• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

UK Politics General Discussion

What will be the result of the UK’s General Election?

  • Conservative Majority

    Votes: 3 2.5%

  • Conversative Biggest Party in Hung Parliament

    Votes: 2 1.7%

  • Labour Majority

    Votes: 87 72.5%

  • Labour Biggest Party in Hung Parliament

    Votes: 28 23.3%

  • Other Result (Please specify in your post)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    120
  • Poll closed .
I don’t disagree, but I also think it’s more nuanced than “only the Tories have to fear Reform”.

I think the very fact that Reform have done so well in so many areas that were decimated by Thatcher and would never have voted Tory if their lives depended on it is a worry for Labour, and indicates that Reform’s reach is broader than “disenfranchised Tories”, extending to “disenfranchised people of all parties”. Areas like the North East and Wales have traditionally had very low Tory vote shares, but Reform are doing really, really well in these areas.

I saw a poll that suggested that the Tories would not have been the second choice party for many Reform voters in the 2024 election, with many actually selecting one of the left-wing parties. Similarly, Reform would not have been the second choice for many 2024 Tory voters, with many picking Labour or Lib Dems.

I feel that Reform’s appeal is broader than simply the “traditional right”, and I don’t think Labour should dismiss them.
 
Last edited:
Reform are still a protest vote as it stands, local elections and by elections are often used by people to protest.

That said the idea that only ex Tory voters are heading to reform is not correct. The simple left right labelling doesn’t help split the population. Left wing and right wing strictly speaking only define the economic outlook someone has, there are a lot of people who are left wing economically but culturally conservative. These are the people Farage is taking from Labour, but their risk is if they push to hard for those votes they risk the traditional economically conservative right wing culturally liberal voter.

The problem Regorm have now is two fold:

1) Farage will say anything to anyone to get elected. Him and his backers are economically very right wing, he is on record wanting to move the UK into an insurance based health model and voted against the workers rights bill. How far can he push the left wing economic messaging without then boxing himself into something his financial backers don’t want (he is a grifter so he mostly wants his money and that comes not from the electorate).

2) They are now in power locally, up to now they have never had to produce results. This massively helps Farage (look at Brexit, he blames its implementation when it was just a stupid idea). He can’t easily blame other people for his parties failings. It doesn’t help that he has put ejits like Andrea Jenkins front and centre. She has already gone on a “I’m going to scrap all DEI roles in the authority” only for the authority to point out they don’t actually have any. If scandals or failures start plaguing the parties then the national picture will change.

He is also risking using language linked to Trump like DEI and Doge; Trump is incredibly unpopular and he has cost two right wing parties elections in the last two weeks. At the moment most people are not switched onto politics (just look at the turnout for the local elections, only the diehards turned up). He needs to be careful not to link himself to hard to Trump as at a general election peoples voting decision making is nationally focused and that could damage him.

The problem the Tories have (which everyone is ignoring) is their vote carved off in two directions, yes Labour lost votes to reform but they mostly just lost votes to “stay at home”, Tories lost votes to reform AND the Lib Dem’s who now have far more councils and councillors than reform do (the MSM are obsessed with reform so only seem to report on its wins). The problem the Tories have is if they go after the voters they lose to reform then their more centrist voters shift to Lib Dem’s, if they go after their centrist voters then their right flank go to reform. Labour have a little bit of an issue with the greens but not to the same extent.

Final point, local and by-elections are terrible predictors of general elections even when they are not 4 years out from an election (look at the by-election in Uxbridge, it went to the Tories in the by-election then a few months later went to Labour in the general).

What you can say is the power of smaller parties is increasing, which although I think Reform are a terrible party who want to attack the very people who vote for them I do think getting rid of two party dominance is a good thing.
 
Smiley said:
Yes - no longer a protest vote. Well that and "smash the pensioners", "smash the disabled", "smash the businesses" have all worked, but the boats not so much so
Click to expand...

Ironically nearly every pensioner is actually financially better off this year even without the winter fuel allowance hence why the media couldn’t find a “old person harmed due to being too cold” story over the winter.

The PIP will cause harm though and that is infuriating.
 
If anything is to be said about the recent elections both here and in Canada and Australia, is that Labour need to be more radically Labour and not incremental and risk looking like a Tory/Reform-lite.

Apparently there’s a lot of behind-the-scenes radical incrementalism in government, they need to show that they’re digging deep and really getting to grips with the structural reforms needed. These local elections will only accelerate that.
 
By elections, a year after a general election, generally represent absolutely nothing at all as an indicator of future elections.
Ever.
Reform have a one topic manifesto, and are run by another ego self serving ego showman.
We have had enough of those.
People tend to vote completely differently in general elections.
I remember many far right groups over the years, that had minor success in by elections and council elections, and "corrections" back to the mainstream followed.
Be that the National Frond, EDL, BNP or a myriad of others.
Reform are simply the latest, more in plain clothes, but still pandering to the far right dream of a great Nation, that simply doesn't exist any more, thank god.
 
Bert2theSpark said:
If anything is to be said about the recent elections both here and in Canada and Australia, is that Labour need to be more radically Labour and not incremental and risk looking like a Tory/Reform-lite.

Apparently there’s a lot of behind-the-scenes radical incrementalism in government, they need to show that they’re digging deep and really getting to grips with the structural reforms needed. These local elections will only accelerate that.
Click to expand...

My big worry is Labour panic and try and pander to the reform voters. Fact is no one is ever going to out reform reform.

The trans issue is a good example, yes 60% of people agree with the (completely un-enforceable) Supreme Court ruling and Labour have panicked and gone with the anti trans rhetoric, but although 60% of people have been persuaded to hate trans folk very few people see it as issue that will impact their voting intention. And for those that do it’s actually the pro-trans voters who will turn their vote to parties like the Greens.

The only issue Reform campaign on that is high on people voting intention predicators is immigration but that is still lower down than the NHS and cost of living. But the trouble Labour has is they are likely to get strikes this year in the NHS if the pay rise is as low as is being suggested or has to be funded from existing budgets and cost of living will be driven up by the moron in the White House.
 
Dave said:
The trans issue is a good example, yes 60% of people agree with the (completely un-enforceable) Supreme Court ruling and Labour have panicked and gone with the anti trans rhetoric, but although 60% of people have been persuaded to hate trans folk very few people see it as issue that will impact their voting intention. And for those that do it’s actually the pro-trans voters who will turn their vote to parties like the Greens.
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree with your overall sentiment (I think Labour leaning right on some issues is a mistake), but on the gender issue specifically; if very few people see it as an issue that will impact voting intention, does that not work both ways? Does that not mean that people with either opinion don’t generally care enough about the issue to make it a key voting issue rather than that only people who agree with the ruling feel this way?

With that in mind, why would Labour actively go against the judgement of the Supreme Court and 60% of the population? If their stance on this issue is unlikely to significantly influence voting intention, why would they pick a stance that actively counteracts what the court have said and what it appears the majority of the country agree with? Picking a stance that counteracts the ruling is far more likely to attract negative attention from the press (it opens them up to “Labour defies court ruling” type headlines from the likes of the Telegraph), and as much as you say they aren’t winning any votes by choosing their current stance, I’d argue they wouldn’t win any more by going with the opposite one.

There are people who agree with the likes of JK Rowling and Rosie Duffield and platform this as a strong enough issue to influence their voting intention, or at least, I would say the number of voters with the opposite view who feel strongly enough to vote against Labour as a result is not big enough to significantly outweigh the number of strongly gender critical voters who would vote against Labour for not upholding the ruling. I admit they are probably more hamstrung by this than the Conservatives, as left-wing voters are more likely to disagree with the ruling, but even still, I don’t think they would win significantly more votes by opposing the ruling, or at very least, I don’t think this would outweigh the number of people such a move would repel. Even if you look at 2024 Labour and Lib Dem voters, more agreed with the ruling than disagreed (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_transpoll_20250430.html). The only party where more 2024 voters disagreed with the ruling than agreed was the Greens.

To be honest, I also think Labour don’t seem to have come down that strongly on either side, having generally stayed somewhat silent on the issue since the ruling. So I’d struggle to say that they’ve ever really made it a big voting issue, unlike the likes of the Tories and Reform.
 
Last edited:
Matt N said:
I don’t disagree with your overall sentiment (I think Labour leaning right on some issues is a mistake), but on the gender issue specifically; if very few people see it as an issue that will impact voting intention, does that not work both ways? Does that not mean that people with either opinion don’t generally care enough about the issue to make it a key voting issue rather than that only people who agree with the ruling feel this way?

With that in mind, why would Labour actively go against the judgement of the Supreme Court and 60% of the population? If their stance on this issue is unlikely to significantly influence voting intention, why would they pick a stance that actively counteracts what the court have said and what it appears the majority of the country agree with? Picking a stance that counteracts the ruling is far more likely to attract negative attention from the press (it opens them up to “Labour defies court ruling” type headlines from the likes of the Telegraph), and as much as you say they aren’t winning any votes by choosing their current stance, I’d argue they wouldn’t win any more by going with the opposite one.

There are people who agree with the likes of JK Rowling and Rosie Duffield and platform this as a strong enough issue to influence their voting intention, or at least, I would say the number of voters with the opposite view who feel strongly enough to vote against Labour as a result is not big enough to significantly outweigh the number of strongly gender critical voters who would vote against Labour for not upholding the ruling. I admit they are probably more hamstrung by this than the Conservatives, as left-wing voters are more likely to disagree with the ruling, but even still, I don’t think they would win significantly more votes by opposing the ruling, or at very least, I don’t think this would outweigh the number of people such a move would repel. Even if you look at 2024 Labour and Lib Dem voters, more agreed with the ruling than disagreed (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_transpoll_20250430.html). The only party where more 2024 voters disagreed with the ruling than agreed was the Greens.

To be honest, I also think Labour don’t seem to have come down that strongly on either side, having generally stayed somewhat silent on the issue since the ruling. So I’d struggle to say that they’ve ever really made it a big voting issue, unlike the likes of the Tories and Reform.
Click to expand...

They might choose to do what is morally correct, I know that’s not a common trait for politics.

Just to be clear though the court doesn’t make law, it interprets it. If parliament wanted to it could amend the equalities act and that would make the judgement irrelevant. Parliament is sovereign in the UK system, which is why I don’t understand the people on the trans side of the debate getting angry at the court, it just interpreted the written act, it didn’t create any new law.

The EHRC is trying to create new law however, in its guidance because its chair is an anti-trans zealot but that’s a different story and will almost certainly get challenged in the court.
 
Matt N said:
Reform represents change, and I think a lot of people are sick to death of the political status quo. A great many people have felt left behind by the political system for decades, and rightly or wrongly, they feel like Reform are listening to them in a way that other political parties aren’t.
Click to expand...

I find it sad that while we live in generally well off, happy, healthy, safe and comfortable society so many are after massive change that inherently benefits the few over the many. Sections of the population have been convinced they are repressed, depressed and hard done by from the onslaught of social media which gives idiots as loud a voice as experts.

Yes, some things certainly need nudging in different directions, but the country we live in now is practically a utopia compared to pretty much all of history and most of the current world. That isn't something that needs tearing down.
 
Unfortunately a majority of folks are either:

Being told to be scared of something (trans panic) or want to have a group to look down on.
Being told about Schrodinger's Immigrant (taking jobs AND stealing benefits at the same time).
Were part of the oppressed but have now climbed up the metaphorical ladder and are now taking it with them to prevent others doing similar.

A number of groups want to tear things down mostly for their own economic gain. Economic instability makes for some very nice profit opportunities for some circles, especially when the man in charge is causing said instability.
 
Benzin said:
Being told about Schrodinger's Immigrant (taking jobs AND stealing benefits at the same time).
Click to expand...
🤪 It will be interesting to see what Reform do in local Councils. My gut feeling is they can start with "look at the mess we've inherited with our £xxx black hole" - but actually many councils are in such financial dire straits you'd have to work hard to make it worse.

The results also show how 6 votes can make all the difference - the question is which voters that will motivate to get out and put their cross in the box. As for the trans issue, can't we just respect each other AND allow safe spaces for biological men/women??
 
Smiley said:
🤪 It will be interesting to see what Reform do in local Councils. My gut feeling is they can start with "look at the mess we've inherited with our £xxx black hole" - but actually many councils are in such financial dire straits you'd have to work hard to make it worse.

The results also show how 6 votes can make all the difference - the question is which voters that will motivate to get out and put their cross in the box. As for the trans issue, can't we just respect each other AND allow safe spaces for biological men/women??
Click to expand...

The issue is no one has been able to demonstrate what was unsafe previously? The papers would have a field day if a trans person attacked someone in a toilet but they never report it so is it happening?

There is debate to be had on some aspect of trans/ cis rights (sport is an example), but forcing people into biological catagories without any nuance is going to make people more unsafe (come back to the people impersonating trans men to get into woman’s spaces). Plus who is going to police toilet use, we all going to have to present an ID card to access the toilet? Also what about us gays, what’s to stop people saying we are a risk as we are sexually attracted to the people who use the same single sex spaces as us, should gay men and lesbians have their own toilet as well?

So the ruling and new guidance as far as I can see offers no extra safety, is unworkable and creates cost for business who are now going to need to build new toilets and changing rooms.

It’s not respectful or safe, it’s just bonkers.
 
Would need to look into the figures but I thought we were still down with the USA, as this deal doesn't offset the tariffs that Trump imposed?
 
Alsty said:
Would need to look into the figures but I thought we were still down with the USA, as this deal doesn't offset the tariffs that Trump imposed?
Click to expand...

I think being up on the rest of the world, in terms of trade terms with America, is more relevant than being down on where we were.
 
But with such a temperamental loony in charge of the white house, give it a couple of weeks and it will all change again.
He needs to try keeping quiet for a few weeks and let the economy settle for a while.
His fat mouth is causing world chaos.
Even the majority of old republican politicians hate him, he isn't a republican, he is a fascist surrounded by yes men.
Bit like the russian chappie.
With world politics the way it is, I'm glad I'm old.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top