New Tory Leader

[Barbe bleu 827]

35 minutes ago, Aggy said:

In fairness, Dylan was querying the truth of an earlier claim that people feel they can vote for neither Labour or the Conservatives because they are both as bad as each other. 

Your post saying there is a 9 percent drop in support for those two parties combined does then look a little “Tory Spin-ish” in response to that, when in reality the stats you posted show that support for Labour has increased. 

It can look like spin if you want to read it that way but it was a straight answer to a straight question. I'm not interested in supporting either team, just in presenting neutral data ans analysis.

In 2019 76% of voters supported one of the big two, that number is now 67%.   The story is mainly that Conservatives are losing votes, that doesn't need to be said, but Labour are losing their way a bit too.

Labour could be on well over 50% against a wildly unpopular government, just as they were in summer 2022, but the above charts seem to suggest that they are losing support rather than tapping into the potential. 

Come the election you'd expect the reform vote to evaporate and the LD to rally but where will these votes come from or go?

Edited March 17 by Barbe bleu

[Aggy 755]

2 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

It can look like spin if you want to read it that way but it was a straight answer to a straight question. I'm not interested in supporting either team, just in presenting neutral data ans analysis.

In 2019 76% of voters supported one of the big two, that number is now 67%.   The story is mainly that Conservatives are losing votes, that doesn't need to be said, but Labour are losing their way a bit too.

Labour could be on well over 50% against a wildly unpopular government, just as they were in summer 2022, but the above charts seem to suggest that they are losing support rather than tapping into the potential. 

Come the election you'd expect the reform vote to evaporate and the LD to rally but where will these votes come from or go?

If you’re looking since 2019 (as initial comment) then Labour are significantly more popular and the reduction is exclusively down to the Tories.

If you’re looking since 2022 then what you say is correct - but Labour have gone down about five or six percentage points and the Tories have gone up a couple, so a net reduction of about three or four percentage points - hardly statistically significant and the usual sort of fluctuation in that sort of time period.

Out of interest, in 2010 the “big 2” only had 65 percent of the vote, in 2005 they had 67, and in 2015 it was 66. Since the 1960s (when it was regularly up in the 80 percent between the two main parties), it’s been pretty stable between high 60s and mid 70s except one or two that were in the high 70s or low 80s.

All seems fairly persuasive to me that the reason for the loss in support for the “big two” between 2019 and now is simply that those voters who are historically ‘swing voters’ are going in their droves away from the Tories - some to Labour and some to Reform. 

When we get to the general election I’d expect Reform’s share to be lower and the Tories to be higher so it will probably end up around 70 per cent.

Edited March 17 by Aggy

[Barbe bleu 827]

6 hours ago, Aggy said:

 

All seems fairly persuasive to me that the reason for the loss in support for the “big two” between 2019 and now is simply that those voters who are historically ‘swing voters’ are going in their droves away from the Tories - some to Labour and some to Reform. 

And that's the heart of it. Tories are losing votes but a great many are not going to Labour but to other parties (or one party really).

Whether you want to put the comparison to 2019 or 2022 it's true that overall support for the big 2 is down. Them's the basic facts. Most of that is due to the Tories losing votes, but Labour is struggling a bit to pick them up and there see signs that it is losing support itself, which might be a indicator that a lot of the support it does have is lukewarm, something that starmers aneamic leadership hints at:

Does this matter? Well yes it does. This far out from the 1997 election ( the last real equivalent to the upcoming vote) Blair was regularly polling at over 50% even though he had to compete with pre-self-immolation  LDs and ended up with 43%.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Labour's share will drop like it did in 1997, for reform support to trend back to tory and for the LDs to reestablish themselves.  If these three things happen Labour could still yet regret its safety first approach and wish it had done more to be positive.

Even with toxic corbyn at the helm a lot of people were behind the economic policies put forward by Labour. They really don't need to play it safe, they can be more positive- it might help both them and the country.

 

Edited March 17 by Barbe bleu

[littleyellowbirdie 2,553]

I think Labour will benefit from the enthusiasm for removing the Conservatives at this point, but equally I think that's going to make Labour's job that much harder to maintain support when in office. Wouldn't be surprised if things were in hung parliament territory by the end of Labour's first term, unless Labour somehow inpire some enthusiams in office, which I can't imagine happening.

[Herman 9,780]

An interesting opinion piece.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/17/like-its-1997-majors-lot-werent-so-pointless-poisonous-or-loathed

[Fen Canary 834]

7 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

I think Labour will benefit from the enthusiasm for removing the Conservatives at this point, but equally I think that's going to make Labour's job that much harder to maintain support when in office. Wouldn't be surprised if things were in hung parliament territory by the end of Labour's first term, unless Labour somehow inpire some enthusiams in office, which I can't imagine happening.

I think you’re probably right. I don’t see any great excitement for Starmer (not like there was for Blair), he seems to be winning by default at the moment because the Tories are (deservedly) loathed. Labour could put Harold Shipman up as leader and they’d still win a comfortable majority.

It will be interesting to see what direction the Tories take after the election. Whether they stick with the Blair/Cameron/Starmer centrism, or whether they seek to copy the parties gaining ground in Europe with a more nationalist and protectionist approach. I suppose it depends which MPs are left after the drubbing as to the route they decide to go.

[Yellow Fever 3,793]

10 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

Even with toxic corbyn at the helm a lot of people were behind the economic policies put forward by Labour. 

I could agree with this - many of his particular policies polled well (but his gargantuan 'baggage' was toxic).

I still think we are seeing a lot of Tories or right leaning voters grasping at straws though - SKS is weak, leadership, there is a way back, if only.., Tories are moving to Reform etc. They'd do better if only they'd go more right etc. Any excuse will do to avoid the unpalatable truth. They are a zombie government just waiting to be put out of office.

Seems to me SKS is doing just fine! 20% lead.

I also seem to recall that after Miliband's defeat Labour completely misread the runes and went even more left, more extreme (Corbyn) and got solidly trounced. Tories making exactly the same mistake tacking right.

You win elections from the centre ground not the far left or right.

Tories will be out of power for a generation now if they even ever recover. All the current list of hopefuls after Sunak are themselves no-hopers -  they need somebody untainted by the current Government's 14 years, able to call a spade a spade. Pro-business and Europe. Their next successful leader probably isn't even a an MP yet!

[sonyc 5,529]

3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

I could agree with this - many of his particular policies polled well (but his gargantuan 'baggage' was toxic).

I still think we are seeing a lot of Tories or right leaning voters grasping at straws though - SKS is weak, leadership, there is a way back, if only.., Tories are moving to Reform etc. They'd do better if only they'd go more right etc. Any excuse will do to avoid the unpalatable truth. They are a zombie government just waiting to be put out of office.

Seems to me SKS is doing just fine! 20% lead.

I also seem to recall that after Miliband's defeat Labour completely misread the runes and went even more left, more extreme (Corbyn) and got solidly trounced. Tories making exactly the same mistake tacking right.

You win elections from the centre ground not the far left or right.

Tories will be out of power for a generation now if they even ever recover. All the current list of hopefuls after Sunak are themselves no-hopers -  they need somebody untainted by the current Government's 14 years, able to call a spade a spade. Pro-business and Europe. Their next successful leader probably isn't even a an MP yet!

I think most people are accepting that under FPTP we will probably be having a Labour government within 6 to 9 months. The problem may well be that, as the Guardian states today, people are fed up with politicians generally and Westminster in particular. This may well translate into lowish turnouts. That will be a negative for Labour. 

The current regime and Johnson / Truss especially have eroded confidence in government. And to raise the issue of Brexit, again they have not been served well and the penny has well and truly dropped. All these things are in the backs of peoples' minds, and at the forefront for a few.

Never write off the Tories though. Look at their record in power. They keep getting voted in. And for the reason you've mentioned Starmer has had to become a leader for the centre and trying on those kind of clothes. Whether he creates a more redistributive government remains to be seen.

[Yellow Fever 3,793]

28 minutes ago, sonyc said:

I think most people are accepting that under FPTP we will probably be having a Labour government within 6 to 9 months. The problem may well be that, as the Guardian states today, people are fed up with politicians generally and Westminster in particular. This may well translate into lowish turnouts. That will be a negative for Labour. 

The current regime and Johnson / Truss especially have eroded confidence in government. And to raise the issue of Brexit, again they have not been served well and the penny has well and truly dropped. All these things are in the backs of peoples' minds, and at the forefront for a few.

Never write off the Tories though. Look at their record in power. They keep getting voted in. And for the reason you've mentioned Starmer has had to become a leader for the centre and trying on those kind of clothes. Whether he creates a more redistributive government remains to be seen.

You have to also remember we are in a Trumpian, post Brexit, toxic, post factual, culture war driven media electoral cycle. At the time of Blair none of this was true - a battle of ideas certainly but the facts would be presented plainly. 

No wonder SKS needs to be very careful !

Edited March 18 by Yellow Fever
See the latest GB 'News' debacle -

[Yellow Fever 3,793]

 

 

[Fen Canary 834]

12 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

I could agree with this - many of his particular policies polled well (but his gargantuan 'baggage' was toxic).

I still think we are seeing a lot of Tories or right leaning voters grasping at straws though - SKS is weak, leadership, there is a way back, if only.., Tories are moving to Reform etc. They'd do better if only they'd go more right etc. Any excuse will do to avoid the unpalatable truth. They are a zombie government just waiting to be put out of office.

Seems to me SKS is doing just fine! 20% lead.

I also seem to recall that after Miliband's defeat Labour completely misread the runes and went even more left, more extreme (Corbyn) and got solidly trounced. Tories making exactly the same mistake tacking right.

You win elections from the centre ground not the far left or right.

Tories will be out of power for a generation now if they even ever recover. All the current list of hopefuls after Sunak are themselves no-hopers -  they need somebody untainted by the current Government's 14 years, able to call a spade a spade. Pro-business and Europe. Their next successful leader probably isn't even a an MP yet!

You’re correct it’s the centre that wins elections, but in my opinion the centre now can be quite contradictory, encompassing both left and right.

Take immigration (both varieties). A solid majority would say that they want it seriously reduced and the illegals stopped, which many on here would deem to be a right wing position. Same with law and order, I’d say the rightish attitude of coming down hard on crime would have more supporters than the more left leaning softly approach. However financially there would be strong support for bringing the utilities back into public ownership, and for state support to return and keep key industries in the country, and protectionist trade policies which is a solidly left wing ideal.

To many when they say the parties should be centrist imply they should simply be Blair clones of free markets, open borders and supranational organisations, but that he was now a generation ago and the centre now isn’t necessarily where it was when he came to power, which is why I think Starmer needs to do more then just managerialism if he wants to retain support once the Tories have had their richly deserved kicking 

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

12 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

You have to also remember we are in a Trumpian, post Brexit, toxic, post factual, culture war driven media electoral cycle. At the time of Blair none of this was true - a battle of ideas certainly but the facts would be presented plainly. 

No wonder SKS needs to be very careful !

Why do you say Trumpian when Biden has been President for nearly four years? Has Biden been that insignificant?

[dylanisabaddog 4,933]

8 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

 

Take immigration (both varieties). A solid majority would say that they want it seriously reduced and the illegals stopped, which many on here would deem to be a right wing position. 

Sorry, but saying a solid majority want immigration seriously reduced isn't true. You're confusing people shouting very loudly with the overall view. 

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/

 

Edited March 19 by dylanisabaddog

[dylanisabaddog 4,933]

4 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

Why do you say Trumpian when Biden has been President for nearly four years? Has Biden been that insignificant?

Although Trump hasn't been President he still drives the political agenda in the USA. His simplistic and populist form of politics is referred to as Trumpian. 

[Fen Canary 834]

7 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Sorry, but saying a solid majority want immigration seriously reduced isn't true. You're confusing people shouting very loudly with the overall view. 

https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/

So 52% want it reduced, 22% remain the same and only 14% want it increased?

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/do-brits-think-that-immigration-has-been-too-high-or-low-in-the-last-10-years

How about the above poll where 65% say immigration has been too high, as opposed to 19% who say about right and only 6% say it’s too low?

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/48056-to-what-extent-is-immigration-a-top-issue-for-britons

Or this one where immigration is the second most important issue tied with health? 
 

Looks to be a major issue, with a solid majority wanting it reduced to me personally 

[dylanisabaddog 4,933]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

So 52% want it reduced, 22% remain the same and only 14% want it increased?

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/trackers/do-brits-think-that-immigration-has-been-too-high-or-low-in-the-last-10-years

How about the above poll where 65% say immigration has been too high, as opposed to 19% who say about right and only 6% say it’s too low?

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/48056-to-what-extent-is-immigration-a-top-issue-for-britons

Or this one where immigration is the second most important issue tied with health? 
 

Looks to be a major issue, with a solid majority wanting it reduced to me personally 

Your post said "a solid majority would say they want it seriously reduced" 

It appears that 37% is your idea of a solid majority 

[Fen Canary 834]

3 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Your post said "a solid majority would say they want it seriously reduced" 

It appears that 37% is your idea of a solid majority 

That’s 52% want it reduced, 22% keep it the same and 14% increase it.

Remove the 12% of don’t knows and those numbers change to 59% reduced, 25% keep it the same and 16% increase it.

A fairly solid majority. What’s your response to the YouGov polls I posted that say 65% think it’s too high, and it being joint second most important issue? 

[Yellow Fever 3,793]

5 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Your post said "a solid majority would say they want it seriously reduced" 

It appears that 37% is your idea of a solid majority 

I always think questions like this belong in the 'Ask a silly question, expect a silly answer category." Rather like yes/no Brexit.

Nearly everybody would like in isolation to see immigration reduced - BUT there are consequences of that too. Do you want have care homes and the NHS fully staffed or are you happy to die early in the street?

Nobody wants to pay tax but the same people expect almost unlimited benefits.

 

[dylanisabaddog 4,933]

6 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

That’s 52% want it reduced, 22% keep it the same and 14% increase it.

Remove the 12% of don’t knows and those numbers change to 59% reduced, 25% keep it the same and 16% increase it.

A fairly solid majority. What’s your response to the YouGov polls I posted that say 65% think it’s too high, and it being joint second most important issue? 

You really are being very silly!

People who want immigration reduced a little have not said they want it reduced a lot. For goodness sake 😂

[Fen Canary 834]

Just now, Yellow Fever said:

I always think questions like this belong in the 'Ask a silly question, expect a silly answer category." Rather like yes/no Brexit.

Nearly everybody would like in isolation to see immigration reduced - BUT there are consequences of that too. Do you want have care homes and the NHS fully staffed or are you happy to die early in the street?

Nobody wants to pay tax but the same people expect almost unlimited benefits.

 

The problem with that argument is that (as I’ve said on a previous thread) the % of doctors and nurses in the recent record immigration is basically the same ratio that already exists amongst the UK population so we haven’t gained anything. If 5% of your existing population works in the health sector, and you import a million people of whom 50,000 are healthcare professionals you’re in exactly the same situation as you were previously.

[Yellow Fever 3,793]

2 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

The problem with that argument is that (as I’ve said on a previous thread) the % of doctors and nurses in the recent record immigration is basically the same ratio that already exists amongst the UK population so we haven’t gained anything. If 5% of your existing population works in the health sector, and you import a million people of whom 50,000 are healthcare professionals you’re in exactly the same situation as you were previously.

The point is the question is a catchall - the answer is much more nuanced than yes/no same as taxes. That's for the birds.

Go take a look in your local care home by the way. 

Edited March 19 by Yellow Fever

[dylanisabaddog 4,933]

4 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

The problem with that argument is that (as I’ve said on a previous thread) the % of doctors and nurses in the recent record immigration is basically the same ratio that already exists amongst the UK population so we haven’t gained anything. If 5% of your existing population works in the health sector, and you import a million people of whom 50,000 are healthcare professionals you’re in exactly the same situation as you were previously.

27% of NHS nurses are from outside the UK 

[Fen Canary 834]

Just now, dylanisabaddog said:

You really are being very silly!

People who want immigration reduced a little have not said they want it reduced a lot. For goodness sake 😂

Ok, you’re being rather pedantic so simply substitute seriously reduced for reduced. There’s still a solid majority who want a reduction in the numbers entering the country.

Do you care to engage with the other points I’ve made?

[Fen Canary 834]

Just now, dylanisabaddog said:

27% of NHS nurses are from outside the UK 

I don’t think many people have an issue with giving visas to nurses (although I do find it slightly immoral stealing healthcare professionals from poorer nations who have paid to train them), the problem with the recent influx as I say is that it didn’t change the ratio of nurses to the general population 

[dylanisabaddog 4,933]

2 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I don’t think many people have an issue with giving visas to nurses (although I do find it slightly immoral stealing healthcare professionals from poorer nations who have paid to train them), the problem with the recent influx as I say is that it didn’t change the ratio of nurses to the general population 

Has it crossed your mind that people who come here are young and people in hospital are old? 

[Well b back 3,222]

If something doesn’t work very well, how do you improve it ? Close it down of course, and p*** everybody off.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68606722

[Fen Canary 834]

5 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Has it crossed your mind that people who come here are young and people in hospital are old? 

So what happens when those new arrivals age? Do we then import twice as many people again to look after the ones we imported first time around? 

[ricardo 7,395]

30 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

So what happens when those new arrivals age? Do we then import twice as many people again to look after the ones we imported first time around? 

Ponzi scheme.

[Well b back 3,222]

30 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

So what happens when those new arrivals age? Do we then import twice as many people again to look after the ones we imported first time around? 

In fairness a lot of those that came recently brought their husbands / wives ( as would you ). With the threat of their spouses and children being thrown out of the U.K. they are already prepared to move to Australia and other such countries.

[sonyc 5,529]

34 minutes ago, Well b back said:

In fairness a lot of those that came recently brought their husbands / wives ( as would you ). With the threat of their spouses and children being thrown out of the U.K. they are already prepared to move to Australia and other such countries.

Fair enough points. What really needs to happen though is that the care and health sectors need greater status / respect and thereby a greater professionalism (in terms of career paths) ought to follow and be better rewarded. It requires a national 'narrative' (and I hate that word) that care matters and is one of the most valuable careers to follow. That of course needs funding properly by government (and tax payer). Theresa May nearly started that move towards legislating around the edges (which at least was something) but it was quickly labelled a dementia tax. We can only hope the next administration develops a plan. 

We really ought not have to have a 'race to the bottom' and import the cheapest labour we can. That would include people coming into the country. We do need to check immigration but that is needed as part of a much broader industrial and skills strategy. Not just stopping the boats. I suppose we as a country dip into the agenda of points systems. Rather, it needs a long term solution. Neither of the two major parties appear to be tackling that holistically. Always, it's put on the back burner. 

Edited March 19 by sonyc