Topic: UK GE and Local Elections, plus polls, and policy.

[killer-heels]

Hope you're right. We are talking about people who seem to prefer principled opposition rather than being in actual government.

If you're in a government of potentially 500 odd MPs, then your voice counts for very little. But in a media age where everyone would be happy to bash a Labour government, people will happily give critics airtime, no matter how moronic their talking points are.

Labour wont get 500 MP’s.

Dont get me wrong I can see a scenario, maybe 3 years in where everybody starts to get vocal particularly if Starmer and Reeves are still cautious, the country hasnt seen any decent turnaround and thats ignoring the myriad of international issues that may arise. But it will be pretty harmonious for the first few years.

[Circa1892]

Seems Corbyn will stand in north Islington

He could join Galloways party….

Do think it’s mad on both sides how many MPs stick it out for so long with the job etc - guess easier for London MPs (you can live at home all the time, don’t have massive commutes multiple times a week) and also for backbenchers. In Corbyns example (the non-career politician apparently…) been in the job for 40 years now. I’d last a month!

[killer-heels]

He could join Galloways party….

Do think it’s mad on both sides how many MPs stick it out for so long with the job etc - guess easier for London MPs (you can live at home all the time, don’t have massive commutes multiple times a week) and also for backbenchers. In Corbyns example (the non-career politician apparently…) been in the job for 40 years now. I’d last a month!

Corbyn is an example of how not to do politics on the left. Has he genuinely done any good for his constituents?

[TepidT2O]

Corbyn is an example of how not to do politics on the left. Has he genuinely done any good for his constituents?

Yes, he’s done a lot of good in his constituency and does make a difference for his voters.  Not every MP has to have been a minister (I mean, I know he tried and all)

[Circa1892]

Corbyn is an example of how not to do politics on the left. Has he genuinely done any good for his constituents?

I think that, whilst in foreign policy he’s always been a bit of an obsessive crank, he’s broadly had a decent reputation as a constituency MP up until his time as leader?

[west_london_red]

He could join Galloways party….

From what I read he’s very much distanced himself from Gorgeous George and his party.

[Circa1892]

From what I read he’s very much distanced himself from Gorgeous George and his party.

Good. Credit where it’s due - a key difference between the two for me has been Corbyn is always convinced he’s doing the right thing - little bit pious and very warped foreign affairs but  clearly has well entrenched views. Galloway is a nasty horrible little grifter.

[Red Beret]

Labour wont get 500 MP’s.

Dont get me wrong I can see a scenario, maybe 3 years in where everybody starts to get vocal particularly if Starmer and Reeves are still cautious, the country hasnt seen any decent turnaround and thats ignoring the myriad of international issues that may arise. But it will be pretty harmonious for the first few years.

You don't know that. But okay, let's be prudent with the numbers and suggest Starmer "only" gets around 400 MPs, which is 1997 territory and quite in line with the more modest poll predictions.

It's the same scenario. A rump of left wing morons who don't think the government are doing things the way they think they should be done; and unlike the Tories, there's not enough of them to influence policy. So they can either kick up a fuss on the back benches like urchins, or breakaway and form an independent "left wing" pressure group in the commons.

A group ready and willing to criticise the government with a right wing media only too happy to give them air time. Not because the criticisms are valid, but more a "Labour are bad and look how much worse these lunatics want to make things" kind of way.

Would it work? Probably not. Because outside the party they can't influence policy. They don't wield the influence of Reform UK. But that doesn't mean they're not dumb enough to try if they think Corbyn is still the answer.

[Lusty]

I think Corbyn will win as a Independent, so will Abbott. you may well be right about any new party being formed after the next election rather than before.
If they truly believed they will win voters over then why not before?

What do all the SCG MPs do if this new party is formed before the next election. if they stand as Labour MPs then they might as well say they don't believe the public will vote for them if they join Corbyns new party. if they did join and get hammered then that's the end of the talk of a Corbyn led left wing party being popular, this is too much of a Acid test, so I can't see any new party started by Corbyn being formed.

Well we both know the answer to that

But in their own rationalisations... They will not be wanting to split the Labour vote and let the Tories back in.  So, safest thing to do would be to win the seat as a Labour candidate and split right after, give yourselves 5 years to get the party established before the next election.  It brings advantages in funding, air time etc.

There's also a chance that if they can find 50 or so members then they will end up as the official opposition.  The way the numbers are looking, there's no way Labour can stop 50 or so cranks from slipping through the net if they're going to get 500+ seats.  PMQs, opposition days, a seat on the privy council.  All very far fetched but it's only possible if Labour win a massive victory so it's in their interests to keep their powder dry.

[west_london_red]

Good luck with that, as he still won't be an MP.

I said before, this is the election Reform flex their muscles. Their messsage to the Tories will be clear - we can't win, but we can ensure you lose. So you do things our way.

I don't know if that's a viable long term strategy as Reform risk killing their golden goose. But for an election that's already lost, they have a gilt edged chance to control the Tories, parasite like.

Frottage is very much like marmite anyway, as many votes he would bring to the Tories if he ended up joining them, he will repel just as many in the more liberal Tories areas in the South.

[Red Beret]

In the interest of balance, this Guardian article pours some cold water over the prospect of a Labour landslide,  pointing out that Starmer's Labour trails Blair's by some distance at the same point in the run up to 1997:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/18/labour-landslide-will-be-much-harder-to-achieve-than-in-1997-analysis-shows

Personally, I think this article is more a warning against complacency, as there are numerous factors in play now that didn't exist in 1997. That said, it's important that Labour's supporters don't feel downbeat if they only secure an 80-120 seat majority - although it would reflect badly on Labour's messaging, given the current state of the country.

[oldfordie]

Well we both know the answer to that

But in their own rationalisations... They will not be wanting to split the Labour vote and let the Tories back in.  So, safest thing to do would be to win the seat as a Labour candidate and split right after, give yourselves 5 years to get the party established before the next election.  It brings advantages in funding, air time etc.

There's also a chance that if they can find 50 or so members then they will end up as the official opposition.  The way the numbers are looking, there's no way Labour can stop 50 or so cranks from slipping through the net if they're going to get 500+ seats.  PMQs, opposition days, a seat on the privy council.  All very far fetched but it's only possible if Labour win a massive victory so it's in their interests to keep their powder dry.

That's a lot of IFs. 
Labour will have a lot more MPs so yeah I imagine some will be towards the far left.
I expect the trouble to come at the party conference. I wouldn't be surprised if the Torys are banking on the conference throwing up some bad publicity for Labour which is giving them the idea of holding the election straight after the party conferences in October. these MPs still won't break away from Labour though just to join a party that they believe won't win the support of the public.

[killer-heels]

Labour never have an issue with people wanting to leave the camp, because once they do that then those people cant bitch, moan and fight in the place they want to which is in Labour conference halls. The far left have no interest with the work a new party would take, they want to have a fight in earshot of the media that visit Labour events.

[Red Beret]

You only have to compare how Change UK crashed and burned to how Reform UK is comparatively thriving to see the idea is a non starter.

There isn't room on the centre left for another party, even the hard left. Scargill tried it in the run up to 1997 with "Real Labour"; Tony Benn often complained that Blair's Labour wasn't true socialism, but he didn't quit the party either. The SDP is self explanatory.

Reform undoubtedly has some heavy financial hitters propping it up - probably a lot of that money is dirty as well. No new party of the left can hope to gain any kind of traction and would be no more than a short term nuisance.

[Circa1892]

You only have to compare how Change UK crashed and burned to how Reform UK is comparatively thriving to see the idea is a non starter.

There isn't room on the centre left for another party, even the hard left. Scargill tried it in the run up to 1997 with "Real Labour"; Tony Benn often complained that Blair's Labour wasn't true socialism, but he didn't quit the party either. The SDP is self explanatory.

Reform undoubtedly has some heavy financial hitters propping it up - probably a lot of that money is dirty as well. No new party of the left can hope to gain any kind of traction and would be no more than a short term nuisance.

Even with all of that - Reform aren't going to win any seats...

[Red Beret]

Even with all of that - Reform aren't going to win any seats...

Indeed. That's not really their purpose though. Their intent is to assimilate the Tory party. 

[Statto Red]

Indeed. That's not really their purpose though. Their intent is to assimilate the Tory party.

Yep, Reforms purpose is to scare the Tories shitless, unless the Tories align themselves to Reforms ideology, one of the reasons the Tories are tearing themselves apart right now because this threat, that's how the Tories got rid of the threat by UKIP by agreeing to that referendum on Brexit, & the shit storm ever since.

[Red Beret]

Yep, Reforms purpose is to scare the Tories shitless, unless the Tories align themselves to Reforms ideology, one of the reasons the Tories are tearing themselves apart right now because this threat, that's how the Tories got rid of the threat by UKIP by agreeing to that referendum on Brexit, & the shit storm ever since.

Absolutely. Why bother getting MPs yourself when you can scare the Tories into picking candidates who broadly align with your views already?

I'd like to know where Reform are getting the resources to even mount a GE campaign on the scale that they are. I'm not convinced they're going to be as active campaigning as poll numbers imply. They'll use their resources and allies in some kind of smoke and mirrors bs to give people the impression that they're bigger and more popular than they are. It'll all just be a ploy to panic the Tories.

That's not to say it won't cause the Tories real damage; just that Reform will try to keep the focus on a few high profile target seats to inflate their standing in the public eye.

[thaddeus]

I'm not sure the Tories can subsume Reform UK quite as easily as they did UKIP.  UKIP were effectively a one-issue party and Cameron stole that issue off them.  Frottage immediately lost interest and went back to being a rent-a-gob.

Reform UK is a collective of cranks with disgruntlement about migration, taxes, "nanny state" (/public sector), "woke" (/equal rights), green issues, crime, benefits etc.  I don't think there's a runner in the Tory party leadership that would placate them to the extent that they'd stand down or be shrunk back into the shadows.

Somebody posted some survey results a few pages back that showed Reform UK were picking up voters from all corners of the electorate.  The Tories were the most impacted but certainly not to the extent that they'd pick up those voters just by mimicking a few policies.

If the Tories hadn't haemorrhaged so many voters from the centre then I don't think they'd even by trying to court Reform UK voters.  They must have a niggling fear that if centrist Labour take power then a headbanging Reform UK could become the voice of the right leaving the Tories with nothing much to say.

[Libertine]

 


@BritainElects
📊 Labour lead at 26pts
Westminster voting intention:

LAB: 47% (+5)
CON: 21% (-3)
REF: 14% (-)
LDEM: 8% (-4)
GRN: 6% (+1)

via @RedfieldWilton - 17 Mar


Second poll today with a big widening of the gap. Being funded by racists - not so popular....

[Kashinoda]

Poll of polls.

[TepidT2O]

Every single poll since the budget has shown them losing support.

Excellent

[PaulF]

Every single poll since the budget has shown them losing support.

Excellent

And I don't think it was generally considered to be a bad budget. Though in all fairness they have set that bar very low.

[TepidT2O]

And I don't think it was generally considered to be a bad budget. Though in all fairness they have set that bar very low.

Everyone knows public services are broken. Tax cuts are just so odd right now

[KillieRed]

They’ve been trying the “bribe the electorate with tax cuts” trick for as long as I can remember. People are just sick of their incompetence and brazen corruption.

[killer-heels]

They’ve been trying the “bribe the electorate with tax cuts” trick for as long as I can remember. People are just sick of their incompetence and brazen corruption.

Tax cuts would have worked but inflation and mortgage rises have blown all costs of households out the water so all people are getting is some money off the increased outlays. Get 30,40 quid a month but all your bills have now gone up 6-10%.

Most people understand how much money they had to spend previously and how much they have now and know they were still well off 3 or 4 years ago.

They would need to provide all manner of big cuts but they cant because they would have to borrow money.

[filopastry]

Budget didn't move the dial too much, I would guess their response to their deeply racist donor hasn't helped them this week

[Kashinoda]

There's a bit of talk that the reason Sunak wants an October election is because it's after the Euros and Olympics and they're banking on success for England & Team GB.

Usually I'd think that was complete bullshit but the state of them now I'm honestly buying it

[killer-heels]

There's a bit of talk that the reason Sunak wants an October election is because it's after the Euros and Olympics and they're banking on success for England & Team GB.

Usually I'd think that was complete bullshit but the state of them now I'm honestly buying it

Yep. They think that the home nations are successful then people automatically go out and vote Tory.

[TSC]

There's a bit of talk that the reason Sunak wants an October election is because it's after the Euros and Olympics and they're banking on success for England & Team GB.

Usually I'd think that was complete bullshit but the state of them now I'm honestly buying it

Maybe they’ll stand alongside the football lads alliance

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_Lads_Alliance

[Red Beret]

@BritainElects
📊 Labour lead at 26pts
Westminster voting intention:

LAB: 47% (+5)
CON: 21% (-3)
REF: 14% (-)
LDEM: 8% (-4)
GRN: 6% (+1)

via @RedfieldWilton - 17 Mar


Second poll today with a big widening of the gap. Being funded by racists - not so popular....

Wait - so Labour actually increased their lead by 8 points since the budget?  Bloody hell!

[Kashinoda]

Maybe they’ll stand alongside the football lads alliance

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_Lads_Alliance

[Lusty]

@BritainElects
📊 Labour lead at 26pts
Westminster voting intention:

LAB: 47% (+5)
CON: 21% (-3)
REF: 14% (-)
LDEM: 8% (-4)
GRN: 6% (+1)

via @RedfieldWilton - 17 Mar


Second poll today with a big widening of the gap. Being funded by racists - not so popular....

This sees the Lib Dems becoming the official opposition.  The sight of Ed Davey and Kier Starmer furiously agreeing with each other over the dispatch box is going to take the sting out of PMQs.

[Red Beret]

This sees the Lib Dems becoming the official opposition.  The sight of Ed Davey and Kier Starmer furiously agreeing with each other over the dispatch box is going to take the sting out of PMQs.

Not according to this?

https://www.britainelects.com/

I don't know where this notion of the Lib Dems becoming the official opposition comes from. I'm just gonna assume it's people having a laugh.

[Riquende]

People are taking recent, individual, very-awful-for-the-Tories polls and plugging those specific percentages into an electoral calculator to end up with such skewed results, as opposed to using aggregators etc, which may account for prior biases when constructing their model.

What's interesting though is that there are now multiple polls showing these sorts of figures, and from different pollsters.

[Lusty]

Not according to this?

https://www.britainelects.com/

I don't know where this notion of the Lib Dems becoming the official opposition comes from. I'm just gonna assume it's people having a laugh.

It was based on the one poll I was responding to.  What you have posted is a more realistic model based on aggregated polls, which is nowhere near as funny.

[Red Beret]

It was based on the one poll I was responding to.  What you have posted is a more realistic model based on aggregated polls, which is nowhere near as funny.

Are there any further details than just that poll? Did you plug the numbers into a predictor? The Tories still have a double digit lead over the Lib Dems in that poll. Even polling at just 21% I don't see how the Lib Dems end up with more seats than the Tories!

Not that I would be complaining if they did like.

[Red Beret]

People are taking recent, individual, very-awful-for-the-Tories polls and plugging those specific percentages into an electoral calculator to end up with such skewed results, as opposed to using aggregators etc, which may account for prior biases when constructing their model.

What's interesting though is that there are now multiple polls showing these sorts of figures, and from different pollsters.

I think it's fair to say that Labour has a secure lead over the Tories of at least 15 points. Anything on top of that is gravy. Lots and lots of gravy.

[Fromola]

This sees the Lib Dems becoming the official opposition.  The sight of Ed Davey and Kier Starmer furiously agreeing with each other over the dispatch box is going to take the sting out of PMQs.

Lib Dems are a bit of an irrelevance at the moment. They'll only really challenge for seats in some Tory areas that would never vote Labour.

[Riquende]

Are there any further details than just that poll? Because it still shows the Tories having a double digit lead over the Lib Dems. Even polling at just 21% I don't see how the Lib Dems end up with more seats than the Tories!

I assume the Electoral Calculus website that produces these results uses a predictive model that assumes a fair amount of anti-Tory tactical voting, thus reflecting the Lib Dem vote being concentrated into a smaller number of seats they tend to be competitive in, whilst the Tory vote, whilst numerically much bigger, is going to be spread out across the country in vain marginal battles against Labour.

Even if the percentages somehow pan out, the model might be way off the mark and not produce the sorts of results they predict.