Sentences with phrase «more labour seats»

So if the case for more Labour seats from AV anytime this decade is dubious, what about the impact of a yes vote on the coalition?

The party has decided to scale back its campaign against the Lib Dems and instead aggressively target up to 20 more Labour seats.

The plan — for which I, then a deputy chairman of the party, was responsible — helped us to win 23 more Labour seats and nine more Lib Dem seats than we would have done on a uniform swing.

In 2010, though the Conservatives did not achieve the national vote share they wanted, the party's targeting strategy meant it won 23 more Labour seats and 9 more Liberal Democrat seats than it would have done on a uniform swing.

Not exact matches

Together with VW's home state of Lower Saxony, labour representatives hold more than half of the 20 seats on the group's supervisory board that ratifies key decisions on investment, plant closures and executive appointments.

«Clearly I would have preferred to have got more votes than we did, but this was always going to be a tough fight for Labour - it's a seat that we've never won,» he said.

The Lib Dems got four less than expected, taking four seats; the Conservatives two more than forecast, on 307; while Labour held three more seats than predicted, taking 258.

What's more, the next election will also be fought on new boundaries and 50 fewer seats — unless Theresa May takes advantage of the turmoil in the Labour party and goes for a snap election in the autumn, as many are now expecting.

«Under First Past the Post this would likely be disastrous for them, splitting the Labour vote and allowing the Conservatives or UKIP, or whoever, to gain more seats from them.

Yet the Tories won sixty seats more than Labour.

But unlike May, Heath was booted out of Number 10 to make way for Harold Wilson, whose Labour party won a mere four seats more than the Tories.

Taking all these factors together - regional variations, over-statement of the Labour vote and more vigorous campaigning in target seats - and we would expect a modest Conservative majority of 30 to 50.

The Conservatives in 2010 got more votes nationally than Labour in 2005... and fewer seats.

Indeed, Labour gained some seats without even canvassing last year, such was the level of enthusiasm among voters based on little more than viral Facebook videos and a pledge to build a fairer Britain.

I think activists can work to get Greens and Respect elected in a handful of FPTP seats and we must all hope for an embarrassingly massive Tory landslide (300 seats or so) on < 50 % of the vote that will make everyone see what an absurd situation we are in, make Cameron's parliamentary party more unruly and nekedly nasty and — crucially — smash the Labour Party so hard that both its right and its left give up all hope of ever winning a FPTP election again, and destroy the hubris that decrees that they never collaborate with other progressive / left forces.

It won't make Labour any more popular among the voters it needs to save its marginal seats at the election.»

One possible development in this scenario is that several months into a Con - Lib government (coalition or otherwise) the polls suggest both Labour and the Liberal Democrats would win more seats if there were another general election.

He polled 1000 people by telephone in each of 16 different seats (15 Labour seats with 2010 leads over the SNP of at least 33 points but often 40 points or more; and 2 Lib Dem seats — Gordon and Inverness).

In London, Labour performed more strongly in boroughs where it already had a healthy lead over the Conservatives when the seats were last contested, in 2014.

The Conservatives, though, were thought likely to be the bigger losers, having done well in 2011 and therefore defending far more seats than Labour, and having also been more damaged by UKIP's dramatic rise.

Along with the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, Reeves represents a northern seat and believes the party has to do more to recognise key Labour voters» concerns about immigration and welfare.

They were undone, however, by a collapse in the Liberal Democrat vote which meant the party lost more seats to Labour where Labour was the second - placed candidate than they gained directly from the Lib Dems where they were the challengers.

The Conservatives tend to pile up large majorities in safe seats and because the planned redistribution of seats did not take place after the 2010 election, Labour has a number of seats with below average electorates, making the vote - to - seat ratio work all the more in its favour.

Such an outcome might still leave Labour with just three seats more than the Conservatives, but it still represents a more attractive prospect than the one Panelbase portrayed in their previous poll a fortnight ago.

The other two envisioned Miliband as prime minister: one had the Tories on 270 to 285, unable to form a government; the other had Labour with slightly more votes than the Tories, but with slightly fewer, or the same, number of seats.

Under First Past the Post this would likely be disastrous for them, splitting the Labour vote and allowing the Conservatives (or UKIP, or whoever) to gain more seats from them.

It seems somewhat likely that we'll end up with the Tories having more seats than Labour, but the parties of the left having a majority of seats in parliament.

Ruth Davidson's Conservatives are now the official Holyrood opposition, with seven seats more than Labour.

They may well pick up a handful of seats from Labour (two in north London look pretty much a done deal)-- I think they will — but the starting - blocks are such that they can pile on votes in Labour strongholds without getting more result than that.

Five years ago, Welsh Labour did very well in the Welsh local elections, increasing the number of council seats they held by around 70 %; by the end of that night they had substantially more councillor in Wales than did the Conservatives, Plaid Cymru and the Liberal Democrats put together.

The lack of any net advantage elsewhere means the Conservatives can afford to lose no more than 23 seats to Labour if they are to remain the largest party.

Indeed, it is entirely possible that the Conservatives could win more votes and gain fewer seats than Labour.

After all, Labour have got more seats to lose than the Tories and disillusioned Labour voters are likely to be highly responsive to a «Mansion Tax».

I would imagine that a «better the devil you know» attitude will prevail in the event of (as I predict) the Tories having a substantial number of seats more than Labour, and the Lib Dems retaining rather more of their seats than the polls predict, at the May election.

Tony Blair's donation of # 106,000 to Labour this week — divided between candidates in the party's 106 designated target seats — doesn't make him the party largest individual donor (there were seven individuals who gave more in 2014) but he is certainly the most controversial.

And if it does not happen the tally of seats the SNP might fail to win would be no more than four, two of them picked up by Labour and one each by the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.

If, for example the Conservatives take 305 seats and the Lib Dems 25, there is more likely to be a continuation of the present coalition arrangement than a grand alliance of say Labour on 265, ScotNats on 35 and Lib Dems on 25.

Of the three second - placed parties who won nine seats, UKIP gained the largest share of the county - wide vote, more than 10 % ahead of Labour.

If Labour had finished with just 15 % more seats than the Tories that would have been a dire night for Labour, and a Tory - win by any reasonable definition.

Most of the elections this time around were city elections, where Labour holds many more seats, and they did best in London.

They make up more than half the electorate in the vast majority of the English swing seats that Labour needs to win to secure a workable majority.

He then proceeded according to that view and negotiated primarily with the Conservatives, who had won 48 more seats than the incumbent Labour Party.

In practice, Labour won more seats because more seats were available in Labour - supporting areas (most notably London).

Switching from Labour to UKIP in a Labour marginal, or switching to UKIP from anyone in a safe Labour seat, is clearly not going to make a Miliband premiership more likely.

Another way of putting it is that Lib Dem MPs are more likely to hold on to their seats — other things being equal — than the Tories or Labour.

Before 2011, the seat was solidly Labour with former First Minister Jack McConnell winning his seat in 2007 with 48.4 % of the vote (23 % more than his SNP opponent).

Watch: the extraordinary moment when The Labour Party campaign chief Douglas Alexander realised he'd lost his seat to Scottish National Party (SNP) 20 - year - old politics student Mhairi Black by six thousand votes.Watch more: Douglas Alexander's concession speech here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7-ZMZeR6a4

In seats where Labour is defending a majority of more than 25 points the swing in the poll from Labour to the SNP since 2010 is 24 points, rather higher than the 19.5 point swing for Scotland as a whole.

We polled a thousand votes more than Labour in the recent Euro elections in the South West seat and are campaigning hard to go one better at the forthcoming Westminster election.

It is a marginal seat between Plaid and the Labour Party, and until the 2016 Assembly election, had never been held by the same party for more than one consecutive term.