashcroft's DK re-allocation for Newark? Am I being dumb, or can that only enhance the vermin as the hit 50%+ last time?
Don't know - literally just walked in the door 5 minutes ago and turned laptop on - will have a dig later. Sounds like that would be the net effect though.
 
b9aa549c-701a-4686-bf90-03ce0f87b59f_zpsfdebc7a2.png


Looks like there's still a potential reservoir of tactical Lab -> UKIP voters there...if they feel like humiliating the tories.
 
Channel 4 news reporting from Newark today.

the greens got less coverage than the monster raving loony party, and comparable with the bus pass elvis party...

:hmm:
 
Good Telegraph piece about Newark by Robert Ford and Ian Warren...

The biggest uncertainty in this by-election is how voters from all parties will react to a fight framed as a straight Conservative-Ukip battle. We have no precedent to rely on for this - there has never been a credible UKIP challenge for a Conservative held seat before. We don't know how willing Labour and Lib Dem voters will be to defect tactically to Ukip in order to help defeat the local Conservative candidate. Nor do we know how willing discontented local Conservatives will be to back Ukip in order to "send a message" to the national party, as they often do in European elections.
 
It's class war in Newark according to the Telegraph....and Bone's not even turned up yet!

:D:D:D

Classic Grayling.

The Newark by-election campaign has been mired in class warfare over the leading candidates’ wealth as the UK Independence Party’s Roger Helmer attacked his Tory opponent over his £5 million property portfolio.

The outspoken attack by Mr Helmer led Chris Grayling, the Tory Cabinet minister, to defend the party’s candidate Robert Jenrick, insisting that the party’s candidates should not be ashamed of being rich.
 
Elect a millionaire with family wealth, get someone who acts in the interest of millionaires with family wealth.

Nice one, democracy.
 
Do we know what time the expected result is?

Early hours I expect; looks like Brillo's extended post QT programme is acting as a result event...so there'll be hours of Chukkashappsy type talking head shit, then the disappointment that the tories have just edged it.
 
Yes i think the tories will win ,but be interesting how many votes ukip get or whether the labour vote will be squezed,forget about the libdems their going nowhere
 
Yes i think the tories will win ,but be interesting how many votes ukip get or whether the labour vote will be squezed,forget about the libdems their going nowhere

Well, the tories damn well should win this seat. (It's no co-incidence that Farage declined the opportunity) Large parts of the south of the seat are filled with the type of tory supporter are the antithesis of disaffected; they've done very well out of the tory government, and any farmers with their heads screwed on should run a mile from any party that proposes separating them from their subsidies.

Of some interest, though, is the polling; two outfits have produced quite distinct numbers...will be interesting to see if Ashcroft's impressive sample size really does equate to a more accurate forecast, or whether Survation's decision not to re-allocate the DKs is closer to the mark.

c55d3aea-9ce9-4b6a-9731-f3783ae70a2e_zps3b73b91c.png
 
..and a late prediction from Ladbrokes' blogger "the political bookie"...

Here’s my stab at a prediction of the result. It’s based on the bets we’ve taken, plus the feedback and opinion I picked up from voters, party workers and candidates on my two days in Newark.

  • 39% Conservatives
  • 30% UKIP
  • 16% Labour
  • 5% Paul Baggaley (Ind)
  • 4% Liberal Democrats
  • 3% Greens
  • 55% Turnout
That would equate to a Tory majority of around 3,500 votes.
 
Not too exciting this one - although another lib dem lost deposit is always fun. Might reopen their civil war.
 
Back
Top Bottom