<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hammersmith</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 04:27:07 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pete Whitehead</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-238026</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete Whitehead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-238026</guid>
		<description>Yes it will be the same answer as for Shepherd&#039;s Bush</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes it will be the same answer as for Shepherd&#8217;s Bush</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Harry Porter</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-238025</link>
		<dc:creator>Harry Porter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 21:50:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-238025</guid>
		<description>Which seats have included present-day White City ward? I am guessing they will have been the same as listed in answer to my previous queries upthread.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which seats have included present-day White City ward? I am guessing they will have been the same as listed in answer to my previous queries upthread.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237712</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 19:15:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237712</guid>
		<description>FS

Of course the swing in each seat will be individual and apart from the uncertainty abour the actual majority other factors such as changing demographics and the quality of the Conservative candidate suggest a greater than average swing in this seat.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FS</p>
<p>Of course the swing in each seat will be individual and apart from the uncertainty abour the actual majority other factors such as changing demographics and the quality of the Conservative candidate suggest a greater than average swing in this seat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frederic Stansfield</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237705</link>
		<dc:creator>Frederic Stansfield</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:39:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237705</guid>
		<description>Thanks for pointing this out, Andy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for pointing this out, Andy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy Stidwill</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237702</link>
		<dc:creator>Andy Stidwill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 18:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237702</guid>
		<description>Frederick, are you aware that the official Rallings &amp; Thrasher notional results give Labour only a 8.4% lead in this seat, so requiring a swing of 4.3% for the Conservatives to win?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Frederick, are you aware that the official Rallings &amp; Thrasher notional results give Labour only a 8.4% lead in this seat, so requiring a swing of 4.3% for the Conservatives to win?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frederic Stansfield</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237700</link>
		<dc:creator>Frederic Stansfield</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:54:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237700</guid>
		<description>The Populus poll reported today of the 100 Labour marginals most challenged by the Conservatives suggests a 6.7% swing in such seats. Which puts this constituency right in multi-recount territory, notionally with Labout getting back by a hundred votes or so.

Is this how people with local knowledge currently see the state of play?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Populus poll reported today of the 100 Labour marginals most challenged by the Conservatives suggests a 6.7% swing in such seats. Which puts this constituency right in multi-recount territory, notionally with Labout getting back by a hundred votes or so.</p>
<p>Is this how people with local knowledge currently see the state of play?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe James B</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237266</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe James B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 21:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237266</guid>
		<description>1979
Hammersmith North
Labour hold 
CS Soley Labour 17,241 48.19% 
J Cripps Conservative 13,735 38.39% 
SHJA Knott Liberal 4,147 11.59% 
R Pearse National Front 462 1.29% 
C Stewart Workers Revolutionary Party 193 0.54% 

Electorate: 50,821; Turnout: 70.40%;
Majority: 3,506 (9.80%


October 1974
Hammersmith North
Labour hold 
F Tomney Labour 18,061 53.38% 
RG Beckett Conservative 9,939 29.38% 
SHJA Knott Liberal 5,200 15.37% 
JP McFadden Ind 633 1.87% 

Electorate: 52,371; Turnout: 64.60%;
Majority: 8,122 (24.01%


February 1974
Hammersmith North
new constituency boundaries 
F Tomney Labour 18,970 49.45% 
RG Beckett Conservative 11,929 31.10% 
S Knott Liberal 7,460 19.45% 

Electorate: 52,036; Turnout: 73.72%;
Majority: 7,041 (18.36%)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1979<br />
Hammersmith North<br />
Labour hold<br />
CS Soley Labour 17,241 48.19%<br />
J Cripps Conservative 13,735 38.39%<br />
SHJA Knott Liberal 4,147 11.59%<br />
R Pearse National Front 462 1.29%<br />
C Stewart Workers Revolutionary Party 193 0.54% </p>
<p>Electorate: 50,821; Turnout: 70.40%;<br />
Majority: 3,506 (9.80%</p>
<p>October 1974<br />
Hammersmith North<br />
Labour hold<br />
F Tomney Labour 18,061 53.38%<br />
RG Beckett Conservative 9,939 29.38%<br />
SHJA Knott Liberal 5,200 15.37%<br />
JP McFadden Ind 633 1.87% </p>
<p>Electorate: 52,371; Turnout: 64.60%;<br />
Majority: 8,122 (24.01%</p>
<p>February 1974<br />
Hammersmith North<br />
new constituency boundaries<br />
F Tomney Labour 18,970 49.45%<br />
RG Beckett Conservative 11,929 31.10%<br />
S Knott Liberal 7,460 19.45% </p>
<p>Electorate: 52,036; Turnout: 73.72%;<br />
Majority: 7,041 (18.36%)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237264</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 21:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237264</guid>
		<description>Barnaby

The Copeland / Workington split is rather infamous.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Barnaby</p>
<p>The Copeland / Workington split is rather infamous.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete Whitehead</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237254</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete Whitehead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 20:47:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237254</guid>
		<description>It is not what they for.  They are to communicate with ones constituents - not to campaign. The majority of the electors in this constituency (and the ones concerned in the article) are not constituents of Andrew Slaughter and may well never be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is not what they for.  They are to communicate with ones constituents &#8211; not to campaign. The majority of the electors in this constituency (and the ones concerned in the article) are not constituents of Andrew Slaughter and may well never be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rutter</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/seat-profiles/hammersmith/comment-page-7#comment-237246</link>
		<dc:creator>Rutter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Mar 2010 19:58:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/?p=526#comment-237246</guid>
		<description>&quot;Mr Slaughter appears to be in a spot of trouble.&quot;

I dont understand what the issue is in that article, I would say that there is nothing wrong with Slaughter using parliamentary envelopes to campaign for getting elected. Surely that is what they are there for?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Mr Slaughter appears to be in a spot of trouble.&#8221;</p>
<p>I dont understand what the issue is in that article, I would say that there is nothing wrong with Slaughter using parliamentary envelopes to campaign for getting elected. Surely that is what they are there for?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
