REMINDER: The CON poll deficit maybe getting smaller but they need to be well ahead on votes just to be level-pegging on seats
| General Election May 6th 2010 | CON | LAB |
|---|---|---|
| Average electorate of seats won | 72,435 | 68,612 |
| Average turnout in seats won | 68.4% | 61.1% |
| Average total votes in seat won | 49,436 | 41,842 |
| Seats won with small majorities | 60 | 81 |
| Votes in seats where party was third | 28.4% | 16.6% |
Much of the so-called bias is down to different voting patterns
Yet again this morning the YouGov daily snapshot has the LAB lead at 7% adding further to a mood of confidence in parts of the Tory camp.
@timmontgomerie Yes – but also before the next round of cuts. Let’s not get carried away…
— Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft) April 23, 2013
Whether it’s the Thatcher effect or not there does appear that for now the margin has narrowed a touch.
The above table was published here three year ago and was based on a slide from Professor John Curtice of Strathclyde University that was presented at a post-GE2010 conference at Nottingham University.
It looks at the factors that mean that LAB can win an overall majority on a much smaller share of the national vote than CON.
True the aborted boundary plan would have helped redress the balance but only by a bit as the numbers above from GE2010 show.
-
The most telling figure is the average turnout in seats won which, as can be seen, is considerably lower for LAB than CON. This then is reflected in the average total votes in seats won.
The final factor, overall votes in seats where the party was third, shows a huge difference between the two main parties.
But how many elements can be described as “bias” at all because as the table shows all but the average constituency size are down to the much more efficient way in which LAB votes are converted into MPs.
For with first past the post there are no prizes for building up large vote shares where it doesn’t matter – like where you are third.
I can never understand the “LAB needs to be doing better in the south” argument. Why? The red team will focus almost their entire efforts on winning seats at GE2015 – not building up vote shares where’s there’s no hope of gaining an MP.
Mike Smithson
For the latest polling and political betting news