Categories
About the Farage comeback – politicalbetting.com
About the Farage comeback – politicalbetting.com
2/ … in reality the problem for the Tories isn’t the country as a whole. @IpsosUK polling in Feb shows Farage second in favourable terms to Boris Johnson with 2019 Con voters.Arguably Sunak numbers comparable but not sure that’s much consolation. pic.twitter.com/2hTjQddSnT
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Reform are going nowhere. They have the potential to cost a lot of Tories their seats but not by being elected themselves. Instead they will let Labour in with a comfortable majority and probably for the next 10 years. How does that advance their agenda? Pointless.
For a long time, before 2016 I think, some on the Right have looked longingly at what happened in Canada- crush the wet Conservatives then absorb the dripping remains from the right to form a Proper Tory Party.
The interaction of FPTP and geography (RefCan was regionally concentrated so won seats, RefUK isn't so won't) means it doesn't work like that here.
We're scarily close to the first tipping point, where RefUK success = Labour hegemony. I wonder where the second tipping point (RefUK actually win meaningful numbers of seats) is?
He mentions that there are lots of people who don't know who Reform are/Don't have an opinion of them and then asks whether Farage joining them would up their public profile (clearly) and so boost their polling numbers.
Is it not possible that at least a bit of Reform's current support is exactly because people don't know who they are/what they stand for but are fed up with the main parties and think 'Reform' sounds like a good name/idea?
Would Farage joining them crystallise people's understanding of where they lie on the politial spectrum and actually drive some voters away?
It's wrong to assume that that will benefit the Tories much though - RefUK support would split, abstain, Tories, Labour, others, in that order, in my unscientific estimate, giving the Tories only a little help.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/18/labour-landslide-will-be-much-harder-to-achieve-than-in-1997-analysis-shows
They're almost exclusively 2019 Tories, and they switched to Reform after Truss was defenestrated - presumably buying the line in the right-wing media that Sunak represented a surrender to the lefty establishment and the proper right-wing agenda of Liz Truss had been abandoned.
I think it's more likely that people have some sense of Reform being Farage's party - their branding is essentially the same as the Brexit party's - and so any return to the fray by Farage might have limited effect, because most of the people who would be impressed see him on GB News and didn't think he'd ever gone away.
I also think that, if he were to return for the election he's leaving it a bit late. Makes me think that he isn't interested. But of course he loves that people are talking about it.
1. Avoids them trying and failing to get MPs elected again, with the attendant risk that people conclude they're irrelevant.
2. Avoids them being blamed for the Tory defeat due to vote-splitting.
3. Gives them influence in the Tory party.
4. Reduces the amount of money they have to spend and effort they have to make in the general election.
The more I think about it the more I think that a deal is all upside for Reform and no downside.
The 2019 marginals will be utterly uncompetitive this time, so it won't help the Conservatives.
The 2024 marginals... that would be awkward.
Besides:
Charlie Morgan picks his top players from all five nations that competed in this year's tournament.
That's a bit harsh.
Kemi Badenoch, the first govt minister to say Frank Hester's comments about Diane Abbott were "racist", seems to have changed her tune.
She tells LBC: "This was something that happened 5 years ago - he wasn't talking to Diane Abbott, it wasn't even really about Diane Abbott."
@paulwaugh
Some will see this as pitch to the Tory Right. But it may just be Badenoch being Badenoch: she hates what she sees as other people pushing a narrative on her + often hits out at 'cancel culture' - which can blind her to the facts of a case (Hester *was* talking about Abbott)
1. get the Tories to stand down in say 100 seats where the Tories can never win but Reform might have a chance
2. This allows them to focus resources so a cheaper more effective campaign
3. Gives the Tories some GOTV boost reducing the wipe out
4, If in Parliament keeps the Tories from forgetting any policy deals as they did previously.
5. chuck in a knighhood for Farage and they have a voice in the HoL - that should be fun TV if nothing else.
Both Tories and Reform would have to reverse policies to make things happen but the Tories are heading for a shellacking and Reform will probably end up with no seats. So they can either choose an arcance squabble for 10 years or the chance to stay relevant.
Big boy politics.
And as much as his fans and some sections of the media love him, as the polling shows he is broadly pretty unpopular. I’m A Celeb doesn’t seem to have shifted that.
That said, I think his name on the tin would stick a rocket up Reform and they would almost certainly be getting into double figures come the GE.
The article appears confused and conflates two different issues: winning a landslide and ability to make an impact afterwards.
Those two dimensions are linked only if you believe that the latter is why people will vote at the GE.
However, this is a fallacy. Most people voting this time will be passing judgement, not looking into a crystal ball.
My contention is that voting against is a far more powerful motivation than voting for. This time people have raw hatred of the tories. Fury. Horror of what has happened.
The article, and the state of things, is neatly summed up by its own comment:
"winning a landslide on a wave of popular goodwill looks like a tall order. The data shows that on almost every economic metric the country is doing worse now than it was in 1997.”
But that’s the point. The landslide won’t happen because of popular goodwill and optimism. It will happen because of ill-will and fury.
And for there to be a deal, what could the Conservative Party publicly sign up to in return?
This election really is "put up or shut up" time for Reform.
Their whole schtick is that the Conservatives have lost their way and failed their supporters.
Tearing down the parliamentary Tory party is exactly what they want.
The question, to my mind, is how organised their ground game will be. UKIP proved to be rubbish at the nuts and bolts of getting their potential votes into the ballot box.
Mode 1 : The government ambles along. Whenever they try and do something substantive, such as build more house, the system pushes back. “Brave policy”, “Upsets this demographic” etc. so they abandon that and start playing with fripperies
Mode 2 : The government tries to do something substantive. When they encounter pushback, they bulldoze through.
There's the old saw about "oppositions don't win, governments lose". 2019 contradicted that- a poor government won a landslide it didn't deserve on its own merits because the opposition was worse.
But although we all sort of know that's the case, it's a traumatic thing for anyone with any sort of emotional attachment to a political party to admit. We'd rather think that it's about the best man winning, rather than the worst man losing.
And that's not new, it's just become really stark in recent years.
Why is the crank right any different?
Government should do the essentials well rather than doing lots of things badly.
If the only you people you talk to all day are obsessed with politics then maybe this is the word that you see. its here on PB for sure. But in the real world? People are talking about the footy, the rugby, the weather,
Kate Middletonsorry, the Princess of Wales etc etc.I have little doubt of a thumping Labour win and its time that the Tories went home again to think again. It may take them a while, as they don't seem to be seeing the right answers right now.
But its good to step out of the bubble every now and again.
The reason why Farage will come back is simple - he has to be a player to become THE player. Remember that Conservative Party rules require its leader to be an MP. So pick your spot, run for office, finally get elected, rule over the ashes.
Tice has gone for Hartlepools, Farage should run in...? Thanet again? Clacton? Boston? Where is the population heavily Brexity, poor and GBeebies-level ignorant?
Operating in that mode requires political ability to build a coalition of support within the party in power. Otherwise the votes get peeled off by the special interests.
It also requires some conviction from the leadership and a desire to "spend" popularity to get things done.
It is much easier to sit in No 10, announcing the same spending 8 or 9 times, and wondering why (if you haven't done anything controversial) no one seems very happy. Mode 1.
Whatever you think of his vision, he has pretty efficiently overhauled the Labour Party in double-quick time. And whilst there have been occasional howls of rage from the dispossessed, he's basically got away with it.
He's like the conjuror who tells you that you can pick any card, but ensures you take the card he wants you to.
And, unlike many of our recent leaders, he's an oldish man who knows he needs to get a move on.
thermos flasksthe Tories on the bus.It looks to be a pretty close contest between which collapses first, the government or the Monarchy.
A government with a working majority replaced by another government with a working majority.
The key factors to consider is that Labour starts with 202 MPs, Blair started with 271, and there’s no lock on Scotland either.
If they don't do a deal - Reform get a x million votes, no MPs, but can claim that they can build on this, and pass the collapsed remains of the Tories etc...
And there are £ five million reasons to go along with it.
I think Farage's strategic aim is to be leader of a combined Tory/Reform party.
Step 1. Reduce the Tory party to 100 seats with Farage on the sidelines avoiding responsibility for it. "Aw what a pity. Let's still be friends" - to the Tory membership and MPs.
Step 2. Lead the move to combine the two parties with Farage as leader.
Step 3. A "volunteer" among the remaining 100 Tory MPs steps down to allow Farage to win the by election and become LOTO.
The Reformed Conservative Party will:
Stand up for British culture, identity and values.
Restore trust in our democracy.
Repair our broken public services.
Cut taxes to make work pay.
Slash government waste and red tape.
Maximise Britain's vast energy treasure of oil and gas, to reduce the cost of energy, beat the cost of living crisis and help unleash real economic growth.
Finally take back control over our borders, our money and our laws.
The Reformed Conservative Party will secure Britain's future as a free, proud and independent sovereign nation.
2. I assume you are referring to Reform here? Reform don't have a ground game. Like UKIP this is one of their issues. So it makes little difference. If you are referring to the Tories they are well resourced anyway. Focusing on a 100 less seats will make little difference to them in the rest of the seats.
3. Freeing up Tories from 100 seats to GOTV elsewhere would be minimal. Most Tory activists are not mobile but local and do not move from one constituency to another and those that do (and I know there are a few) would already be doing so, so it would free up very few extra helpers from 100 seats to the other 500 odd seats. Minimal benefit.
4. Fair point
5. How does a knighthood give Farage a voice in the HofL?
I'm fairly optimistic that Starmer will roll over special interest groups if he thinks it necessary - he's much more ruthless than his equable manner suggests. Whether I'll personally approve of it all is another matter, but we will have a purposeful government, which at present we really don't.
There are, though, well over 100 Tory MPs standing down. Shenanigans at the constituency level might be possible.
Prime minister ‘would sooner call vote than be ousted’, a senior ally warned
"A senior ally of the prime minister said that Sunak’s critics underestimate his resolve. They said that he would be prepared to call a general election if rebels force a leadership contest.
“He’s increasingly determined to prove his point and establish his own mandate,” they said. “You don’t get to achieve the things he’s done without some steel. He’s not just going to roll over.
“People should be careful what they wish for. It’s up to them. If they don’t want an election they should stop messing about. Rishi could easily say ‘OK, if that’s the mood of the party I don’t think it’s fair to put it to another leadership contest’. He can say reasonably he might just go to the palace instead.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-general-election-call-allies-warning-wxxgrcql6
Though as you note, it's very likely to be well over 100 in due course.
You may have missed it but most things on this board are fantasy politics.
Boris Johnson drops heavy hints of snap election – but the Queen could block the plan
PM threatens quickfire vote to thwart bid to oust him, although Buckingham Palace could refuse any request to dissolve Parliament
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/06/snap-general-election-what-will-call-boris-johnson-confidence/
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/18/labour-landslide-will-be-much-harder-to-achieve-than-in-1997-analysis-shows
The Labour Party have been consistently polling 20% above the Tories since Truss was PM - and the Tories have consistently hovered around / below 25% for the last 6 months. The Reform vote share is growing and, despite Labour not actually being popular in polls, there doesn't seem to be any huge swing from Labour to Greens or LDs - with both remaining steady.
Given FPTP this scenario could produce anything from a Labour majority that was similar to the majority won by the Tories in 2019, or we could have Baathist levels of Labour representation in the Commons and an extinction level wipeout of the Tories. FPTP makes it difficult to predict - but neither of those scenarios are more tricky than '97.
I think people are just failing to see that the time of long stable governments has long been over. It looks like we have had that since the coalition because the Tories have been the biggest party after each election since 2010 - but they only won an outright majority twice and a governable majority once (I don't count the majority that Cameron won as governable as it required the Brexit referendum to function and fell apart almost immediately afterwards). Conservative policy (on the economy and Brexit) has been hegemonic, but the party less so. A huge swing from a large Tory majority to a large Labour majority would be in line with what I see as quite chaotic electoral modern history in the UK.
I also would not be surprised if by 2030 Labour looks like they may lose their majority, despite potentially Baathist numbers, for similar reasons - that since the 2008 crash no political party has dealt with the underlying economic issues that are negatively impacting most people and, in fact, keep allowing thigs to get worse as the situation in the economy changes over time. Labour don't look like they'll enact policies to actually help, so I imagine a similar fallout for them that could, eventually, benefit reactionaries like Farage who argue that neither side has the answers and only he can sort things out...
An old article but interesting in the context of the rather mind numbing thought that 42% of 2019 Conservative voters have a favourable opinion of Nigel Farage. Particularly interesting in how the BBC's interpretation of 'impartiality' helped lead to the UK leaving the EU.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/aug/25/emily-maitlis-bbc-broadcaster-newsnight-government
A sensible deal for them would be to..
....
5. chuck in a knighthood for Farage and they have a voice in the HoL - that should be fun TV if nothing else.
You would need a bit more than a K -Lord Farridge of Fagash at least
And what about RefUKs front line troops? Their ability to run a ground campaign has been discussed, however the quality of their candidates may be problematical. A RefUk candidate near me is presented as a model of managerial experience on their website; perusal of the local newspaper archive tells a different story. The major parties candidate selection processes do weed out a lot of the totally unacceptable. What level of scrutiny has been applied by RefUK who will not have the experience (and battle scars) of running a national party over the years?
That's important because it offers better explanations of Labour strategy (or what it should be) and how their commanding position is slightly more precarious than then. They have to win seats in which they came nowhere 5 years ago. The polls would indicate that's likely, but it doesn't stop it being a pretty difficult and then incredible feat if and when they do so.
As to the future, we'll see, little doubt in the volatility of the electorate. My gut feeling though is that since the Truss debacle the Tories have so discredited themselves that Labour may get more of a sympathetic hearing than some expect. There are cohorts that may never, ever vote Tory again having previously done so because of the past decade or so.
So if Lab manage some incremental improvements and relieve some of the acute crises where the country feels really broken, then they might be harder to dislodge than imagined and get credit for relatively meagre returns. Of course if in a 2nd term there's not real progress on resolving our big issues, then they would likely face rejection.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/royals/26753071/king-charles-trooping-the-colour-cancer/
They like their politicians to be a 'bit of a card' which they internally translate as 'authentic' and 'unPC' and 'telling it like it is' and all of that baloney. Hence Johnson and Farage do well with them.
Their big area of concern, politically, is Immigration. Rhetoric and policies which sound 'tough' on this will appeal (if they believe it). The tougher the better. Eg Rwanda, the policy not the place, will be quite popular with them.
'An analysis of economic and polling data by the political consultancy Public First shows the country has lower wage growth, higher levels of debt and less affordable housing than it did when Labour last ousted the Conservatives from power..The economy grew 4.9% in 1997, following nearly five years where it did not shrink in a single quarter. This year, the Office for Budget Responsibility forecasts it will grow just 0.6%.
Wage growth had been strong for years before the 1997 election and was 2.6% in the election year. This year, the OBR thinks it will be just 0.1%.
This had a knock-on effect on the government’s finances. In 1997, public sector net debt was 37.5% of gross domestic product. It is now over 90%.'
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/18/labour-landslide-will-be-much-harder-to-achieve-than-in-1997-analysis-shows
Fairly sure Charles isn't dead. The lags between queen's death and internet rumours of queen's death, and between queen's death and actual announcement of queen's death, were about 2 hours and 7 hours respectively. It was hardly hushed up.
The Kate stuff is weirder by far. Not least because it's hard to see who gains by it.
Edit: assuming there are any Tories left.
https://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2024-03/forsa-umfrage-europawahl-union-ampel-afd
Apart from the headline that CDU/CSU (34%) polled more than all 3 coalition partners together (SPD 16%, Greens 14%, FDP 3%), it also has the AfD back in 3rd place on 15%.
In national polling for the Bundestag the last 4 Forsa polls have the AfD on 17%, slightly surprising to me that they are doing worse in polling for the European parliament elections.
Maybe it's because the (former?) AfD policy of 'controlled dissolution' of the EU is unpopular even among AfD voters - a policy they seem to have now abandoned.
Wind = 29% and even solar energy is up to nearly 5%. Oil and gas increasingly expensive (ignoring carbon) and just sets us up for future dependency and supply problems as our resources dwindle?
1) I am a decent, unbiased person.
2) Royal wife x is a saint.
3) I am a decent, unbiased person.
4) Royal wife y is the anti-christ and so is her husband. And their children. And their cat. HATE HATE HATE HATE.
Plus you have republicans who are extremely upset - they were promised the monarchy would implode in seconds of King Charles getting the throne.
But, getting back to the point I was making, and have made repeatedly, this is yet another poll that shows Boris to be the most popular Tory amongst 2019 Con voters. I can’t see why people try to pretend this isn’t so. He’s gone, the Conservative MPs committed suicide, you got lucky, there’s no need to be scared anymore
The resistance to tidal in the permanent system of government is a fascinating example of how "the done thing" is pushed.
I bet they are still pushing those ridiculous reports on tidal - the one claiming that it would need x hundred percent of the concrete production of Europe was especially funny.
I genuinely did not know what was expected of me. A very old lady had died of old age. Different generations I guess.
Lets put this in perspective
We have low growth
We have massive debts
We need about 5 millions dwellings and the commensurate infrastructure
We have a migration problem and the much larger problem of workforce participation
We need productivity and investment
We have a war in Ukraine
And Starmer is just the man for the job because he sacked Corbyn, The equivalent of reorganising the filing in Labour HQ,
Your hope is based on all of us accepting decline is good enough.
Personally I dont.
The mistake is to assume that if she had a health issue they would necessarily be OK with its nature and cause and circumstances coming out. It's easy to think of scenarios where that wouldn't be so - ones that don't involve the anti-Christ or bad people believing what they read on the internet.