Comments

Hampstead & Kilburn as it happened — 9 Comments

  1. A good write up of an incredible night. I would just add a few points though. The tallying up at the verification stage isn’t useless after the result as it allows the parties to see where their actual support is coming from. Each box comes from a polling station in a particular area so a good operation can tally up its totals in the different areas to see where it is strongest for future campaigning. Once the verification is over this isn’t possible as the votes are bundled together for the whole constituency.

    The reason neither Glenda nor Chris mentioned the Lib Dem’s campaign was that it was one of the dirtiest and vindictive campaigns fought in the country. Ed fought dirty and got his comeuppance by coming third.

  2. I totally agree with the above,
    I have seen first hand the dirty campaign of the Lib Dems, with many conservative signs being sabotaged with marker pens and what not, think about it, its not like the average person carries a permanent marker pen around with them is it?
    But congratulations are in order to Phil, his campaign team and Jackson. Plus a good article of what happend 🙂

  3. Conservative and Liberal Democrat signs both suffered, Conservative and Liberal Democrat literature both claimed 'the other couldn't win' so in light of a fabulous write-up and an incredible night, it's hardly the time to be taking potshots and scoring points.

  4. Fantastic write up as always.

    Will write more later, so just a a couple of quick points from me now – anyone who thinks any of these campaigns were dirty hasn’t been to many marginal by-elections. Try asking Shaun Bailey and Andrew Slaughter what dirty campaigns are about, for example.

    Also – I wonder if the Tory “it’s us or Labour here” backfired? It was intended to scare Lib Dem voters into thinking “hang on, I don’t want a Labour MP to win” but perhaps it did just the opposite. We’ll never know.

  5. Thanks for the great blog – and in particular for staying up. I went to bed a 3 and still managed to get up in time for the h and k result.

    To the first two posters – if you're going to throw around serious allegations please have the basic decency not to post anonymously.

  6. I can say hand on heart that I’m totally unaware of people from any party actively defacing or attacking other signs.

    I know of three specific instances of hassle – one was a group of lads on their way home, one was a neighbour dispute and the other was a multi occ house where someone had not got permission.

    Thanks to Whampstead for all the ongoing conversations etc – more to follow I am sure
    🙂

    Ed

  7. Well done Jonathan on an excellent write-up. It’s good to have an insight into a count from someone not already immersed in the process and rituals.

    I agree with Ed that I’m unaware of people actively involved in any of the campaigns attacking the others signs. We did however have quite a few signs taken down and defaced, obviously somebody did this. My guess would be politically motivated (and maybe accohol fuelled) individuals who weren’t involved, or at least centrally involved, in any of the campaigns. This is the general experience elsewhere on this.

    Cllr Andrew Marshall

  8. Hum, hum. Those first two posts are very odd. Great write up, Whampstead. I agree with Andrew Marshall (there, I said it). I saw both Tory and Lib Dem signs taken down and vandalised. One of the most heartening and humbling moments of the campaign was when I had a call out to a vandalised LibDem sign. I turned up cursing Tory vandals and discovered that a Tory and LibDem sign had been vandalised at the same time and that the Tory supporter had found the discarded signs and brought the LibDem one back to his neighbour.

  9. Frankly the signs were the least of it. The Lib Dems ran a weird and cynical campaign, keeping a separate list of Jewish voters, and targeting them with flyers showing their candidate on holiday in Israel, implying (but never specifying) support for that country, despite the party and its leader having very anti-Israel policies. Of course their leaflets in other parts of London told a different story on the same issue, if they felt it’d help them get elected (see http://is.gd/c7wKc).

    Among the reasons they moved Sarah Teather to the other constituency when the new boundaries were created must have been the small but significant Jewish population in Hampstead and Kilburn. Teather had made no secret of her animosity towards Israel, even yelling about it in Trafalgar Square.

    This might explain Ed Fordham’s particular efforts to woo the Jews in H and K. He even implied support from members of the Israeli government in his leaflets, and mis-captioned them to imply a greater connection to London Jewry.

    Dirty campaign? Absolutely. Lucky Hampstead and Kilburn put them third. So much for 474 votes to win!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>