Comparison of election results (1st May 2008)

I don't think anyone would expect the Liberal Party to well (or frankly retain their deposit) but that wouldn't be the point of standing in the by-election. It would be a way of trying to raise the profile of the party, trying to expand into new areas of the country and pick up new members. If somehow they get a decent share of the vote then that would be a bonus. If the Liberal Party doesn't try to expand beyond their comfort zones they'll be stuck in the 15 to 20 places they currently are. I guess the question would be; what is the best way for them to try and expand? That's all very well and good, but do you really think you'd get the media coverage? It seems unlikely to me. The media are interested in parties that might win or otherwise do well: by your own admission, your party does not fall into that category. For you, just getting mentioned is not helpful - if a journalist makes a reference to the "Liberal Party" on TV the vast majority of viewers will subconsciously add in the word "Democrat".

That is the point
This is the whole point of the By-election forum, we raise our parties profile on the national stage, national news. We run for Henley and start planning now.

That's all very well and good, but do you really think you'd get the media coverage? It seems unlikely to me. The media are interested in parties that might win or otherwise do well: by your own admission, your party does not fall into that category. For you, just getting mentioned is not helpful - if a journalist makes a reference to the "Liberal Party" on TV the vast majority of viewers will subconsciously add in the word "Democrat". Which is why the Liberal Party need to try and gain more publicity so people don't confuse them with the Liberal Democrats (which I guess must be a common occurrence for them). I would also point out the Liberal Party would get more media coverage by standing than if they don't. A quick note, an understandable mistake on your part, at no point have I referred to the Liberal Party as my party.

Which is why the Liberal Party need to try and gain more publicity so people don't confuse them with the Liberal Democrats (which I guess must be a common occurrence for them). I would also point out the Liberal Party would get more media coverage by standing than if they don't. A quick note, an understandable mistake on your part, at no point have I referred to the Liberal Party as my party. You're not one of them? In that case, there's a nice party with its HQ in Cowley Street... 8) I suppose you're right. To be honest though, the most that's going to happen is that they get a footnote in the news - they may even be completely ignored and lumped into "Other" throughout. The problem that I see regarding confusion with the Lib Dems is that in order to permeate the public psyche sufficiently they would have to become a significant party (I'm sure they won't be offended by the suggestion that they aren't at the moment: they've as good as admitted it already on this thread). That's not easy to do. It took the Liberal Party decades to do that without there being any question of confusion. Since there is confusion, they will be lumped in with the Lib Dems on practically everything, except where they can put out a leaflet to prevent that. Since even the Lib Dems struggle to get 100% leaflet coverage on anything like a regular basis that's a big problem for a party the size of the Liberals which wants to be identified in its own right. Electorally it's possibly not quite such a bad thing for the Liberal Party (they'll be able to freeload on Lib Dem successes to some extent), although considering that many Lib Dem success stories are the result of hard work on the ground (which would have to be more than matched) that may not be much help.

Remember Bootle, but Richmond months before
Stephen quoted in an open email to Bill today, that the risk of a by-election would put us behind The loony party. But here are two other facts: Richmond by-election, 1989 Party Candidate Votes Conservative William Hague 19,543 37.2 -24.0 Social Democrat Mike Potter 16,909 32.2 Social and Liberal Democrats Barbara Pearce 11,589 22.1 -4.9 Labour Frank Robson 2,591 4.9 -6.9 Bootle by-election, May 1990 Party Candidate Votes % ±% Labour Michael Carr 26,737 75.4 + 8.5 Conservative James Clappison 3,220 9.1 − 11.0 Liberal Democrat John Cunningham 3,179 8.9 − 4.1 Green Sean Brady 1,269 3.6 N/A Liberal Kevin White 474 1.3 N/A Monster Raving Loony Lord David Sutch 418 1.2 N/A Social Democrat Jack Holmes 155 0.4 N/A Neath by-election, 1991 Party Candidate Votes Labour Peter Hain 17,962 51.7 Plaid Cymru Dewi Evans 8,132 23.3 Conservative Richard Evans 2,995 8.6 Liberal Democrat David Lloyd 2,000 5.8 Social Democrat John Warman 1,826 Only months before the bootle by-election the SDP nearly won Richmond, and had a respectable result months after in Neath. And in Neath they returned 3 SDP councillors not so long after in the council elections. The moral being, he who does nothing achieves nothing. Stephen could in one action change the fortunes of this party by agreeing we stand a candidate in Henley. Stephen is the same guy he gained us 96,000 votes in the European elections. He took a risk, and it paid off. We stand in Henley.

Henley will be an interesting by-election: it'll be a con-*test*-('") between the Liberal Democrat by-election engine (which I think I'm justified in calling the most powerful campaigning force - when focused on one constituency - in British politics) against the resurgent Conservative Party (perhaps hampered by the loss of Boris Johnson's personal vote).

Re: Remember Bootle, but Richmond months before

Stephen quoted in an open email to Bill today, that the risk of a by-election would put us behind The loony party. The Loonies (as much as I love their wackiness) only tend to beat single issue parties and independents. Here is the list of parties the Loonies have beaten in by-elections over the past ten years: Sedgefield 2007 = Anti-Crime Party Ealing Southall 2007 = English Democrats Party and two independents Bromley & Chislehurst 2006 = Money Reform Party and one independent Hartlepool 2004 = English Democrats Party and one independent Leicester South 2004 = Five independents Brent East 2003 = www . xat . org and two independents Ogmore 2002 = New Millenium Bean Party and one independent Kensington & Chelsea 1999 = One independent Wigan 1999 = Natural Law Party and one independent Eddisbury 1999 = Natural Law Party and one independent So while there is a risk of the Liberal Party being beaten by the Official Monster Raving Loony Party, I reckon it is a minimal one.

Re: Remember Bootle, but Richmond months before

Stephen quoted in an open email to Bill today, that the risk of a by-election would put us behind The loony party. I just read that email myself. Bill's email talked about standing in the byelections in Crewe and also in Henley. Steve said it was madness to throw resources at an election in area where we have no connections. I may be wrong but I read that remark as being directed at the idea of standing in Crewe, not at the idea of standing in Henley. After all, in Henley we do have local connections, to the extent that Dane Clouston lives in the constituency and organises the Oxfordshire Liberals from there. Dane alerted the party to the likelihood of a by-election in Henley almost 2 months ago, and has been preparing ever since: forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=44" target="_blank">http://liberals.12.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=44

Re: Remember Bootle, but Richmond months before

Stephen quoted in an open email to Bill today, that the risk of a by-election would put us behind The loony party. I just read that email myself. Bill's email talked about standing in the byelections in Crewe and also in Henley. Steve said it was madness to throw resources at an election in area where we have no connections. I would disagree with Steve it wouldn't be madness, the Liberal Party should try to push beyond its comfort zones and into new areas of the country. It would be worth them standing candidates in the two or three parliamentary by-elections every year. To answer my own question of a couple of days ago the last time a Liberal Party candidate stood in a parliamentary by-election was the Beckenham by-election in 1997.

Re: Remember Bootle, but Richmond months before
To answer my own question of a couple of days ago the last time a Liberal Party candidate stood in a parliamentary by-election was the Beckenham by-election in 1997. Where they won 1% of the vote (330 votes), down 0.3% on the General Election earlier that year and only 0.2% above the National Front. I'm sorry if you think I'm being negative again but I'd have thought this was important information. On the positive side, they were in 4th place.

Yeah, clearly not the grea-*test*-('") result but in line with lower end of the Liberal Party's General election results over the past years. Fourth place must have been the best they could have hoped for and they achieved it.

my result
The first time I stood in the general election in 2005, I had 605 votes, the first time we had had a candidate here in 17 years. I believe if we could put effort into Henley we could pick up support and a team for the general election next year. This is worth a risk. Lets gamble nothing, as we have nothing to loose. Dane Clouston Liberal Party

View Full Version: Comparison of election results (1st May 2008)