[john74]

Here are the seats the Tories need to win in order to win the General Election in 2009/10:

001. Crawley - 37
002. Sittingbourne and Sheppey - 79
003. Harlow - 97
004. Romsey - 125
005. Battersea - 163
006. Medway - 213
007. Gillingham - 254
008. Warwick and Leamington - 266
009. Westmorland and Lonsdale - 267
010. Solihull - 279
011. Stroud - 350
012. Stourbridge - 407
013. Hove - 420
014. Selby - 467
015. Eastleigh - 568
016. Taunton - 573
017. Thanet South - 664
018. Dartford - 706
019. High Peak - 735
020. Finchley and Golders Green - 741
021. Somerton and Frome - 812
022. Bethnal Green and Bow - 823
023. Chester, City of - 915
024. Hereford - 962
025. Carshalton and Wallington - 1,068
026. Wirral West - 1,097
027. Portsmouth North - 1,139
028. Cardiff North - 1,146
029. Swindon South - 1,353
030. Calder Valley - 1,367
031. Burton - 1,421
032. Colne Valley - 1,501
033. Corby - 1,517
034. Perth and North Perthshire - 1,521
035. Angus - 1,601
036. Vale of Glamorgan - 1,808
037. Dorset South - 1,812
038. Wansdyke - 1,839
039. Carmarthen West and Pembrokeshire South - 1,910
040. Enfield North - 1,920
041. Loughborough - 1,996
042. Hastings and Rye - 2,026
043. Harrow West - 2,028
044. Torbay - 2,029
045. Bolton West - 2,064
046. Stafford - 2,121
047. Pendle - 2,180
048. Ribble South - 2,184
049. Nuneaton - 2,280
050. Broxtowe - 2,296
051. Cheltenham - 2,303
052. Chatham and Aylesford - 2,332
053. Birmingham Edgbaston - 2,349
054. Staffordshire Moorlands - 2,438
055. Swindon North - 2,571
056. Tamworth - 2,569
057. Cleethorpes - 2,642
058. Hendon - 2,699
059. Redditch - 2,716
060. Brighton Kemptown - 2,737
061. Sutton and Cheam - 2,846
062. Wolverhampton South West - 2,879
063. Brigg and Goole - 2,894
064. Dumfries and Galloway - 2,922
065. Bury North - 2,926
066. Bradford West - 3,026
067. Great Yarmouth - 3,055
068. Cornwall North - 3,076
069. Conwy - 3,081
070 Stevenage - 3,139
071. Basildon - 3,142
072. Worcester - 3,144
073. Eltham - 3,276
074. Portsmouth South - 3,362
075. Bedford - 3,383
076. Halifax - 3,417
077. Warrington South - 3,515
078. Rossendale and Darwen - 3,676
079. Wirral South - 3,724
080. Hampstead and Highgate - 3,729
081. Richmond Park - 3,731
082. Derby North - 3,757
083. Gedling - 3,811
084. Southport - 3,838
085. Brecon and Radnorshire - 3,905
086. Northampton North - 3,960
087. Milton Keynes South West - 4,010
088. Cheadle - 4,020
089. Bolton North East - 4,103
090. Plymouth Sutton - 4,109
091. Tynemouth - 4,143
092. Dudley South - 4,244
093. Gloucester - 4,271
094. Halesowen and Rowley Regis - 4,337
095. Brentford and Isleworth - 4,411
096. Derbyshire South - 4,495
097. Elmet - 4,528
098. Lincoln - 4,614
099. Dewsbury - 4,615
100. Bath - 4,638
101. Vale of Clwyd - 4,669
102. Reading West - 4,682
103. Harrow East - 4,730
104. Stirling - 4,767
105. Morecambe and Lunesdale - 4,768
106. Keighley - 4,852
107. Dover - 4,941
108. Devon North - 4,972
109. Brighton Pavilion - 5,030
110. Blackpool North and Fleetwood - 5,062
111. Wakefield - 5,154
112. Wyre Forest - 5,250
113. Leeds North East - 5,262
114. Amber Valley - 5,275
115. Ipswich - 5,332
116. Tooting - 5,381
117. Telford - 5,406
118. Dudley North - 5,432
119. Newport West - 5,458
120. Norwich North - 5,459
121. Dorset Mid and Poole North - 5,482
122. Ealing Acton and Shepherd's Bush - 5,520
123. Hyndburn - 5,587
124. Argyll and Bute - 5,636
125. Brent North - 5,641
126. Luton South - 5,650 ---Winning post
127. Moray - 5,676
128. Carlisle - 5,695
129. Birmingham Hall Green - 5,714
130. Batley and Spen - 5,788
131. Crosby - 5,840
132. Pudsey - 5,870
133. Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk - 5,901
134. Waveney - 5,915
135. Barrow and Furness - 6,037
136. Lancashire West - 6,084
137. Regent's Park and Kensington North - 6,131
138. Stockton South - 6,139
139. Teignbridge - 6,215
140. Coventry South - 6,255
141. Colchester - 6,277
142. Copeland - 6,320
143. Clwyd South - 6,348
144. Thurrock - 6,375
145. Birmingham Northfield - 6,454
146. Ellesmere Port and Neston - 6,486
147. Luton North - 6,487
148. Cornwall South East - 6,507
149. Bridgend - 6,523
150. Walsall North - 6,640
151. Delyn - 6,644
152. Sherwood - 6,652
153. Renfrewshire East - 6,657
154. Gower - 6,703
155. Lewisham East - 6,751
156. Feltham and Heston - 6,820
157. Weaver Vale - 6,855
158. Workington - 6,895
159. Southampton Test - 7,018
160. Ealing North - 7,059
161. Crewe and Nantwich - 7,078
162. Erewash - 7,084
163. Poplar and Canning Town - 7,129
164. Montgomeryshire - 7,173
165. Edinburgh South West - 7,242
166. Truro and St Austell - 7,403
167. Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine - 7,471
168. Winchester - 7,476
169. Nottingham South - 7,486
170. Warwickshire North - 7,553
171. Dagenham - 7,605
172. Chorley - 7,625
173. Great Grimsby - 7,654
174. Exeter - 7,665
175. Oxford West and Abingdon - 7,683
176. Hazel Grove - 7,748
177. Slough - 7,851
178. Stretford and Urmston - 7,851
179. Kingswood - 7,873
180. Blackpool South - 7,922

This many gains assuming they didn't lose any would give the Tories a maj of 108 seats.

[Up Pompey!!]

Caroline Dineage did well to cut Mike Hancocks majority in the last election of Portsmouth South but the next tory candidate will have to try much harder to get elected here

[elena]

The problem is that the Boundary Commission is due to report in 2007, so I don't think we'll actually know the constituency makeup for 2009/10 until then.

If the Tories DO win a majority, I doubt it'll be as large as 108. Probably 10 - 40 IF things go their way. At the moment, even with a poll lead of 40-37, it can be projected that they'd STILL lose the election, with a Labour majority of 20. Although if that happened, all hell would break loose.

[swingaleg]

Originally Posted by john74

This many gains assuming they didn't lose any would give the Tories a maj of 108 seats.

What's the significance of a majority of 108 ?


Which would they have to win down to, to get a majority of one ?

[john74]

I know they may be a few boundary changes. I spent about 2 days compiling that list. A 150 seat gain would give the Tories a 50 seat maj roughly.

[john74]

Originally Posted by swingaleg

What's the significance of a majority of 108 ?


Which would they have to win down to, to get a majority of one ?

Have a look at the list, I marked the winning post at seat 126.

[elena]

A 150-seat gain is a damn big target. The only time that's really been done in post-war politics was in 1945 and 1997 (both Labour). I think 80-110 is more realistic (and even then, pretty tricky), hence why I think that, if the Tories are elected in 2009/10, their majority will be pretty slim.

[swingaleg]

Originally Posted by john74

Have a look at the list, I marked the winning post at seat 126.

Cheers..........I hadn't noticed that.

Still wonder what the significance of 108 is............

[john74]

A 12% lead over Labour at the next election will give the Tories a 86 seat maj.

Conservative 366
Labour 232
Lib-Dem 18

[Up Pompey!!]

Originally Posted by john74

A 12% lead over Labour at the next election will give the Tories a 86 seat maj.

Conservative 366
Labour 232
Lib-Dem 18

Now i can see it is not going to happen beacuse i dont see the Lib Dems losing 44 seats

[elena]

At the moment, it doesn't look like the Tories will poll anything near as big as 12% ahead of Labour. Of course, it could all change, but a gap of 1% - 5% is probably more likely.

As for the Lib Dem question - it could easily happen. If people think the election will be close they'll vote for one of the big two in order to keep their least-favoured party out of power (hence some of the Lib Dem voters could defect to Labour) and therefore the Lib Dems would end up losing a whole load of seats. I only see them with around 50-40 by the time of the next election anyway. That said, I still think that the outcome could be a hung parliament, with the Libs holding the balance of power

[Mesostim]

Surely Labour need to win those seats as well...and The Lib Dems...and the Green Party...and god help us...the BNP...

[john74]

Originally Posted by Mesostim

Surely Labour need to win those seats as well...and The Lib Dems...and the Green Party...and god help us...the BNP...

The seats listed are currently held by Labour, Lib Dems, SNP and PC and Respect(mind you that one will probably go to the Labour, usually a safe seat for Labour)

[Up Pompey!!]

Originally Posted by john74

The seats listed are currently held by Labour, Lib Dems, SNP and PC and Respect(mind you that one will probably go to the Labour, usually a safe seat for Labour)

Why, it's not like the incumbent is a member of a one issue party

Oh, wait there, he is

[demorules]

Originally Posted by john74

059. Redditch - 2,716

Could be quite an easy one for the Tories. Jacqui Smith (Labour) is proving to be pretty unpopular round these parts at the moment.

[thms]

won't happen
as labour will have young and stunning
looking candidates standing for election

[hardeep]

Originally Posted by elena

The problem is that the Boundary Commission is due to report in 2007, so I don't think we'll actually know the constituency makeup for 2009/10 until then.

Good point. In my neck of the woods Derbyshire South is a case in point. The BC has recommended that 2 wards which together could be regarded a "good" Conservative areas have been removed and added to Derby South - only ever had a Labour MP.

So a possible marginal becomes harder to win whereas a rock solid Labour seat now only needs a 15% swing for the Conservatives. A decent Lib Dem presence makes this even less unlikely.

Geographically the changes do make sense. (The two wards in question are in the City of Derby and in Local Elections are part of the unitary council whereas the rest of S Derbyshire vote for Derbshire CC.) But it does show how a list of raw numbers is only useful with knowledge of the local political landscape.

[ukpaul]

Originally Posted by hardeep

Good point. In my neck of the woods Derbyshire South is a case in point. The BC has recommended that 2 wards which together could be regarded a "good" Conservative areas have been removed and added to Derby South - only ever had a Labour MP.

So a possible marginal becomes harder to win whereas a rock solid Labour seat now only needs a 15% swing for the Conservatives. A decent Lib Dem presence makes this even less unlikely.

Geographically the changes do make sense. (The two wards in question are in the City of Derby and in Local Elections are part of the unitary council whereas the rest of S Derbyshire vote for Derbshire CC.) But it does show how a list of raw numbers is only useful with knowledge of the local political landscape.

People who know about these things (on Anthony Wells' Polling Report) have been doing calculations and have come up with the following conclusion. Tories gain eleven seats, labour lose seven seats.

Originally Posted by thms

won't happen
as labour will have young and stunning
looking candidates standing for election

Nice to see you prefer image over substance.

[elena]

Originally Posted by ukpaul

People who know about these things (on Anthony Wells' Polling Report) have been doing calculations and have come up with the following conclusion. Tories gain eleven seats, labour lose seven seats.

There is also the possibility, I believe, that some seats previously solid will become more marginal if more districts are factored in. The electoral system has always favoured Labour, but the Boundary changes do sound as if the Tories could make some more ground.

Originally Posted by demorules

Could be quite an easy one for the Tories. Jacqui Smith (Labour) is proving to be pretty unpopular round these parts at the moment.

Pray tell, why?

[thms]

Originally Posted by cifpower

Nice to see you prefer image over substance.

just copying the tories and lib dems..
if you can't beat them join them

So you are joining the Tories.

[thms]

Originally Posted by cifpower

So you are joining the Tories.

i'm to good looking to be a tory

[Peter E]

Originally Posted by demorules

Could be quite an easy one for the Tories. Jacqui Smith (Labour) is proving to be pretty unpopular round these parts at the moment.

Whyt is she unpopular in her consituency? I saw her on Question Time a few months ago and she seemed like a really lovely lady. Apprantly, her majority increased at the 2005 May General Election.