General Election '24

[jimbob]

Ah well, I see that Mark Menzies has managed to get Wragg out of the spotlight.

And the bizarre details are obscuring the fact that the Tories hid the plausible accusations of illegal activity for three months until the story broke.

[El Pollo Diablo]

Quick update on polling:

GE24 Apr.png (695.2 KiB) Viewed 324 times

Labour continue to poll in the 1992 area, but worth noting that that GE had a particularly pronounced bias in their favour and against the Tories (see where the election itself ended up). Note also that the GE result for Labour in 1997 is about where they're polling now. It's probable that the level of support for them will translate to a few points lower by the election, but we'll see. Tactical voting will also come into play. Over the last year and a bit, Labour have lost a little support but it's been steady now for a few months. They lost support at about the same rate in 1992 and 1997.

The Tories remain f.cked. In 1992 their (underestimated) level of support was over 15 points higher than where they currently sit in the polls. In 1997, they had been in recovery polling-wise for about 9 months and had already reached the level they ended up at - low 30s. The polling in 1997 was accurate for the Tories. This time, they are still losing support and are doing so faster than Labour. The loss is even more stark when you see it against the rise in the Reform vote:

GE24 Apr2.png (552.2 KiB) Viewed 324 times

I cut short the trendline to start from day 1180 rather than 1080, as it was looking too wrong. The main point is - nothing is currently working for the Tories. If nothing changes - and it's hard to see what can change to start improving the numbers - then this will be their worst election for a very, very long time, maybe ever. They're not quite yet down at the pit of despair that was the Truss era*, but they're averaging less than a point better than that now. YouGov have reported two polls with them in the teens support-wise, and Ipsos have reported one.

Just to drive home the message, the current trends show that at an October election, Labour will land on 43.0%, Cons on 21.8%, LDs on 10.4%, Greens on 6.3% and Reform on 14.1%. With no tactical voting, that translates (via Electoral Calculus) into 467 seats for Labour, 74 seats for the Tories, 57 for the LDs, 28 for SNP and none for Reform - a Labour majority of 284.

If the Tories went in June, however, they would lose fewer seats on current trends. They're still well-beaten, but their support would be 23.3%, against Labour's vote of 43.5% and Reform on 12.0%. That's instead a majestic 87 seats for the Tories.

Even if we cut those numbers to account for an overestimate of the Labour vote, they're still looking at a majority of nearly 200.

Tl;dr: the Tories currently look completely f.cked.



*Can a month and a half be fairly described as an "era"? Answers on a postcard.

[lpm]

They should have called the election in May.

- would have avoided the negative impact their local elections wipe out is going to have
- election campaigns always lead to suspension of infighting
- could have campaigned on "dangerous world, don't jump ship to the unknown, stick with experienced statesmen of Sunak, Cameron and Hunt"*
- dirty tricks, e.g. against Rayner, have to be deployed fast and hard, not languish across many months
- inflation will hit a low in May when the energy prices a year ago vanish from the stats - but then will rise again before the autumn. Can't campaign on beaten inflation when inflation is on the up again
- "Get Rwanda done" is better politics than "We got Rwanda done and it's made bugger all difference"
- pay packets at end of April will be higher than end of March, due to the budget's tax bribe. Something to shout about in the final week of the campaign. Will be forgotten by the autumn




*Yeah, I know, but it's all relative, and those three are a bit more professional than their colleagues.

[dyqik]

If you include tactical voting at some moderate level (and this seems likely), then the Tories risk dropping behind the Lib Dems even right now, yet alone later.

[Woodchopper]

As expected the Conservatives are losing a lot.

It will be interesting to see how Reform is doing. For example, in Redhill in Sunderland Reform came second and the Conservatives third. If a strong Reform result is repeated around the country then the Tories are completely screwed. Shows that the Reform opinion polling is reflected in actual votes. Something which would be consistent with the Tories not picking up votes in the general election from people who had previously said that they'd vote for Reform.

[Woodchopper]

As expected the Conservatives are losing a lot.

It will be interesting to see how Reform is doing. For example, in Redhill in Sunderland Reform came second and the Conservatives third. If a strong Reform result is repeated around the country then the Tories are completely screwed. Shows that the Reform opinion polling is reflected in actual votes. Something which would be consistent with the Tories not picking up votes in the general election from people who had previously said that they'd vote for Reform.

And in the Blackpool South by election Reform came third but with 16.88% and were only 117 votes behind the Conservative candidate.

[TopBadger]

I think the only way Sunak fights the next GE is if he calls one now... otherwise Tories will boot him out, pick Mordant as leader and call a GE with a new face at the top whom the public detest less than Sunak.

[Woodchopper]

I think the only way Sunak fights the next GE is if he calls one now... otherwise Tories will boot him out, pick Mordant as leader and call a GE with a new face at the top whom the public detest less than Sunak.

That might help the Tories, but it wouldn't stop them losing. But would anyone actually want to take over for a few months or even weeks in order to be defeated? Maybe better in the long run to let Sunak take all the responsibility for a loss and then take over in order to rebuild.

[lpm]

I think the only way Sunak fights the next GE is if he calls one now... otherwise Tories will boot him out, pick Mordant as leader and call a GE with a new face at the top whom the public detest less than Sunak.

The public don't particularly detest Sunak.

[headshot]

I think the only way Sunak fights the next GE is if he calls one now... otherwise Tories will boot him out, pick Mordant as leader and call a GE with a new face at the top whom the public detest less than Sunak.

The public don't particularly detest Sunak.

The ones who've decamped to Reform probably do.

[jimbob]

I think the only way Sunak fights the next GE is if he calls one now... otherwise Tories will boot him out, pick Mordant as leader and call a GE with a new face at the top whom the public detest less than Sunak.

That might help the Tories, but it wouldn't stop them losing. But would anyone actually want to take over for a few months or even weeks in order to be defeated? Maybe better in the long run to let Sunak take all the responsibility for a loss and then take over in order to rebuild.

It depends.

PM for a few months with low expectations, probably outlasting Truss, or opposition leader and failing to get anywhere near power?

[Woodchopper]

I think the only way Sunak fights the next GE is if he calls one now... otherwise Tories will boot him out, pick Mordant as leader and call a GE with a new face at the top whom the public detest less than Sunak.

That might help the Tories, but it wouldn't stop them losing. But would anyone actually want to take over for a few months or even weeks in order to be defeated? Maybe better in the long run to let Sunak take all the responsibility for a loss and then take over in order to rebuild.

It depends.

PM for a few months with low expectations, probably outlasting Truss, or opposition leader and failing to get anywhere near power?

Yes, maybe the attractions being PM might be tempting enough. Its a great line on their CV.

[jimbob]

That might help the Tories, but it wouldn't stop them losing. But would anyone actually want to take over for a few months or even weeks in order to be defeated? Maybe better in the long run to let Sunak take all the responsibility for a loss and then take over in order to rebuild.

It depends.

PM for a few months with low expectations, probably outlasting Truss, or opposition leader and failing to get anywhere near power?

Yes, maybe the attractions being PM might be tempting enough. Its a great line on their CV.

Yup. Also you have to think about her ego. She probably thinks she would be good at the job of PM. I doubt anyone has ambitions to be leader of the opposition, except as a stepping stone.

And if she has a sense of realism, she might consider that she'd be unlikely to make it to the subsequent general election, let alone 2034 when the Tory leader might have a realistic chance to win.

[TopBadger]

That plus the £100k/yr for the rest of your life as an ex-PM... got to be worth a stab at for any of them. Last chance to gorge at the trough.

[jimbob]

It depends.

PM for a few months with low expectations, probably outlasting Truss, or opposition leader and failing to get anywhere near power?

Yes, maybe the attractions being PM might be tempting enough. Its a great line on their CV.

Yup. Also you have to think about her ego. She probably thinks she would be good at the job of PM. I doubt anyone has ambitions to be leader of the opposition, except as a stepping stone.

And if she has a sense of realism, she might consider that she'd be unlikely to make it to the subsequent general election, let alone 2034 when the Tory leader might have a realistic chance to win.

Maybe the bolded might have, except people like Corbyn