A few people have asked me if I know where there is a spreadsheet of the general election results available so they can crunch the numbers and explore results themselves. Until now I’ve been using results scraped off the BBC website, but the British Election Study team have now released a data set of the election results for download here.


420 Responses to “Spreadsheet of the General Election Results”

1 7 8 9
  1. @Jack Sheldon
    “Racism – an explicit belief in inherent racial differences that determine ability and achievement – is, I hope and believe, now limited to very few individuals, most of whom will be dead within 10 years.”

    I beg to disagree with this statement. To take an obvious example, East Africans have been disproportionately successful in middle and long distance running since the days of Kip Keino and Abebe Bikila, but not really in any other sport.

    My definition of racism would not be just a belief in inherent racial differences, but to let that belief affect how you treat other people.

  2. HAWTHORN

    OK-lets re-wind this conversation.

    You commented that only “rightwingers” were opposed to 24 hr NHS.

    I asked if you meant the BMA-who have been resistant on behalf of consultants.

    You responded with “It never ceases to amaze me how many people [] go on about market forces choose to ignore them when it is inconvenient for them.”

    I pointed out that in the NHS, market forces are not able to provide the customer/patient with influence over suppliers like hospital Consultants, and thus , as with many Trades Unions representing Public Sector service providers they are able to resist changes & reforms which they see as against their members interests.

    The point I was trying to make in response to your crack about “market forces” is that market forces are not present for patients to use within NHS.

  3. @Pete B

    I fully endorse your amendment to my definition!

  4. I don’t deny that racism has reduced (although if polls can be believed, it’s on the rise, at least marginally). It’s certainly much better than anywhere in Eastern Europe or for that matter France. Still …

    @ Jack Sheldon

    “Racism – an explicit belief in inherent racial differences that determine ability and achievement – is, I hope and believe, now limited to very few individuals, most of whom will be dead within 10 years.”

    English and everyone else is not racist? Anyway I think you are overestimating the average age of certain political movements in the UK. Also Sir Cecil hasn’t been that long ago and if I read the literature correctly, it’s still around.

    We may try our very best to avoid it but preconceived views of people and cultures still influence our judgments all of the time.

    Yes, we do. I wonder how you then draw the line between prejudices and values, and after differentiating between racism and prejudices, how would you describe a deliberate attempt of gaining (quite a few) votes by appealing to these prejudices using the teeminology of racism, just without skin colour? It seems to me that it worked quite well in 2015.

    @ Hawthorn

    [not] “necessarily representative of the working class as a whole.”

    Not at all. But there is a very deliberate and widely supported movement to try to stir it. Actually, it was an upper middle class colleague of mine who fewer than 10 years ago said openly that the British lower classes are genetically defined and a different race altogether. I was the only one of the five people who stood up and left at that point. You may not call this racism, but it uses its terminology, and for the same purpose.

  5. I hope this parliament is finally one where Cameron can nail the myth that the Tories want to dismantle the NHS. Of course some people won’t care what happens, and will peddle that line ad finitum, but I for one hope he can get as much evidence out there to the contrary.

  6. Me too Rich.

    Here’s an interesting view point on Labour’s tribulations.

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c1ee92c2-fafa-11e4-9aed-00144feab7de.html#axzz3aVrhdRML

    Must say I subscribed to the “understand why you lost first” point of view.

    But if Ganesh is correct its all seat of the pants anyway & just depends on “right” leader.

  7. Colin

    I am arguing about no-one disagreeing with the principle.

    The unions are pointing out that it needs to be paid for, and that extra duties require extra renumeration.

  8. HAWTORN

    It doesn’t mean people working 7 days a week.

    It requires sensible shift patterns which provide the gamut of clinical resource ( consultants/diagnostics etc as well as nursing) every day of the week.

    Of course some staff unions-including the BMA will see this as imposition of “unsocial hours”. No doubt too, anything which hinders their ability to spend time in Private Practice also excercises hospital consultants.

    Hopefully we will see all concerned concentrate on patients interests & the actual funding required.

    If you have ever been unfortunate enough to be admitted to hospital on a Friday evening, or Saturday morning, you will know the frustration & stress of waiting for the NHS clinicians to turn up sometime on Monday morning.

  9. Colin

    If you have full 7 day working, you have more shifts and therefore need more staff. Therefore you need more money. Where the money is coming from is unexplained.

  10. Laszlo
    “…it was an upper middle class colleague of mine who fewer than 10 years ago said openly that the British lower classes are genetically defined and a different race altogether”

    There might actually be a tiny grain of truth in this because when the Normans came over, they dispossessed the Saxon noblemen and became the new ruling class. By and large they hung on to that position for a very long time, and intermarried amongst themselves (mainly). Nowadays though even royalty marries commoners so the effect is reducing.
    ———————–
    On the polls being wrong there could be another reason in addition to the three that unicorn mentioned. We know that a small(?) percentage of voters don’t actually make their mind up until they are in the polling booth. If asked prior to the election they would presumably answer ‘Don’t Know’. The pollsters then categorise them according to their recalled 2010 vote I believe. Now if those voters break more in favour of one party than another, the pollsters won’t (and can’t) pick that up.

  11. Obviously there is little polling at the moment so people can’t discuss new polls, but hopefully why the polls were wrong, the huge chunk of actual election results and explaining why people voted as they did might give people things to talk about OTHER than debating policy, which can only end up in party partisan debate… especially if you are one of those people who are not very good at all at leaving your party partisanship at the door…

  12. HAWTHORN

    I don’t know if that is correct or not-or if it is, to what extent it is.

    If a hospital has 4 Cardiologists, currently working two days a week for NHS ( & the rest for Private Hospitals) perhaps a reduction in their Private hours would allow the compliment of 4 to cover weekends in the NHS.

    Of course there will be a cost . But there is far too much horror & resistance from medical professionals at the very idea-even before details have been thrashed out & costed.

    Lets get the principle agreed as a good thing for patients first.

    Funding-when agreed-will be the responsibility of the Government, and I have no doubt that you will be among the first to examine how it will be provided.

  13. @Colin

    We had seven day surgeries at our local GP in Beckenham until they scrapped it late last year on the basis of cost. The weekend staff were always different, though. If you wanted to see your doctor you has to attend during the week.

  14. RAF

    I have a feeling that your example confirms my worst prejudices about today’s senior medical practitioners .

  15. @ Pete B

    :-)

  16. @ Pete B

    I wonder if the polls had been better had the 2005-2010 LAB-LD switchers had been treated differently than other party IDs.

  17. Laszlo
    It would be something for the investigators to look into.

  18. @Laszlo

    Sorry for the slow response – thank you for sending that link. I was starting to get withdrawal symptoms from a lack of tables to pour over

  19. @ Unicorn

    Thinking about the 2015 UK election I observe Lord Ashcroft’s last poll of voters taken on May 5th and 6th and released May 7th:

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/ANP-150507.jpg

    My own experience from foot canvassing in the Patcham area of Brighton Pavillion was that our last mass canvass provided results that were spot on with the eventual vote count on the morning of May 8th.

    There was a clear shift in people making their minds up over the holiday weekend, and when I went out for the last time on the evening of May 5th, I only found one person genuinely undecided and two leaning to either Green or Labour out of 50 voters I contacted that night on the doorstep.

    So I go back to my post of yesterday and suggest that a statistical review should be undertaken to see whether votes from Conservative and Labour were rather more concentrated in incumbent seats.

    If that is the case, excluding Scotland, it would have been extremely difficult for the pollsters to have got polling right given the low sample sizes across the UK.

    I still think the UK needs to move to a regional polling model in England, given the variations in support between London and many urban areas being pro-Labour
    and rural areas and “suburbs” being pro-Conservative.

    This, by the way, follows voting patterns that have emerged between Republicans and Democrats in the US and Conservative, NDP and Liberal in Canada.

    That said the bigger issue in this UK election becomes the number of votes that a party required to elect a candidate under UK FPTP:

    DUP 23,033
    SNP 25,972
    SDLP 33,269
    Conservative 34,243
    Labour 40,290
    Sinn Fein 44,058
    Plaid Cymru 60,568
    LD 301,982
    Green 1,157,613
    UKIP 3,881,099

    As a Green Party supporter and activist for over twenty two years I am used to the vagaries of FPTP, but surmise it might have come as a shock to some of the more “well heeled” UKIP supporters who are used to voting Conservative and winning seats.

    I would observe, from first hand experience, and looking at the results that the Green Party in England is getting better at playing the ground game, and not unlike the Greens in Australia is starting to emerge as a political player in inner city seats (ie London and the North).

    The Greens will have to battle it out with UKIP and Labour for some of those voters in the urban areas, but in looking over the seats still held by the Liberal Democrats, and at where LD lost deposits I would say they are in danger of becoming a rural “fringe” party.

    Finally I’ll observe that in 2010 Labour and Conservative obtained a combined 65.1% of the vote, which when combined with LD gave 88.1% going to the three traditional parties.

    In 2015 Conservative and Labour achieved 67.3%, which when combined with LD only reached 75.2%. Thus just shy of one in four voters cast a ballot for a party other than the traditional three – up from just over 1:10 in 2010.

    The fact that the pollsters got the order of the Conservatives and Labour wrong, is surely immaterial to the fact, that the “coalition” went from 59.1% support to 44.8% and from 364 seats to 331+8, and the main opposition party inched up from 29% to 30.4% and declined from from 258 seats to to 232 – suggests that a pyrric victory exists for the status quo parties.

    If Scotland, for example, has a second referendum and the nationalists win, that loss and Cameron’s role and the role of the Conservatives will for ever be etched in the minds of the English as a result of a failure of Cameron and the Conservatives.

    Between 1988 and 1993 Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and the Progressive Conservatives twice tried to make a deal with the nationalists and failed, and within a decade of losing power in 1993 the Progressive Conservatives, as a federal party no longer existed.

    So to those who think the Conservatives are set to rule the UK for a long time because of their current strength in England:

    “Pride cometh before a fall”

    Social Credit were in power in Alberta from 1935 to 1972 and the Progressive Conservatives from 1972 to 2015, but when financial analysts pointed out that with the collapse of oil prices the Alberta government was basically bankrupt, whereas ‘socially progressive” Norway had a three trillion $ “rainy day fund” – something snapped in lower and middle income urban voters.

    2020 is a long way away and a lot can happen in the global economy between now and then.

  20. @Andy S

    Thanks for your comments about foot canvassing development over the last few days before the election. You write:

    If that is the case, excluding Scotland, it would have been extremely difficult for the pollsters to have got polling right given the low sample sizes across the UK.

    I don’t understand why you say this. In particular, if you are right about shifts taking places after the last weekend, I don’t understand why these changes weren’t picked up by the last few polls and specifically by the recall poll conducted by YouGov. The latest polls were still suggesting a Tory lead of about 1% and by the time of the exit polls this was increased to a lead which was way beyond the MoE of the combined polls. Even with the change varying from region to region, its absolute effects were easily large enough to be picked up by the polls.

    If you are right about the emergence of very late changes, then a second YouGov recall of respondents to their big 10K poll should find significant numbers of individuals who shifted from Lab -> Tory after their last poll. It still haven’t heard any reports of this kind.

1 7 8 9