Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[TheSmiths82]

Slim chance. There is a big difference between reducing the government's majority by 4 (although, effectively, 2) and electing a new government.

This what we need to remind our selves, people often use bi elections to punish the government but when they are voting for a prime minister will go to the their old habits. If this was a general election I think these two seats might have still ended up being conservative but with a huge swing to labour. However there are lots and lots of seats out there which only have a Tory minority and there are enough of these to still make them loose the next election.

 

[SteveM70]

I mean that he spent his first year as PM relying on the fact that he wasn't incompetent, mendacious and useless in the way his two predecessors were, but it wasn't enough

Maybe, but he also lacked the self-awareness to understand that whilst this is true, the reality is that he is merely less incompetent, less mendacious and less useless than Johnson and Truss

 

[takno]

I think, with the wisdom of hindsight, that these results prove that Rishi Sunak didn't act soon enough. In that, I mean that he spent his first year as PM relying on the fact that he wasn't incompetent, mendacious and useless in the way his two predecessors were, but it wasn't enough. He seems to have tried to escape and be seen to do something himself at the recent party conference, but it was too late and nobody believes him. I'm sure if he'd acted sooner he'd have garnered more positive results at the ballot box, but equally he might have been defenestrated by the right of his party.

His incompetence, mendacity and uselessness are indeed of a slightly different nature to his predecessors. In many ways they're actually nastier

 

[baz962]

Easy.

Many are not interested in politics. They have a decent job, kids are at an alright state school, everything is under control. Why risk changing anything?

Also I can see why people stick to the status quo. I am no fan of any political party per se . I voted labour in mid Beds yesterday and it's taken me a long time to forgive that war . But we all look at the big name politicians and prime ministers etc. Many people will have pretty decent politicians of all colours doing a decent job in the local constituency and may have fought for them in some way. Lots of decent politicians of all rosette's in the background.

 

[dosxuk]

This what we need to remind our selves, people often use bi elections to punish the government but when they are voting for a prime minister will go to the their old habits.

But things don't look good for the Tories in that respect either. Sunak is less popular than Starmer - furthermore, the divisions within the Tory party itself are preventing his attempts to try and improve his ratings. The constant in-fighting, and reminders from their own members that he wasn't even voted for by them to become Prime Minister undermine all the messaging about stability that he wants people to think he has brought. With his two predecessors especially, making claims of being more stable and trustworthy is a bit like saying you're not quite as violent as Jack the Ripper - it may be true but it's not a positive comparison. After all, a lettuce was more stable than the previous holder of the position.

 

[jfollows]

Also I can see why people stick to the status quo.

Yes, I think that all the political parties rely on this heavily.
I mean, I voted LibDem in 2010 & 2015, Independent in 2017, Labour in 2019, and will almost certainly vote Labour at the next election (because Labour is most likely to win against the Conservatives in Tatton, I'm definitely voting anti-Conservative rather than pro-Labour). But a lot of people don't engage, always vote the same, or vote for change for its own sake. So there are a lot of different forces to account for.

 

[Thirteen]

The Tories are going to lose power no matter when the election is and dragging it out to 2025 is just going to them sink further. I think May or October would be the best bet.

 

[jfollows]

The Tories are going to lose power no matter when the election is and dragging it out to 2025 is just going to them sink further. I think May or October would be the best bet.

I don't think the current lot in power care about what happens after the next election, though. I agree with you that if they string it out until January 2025 it will be worse for them after that, but I really don't think that most of them care.

 

[WelshBluebird]

While it doesn't surprise me massively that Labour won the Mid-Beds by-election, what is rather crazy to think is that this particular seat had been a safe-haven for the Conservatives for over 90 years (being held by them since 1931 until yesterday). It shows that they certainly can't take anything for granted right now, and reflects the true mood of the majority of the population towards the Conservatives.

What did surprise me was the fact the Tories didn't learn from the Uxbridge by election. Yes they won it, but despite all the noise made about Labour losing it because of the ULEZ, the seat had been Tory for decades. The fact that Labour very nearly did win that seat should have been setting off warning bells. And so this isn't surprising to me, as the writing has been on the wall for a while. Even safe Tory seats are swinging towards Labour - the question will be how many of them will swing enough to be lost to Labour and how many will maintain a tiny Tory lead.

 

[najaB]

This what we need to remind our selves, people often use bi elections to punish the government but when they are voting for a prime minister will go to the their old habits.

Hate to be "that guy" but we don't vote for a Prime Minister. The party leader does, naturally, do a lot to shape people's opinions, but I don't think there are many who would think "This person has been/will be a terrible MP, does nothing to promote anything I'm interested in, but their rosette is the right colour so..."

 

[nw1]

Looks to me like the opposite happened: Not only did Labour take Mid Beds despite the split in the anti-Tory vote, but in Tamworth the main split was in the right-wing vote, and it's just possible that might have cost the Tories the seat (if you assume plausibly that the minor party right-wing/extremist vote would have broken more for the Tories than for Labour): In Tamworth, the Tories lost with 40.7% of the vote, but Reform UK + Britain First + UKIP between them took 9.4%, which adds up to just over 50%



Actual Tory-to-Labour swing was above 20% in both constituencies - which comfortably meets your definition of 'apocalyptic'. There can't be many Tory-held seats that would survive a swing of that magnitude (although I'm sure the swing will be lower in the general election)

So interestingly, perhaps, Mid-Beds is clearly the most socially progressive seat of the two - unless the dislike of Dorries was stronger than that of Pincher in Tamworth.

Wouldn't have expected that, with Mid-Beds being mostly rural and lacking any large towns. Yet Labour + Lib Dem + Green added up to 59%.

I think Sunak is still hoping Steiner can make his counter attack.

Steiner?

 

[edwin_m]

I think, with the wisdom of hindsight, that these results prove that Rishi Sunak didn't act soon enough. In that, I mean that he spent his first year as PM relying on the fact that he wasn't incompetent, mendacious and useless in the way his two predecessors were, but it wasn't enough. He seems to have tried to escape and be seen to do something himself at the recent party conference, but it was too late and nobody believes him. I'm sure if he'd acted sooner he'd have garnered more positive results at the ballot box, but equally he might have been defenestrated by the right of his party.

What he is doing now is mostly the wrong things - if they appeal to anyone it's people who can get their egos tickled more effectively by Reform UK or one of the other further-right groups. About the only things he has done that would appeal to the swing voter are the small rapproachments with the EU, which are not relevant enough to most people to change their opinions.

He had a year's grace before "defenestration" was permitted under the party rules, which has either just expired or is about to (not sure when the clock officially started). He could have used his status as the last hope of obtaining re-election to take on the Right, very publicly dealing with Braverman and Truss as Starmer did with the Corbynites for instance.

His incompetence, mendacity and uselessness are indeed of a slightly different nature to his predecessors. In many ways they're actually nastier

Rather like some of the US Republican candidates not named Trump, he's competent enough to achieve more but most of the things he might achieve are likely to be bad for the country.

 

[nw1]

The Tories are going to lose power no matter when the election is and dragging it out to 2025 is just going to them sink further. I think May or October would be the best bet.

Definitely. Only a fool would hold a mid-winter election.

The weather's bad enough in October, heaven knows what it might be like in January. As much rain, plus more wind and about 10 degrees colder. Plus, in the north, chance of blizzards.

All of this would perhaps keep the most Tory-leaning demographic at home. Best for them will be a May election I think, but on balance I'll go with this time next year.

His incompetence, mendacity and uselessness are indeed of a slightly different nature to his predecessors. In many ways they're actually nastier

Main thing about Sunak is weakness. He seems afraid of controlling the hard-right element in the party, indeed he seems to want to promote them.

I suspect that, more than anything else, has cost them any realistic chance of being the largest party in the forthcoming election.

 

[Western Sunset]

Hopefully @Blindtraveler won't mind me saying but they are a screen reader user and use text to speech to compose their posts. This software can sometimes garble the composition of messages. I'm sure they meant "deluded voters" and "Tory light".

My apologies. I didn't "twig" his user name.

 

[nw1]

What did surprise me was the fact the Tories didn't learn from the Uxbridge by election. Yes they won it, but despite all the noise made about Labour losing it because of the ULEZ, the seat had been Tory for decades. The fact that Labour very nearly did win that seat should have been setting off warning bells. And so this isn't surprising to me, as the writing has been on the wall for a while. Even safe Tory seats are swinging towards Labour - the question will be how many of them will swing enough to be lost to Labour and how many will maintain a tiny Tory lead.

As an aside, of all the byelections of late where Labour were in with a chance (Selby, Tamworth, Mid Beds and Uxbridge) they lost in the least likely of all of them!

 

[Busaholic]

Definitely. Only a fool would hold a mid-winter election.

Maybe, but a buffoon chose December in 2019 and it didn't do him too badly, The country, on the other hand.......

 

[dosxuk]

He had a year's grace before "defenestration" was permitted under the party rules, which has either just expired or is about to (not sure when the clock officially started). He could have used his status as the last hope of obtaining re-election to take on the Right, very publicly dealing with Braverman and Truss as Starmer did with the Corbynites for instance.

Lots of Tory supporting voices today hoping for no-confidence letters are going to start arriving in the coming days when the clock expires - obviously what the country is calling out for is another round of Tory party bickering to choose the fourth Prime Minister of this election cycle. Maybe they're hoping Rishi can appoint Boris to the upper chamber in his leaving honours, and then the Tories can bring him back as Prime Minister without that pesky electorate getting in the way?

 

[nw1]

Maybe, but a buffoon chose December in 2019 and it didn't do him too badly, The country, on the other hand.......

That was a bit of a unique situation though, where said buffoon wanted to "get Brexit done" and had a very small time window to do this.

No such special circumstances exist next year. There would really be no logical reason at all, least of all for the Tories, to hold it any later than this time next year. They will not do any better through leaving it for three months: indeed in January, with things like fuel bills uppermost in people's minds, it would actually hurt their performance if anything.

 

[najaB]

I think Sunak is still hoping Steiner can make his counter attack.

Steiner?

It's a reference to the film Downfall, specifically the much parodied bunker scene:

 

[birchesgreen]

Its been memed so many times i thought everyone would know what it meant by now.

 

[GS250]

I actually think the Labour party of the 80s and 90s had MPs that would be a pillar of strength and reason these days. Kaufman, Gould, Cook, the late Smith etc. Even Clare Short was able to have a reasonable argument with right wingers without resorting to the pathetic insults and 'isms' that you see today.

Seem to recall a fairly opinionated but harmonious debate between Short and Tebbit on Question time. The good old days.

 

[takno]

Its been memed so many times i thought everyone would know what it meant by now.

I've got to admit it didn't click for me, and I used to love a good downfall parody

 

[nw1]

It's a reference to the film Downfall, specifically the much parodied bunker scene:

OK thanks. Yes I did watch Downfall, but many years ago now so forgotten this kind of detail!

I actually think the Labour party of the 80s and 90s had MPs that would be a pillar of strength and reason these days. Kaufman, Gould, Cook, the late Smith etc. Even Clare Short was able to have a reasonable argument with right wingers without resorting to the pathetic insults and 'isms' that you see today.

Seem to recall a fairly opinionated but harmonious debate between Short and Tebbit on Question time. The good old days.

The usage of insults work both ways, of course. Braverman and Anderson are obvious examples from the Tory side.

 

[JonathanH]

There’s a chance they could be the third largest party after the next election. There are no safe Tory seats anymore.

That seems unlikely as for the Conservatives to come third, they need to get fewer seats than the SNP, and the SNP only put themselves forward in Scotland. Moreover, it would also need the Liberal Democrats to have a resurgence and that doesn't seem to be happening.

A proper resurgence of the Liberal Democrats could push the Conservatives to fourth.

 

[nw1]

Meanwhile at least one Tory evidently doesn't have a clue (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-67126173?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=65327154fd63b979e1ace48d&More Tory calls for government to 'lean into' Conservative voters' values&2023-10-20T13:10:02.095Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:b857b2df-259a-4cc4-9754-f5b70253f5e3&pinned_post_asset_id=65327154fd63b979e1ace48d&pinned_post_type=share):

Devizes MP Danny Kruger, who co-chairs the New Conservatives group of mainly "Red Wall" MPs, agrees, telling BBC Radio 4's World at One the Brexit referendum result showed "ordinary people... wanted their country back" - and the government had yet to deliver this.

He describes the results as a "wake-up call", saying the Tories can still win the next election if they get their vote out by standing up for voters' values - on migration, sex education in schools, gender issues and taxation.

The name of this MP sounds familiar, and not in a good way.

Are most people's concerns "migration, sex education in schools, gender issues, and taxation"? He sounds just like a Tea Party Republican in the USA.

I suspect more people are more concerned about the cost of living, problems with public services, and the woeful state of the NHS.

The Tories will never win if they listen to people like Kruger. Yet another Tory obsessed with culture wars, it seems. A poor replacement for the, IIRC quite reasonable Claire Perry.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Hate to be "that guy" but we don't vote for a Prime Minister. The party leader does, naturally, do a lot to shape people's opinions, but I don't think there are many who would think "This person has been/will be a terrible MP, does nothing to promote anything I'm interested in, but their rosette is the right colour so..."

Yes - we are not a Republic just yet!

 

[nw1]

That seems unlikely as for the Conservatives to come third, they need to get fewer seats than the SNP, and the SNP only put themselves forward in Scotland. Moreover, it would also need the Liberal Democrats to have a resurgence and that doesn't seem to be happening.

A proper resurgence of the Liberal Democrats could push the Conservatives to fourth.

I suspect the Lib Dems will have a resurgence in places (mostly the SE and SW) but not enough to overtake the Tories.

Hate to be "that guy" but we don't vote for a Prime Minister. The party leader does, naturally, do a lot to shape people's opinions, but I don't think there are many who would think "This person has been/will be a terrible MP, does nothing to promote anything I'm interested in, but their rosette is the right colour so..."

I think that is precisely what a lot of people did in 2019, when you look at how just how many bad MPs retained their seats. Admittedly it was perhaps driven by fear of Corbyn rather than love of the Tories, to be fair.

 

[jfollows]

I think that is precisely what a lot of people did in 2019, when you look at how just how many bad MPs retained their seats. Admittedly it was perhaps driven by fear of Corbyn rather than love of the Tories, to be fair.

I am sure a lot of people voted Conservative in 2019 because Boris Johnson was Prime Minister (if he won the election).
Equally, I have never felt that he deserved the job and my voting in 2019 was directed against him getting the job - clearly I lost that particular one.
I considered voting Conservative in 2017 because I felt Theresa May was the right person to do the job, but this was over-ridden by local considerations when Esther McVey became our Conservative candidate, for whom I could never vote. I had no similar concerns about George Osborne, although in the end I never voted for him either.

 

[SynthD]

Actual Tory-to-Labour swing was above 20% in both constituencies - which comfortably meets your definition of 'apocalyptic'. There can't be many Tory-held seats that would survive a swing of that magnitude (although I'm sure the swing will be lower in the general election)

Richmond (Yorks) would still return Sunak with that swing, with a majority of about 3500. I read that it's the second safest Con seat in the country, and I still don't know why it was given to Sunak. The parliament list of constituencies has many safer Con seats so I’m misremembering the claim.

The fact that Labour very nearly did win that seat should have been setting off warning bells. And so this isn't surprising to me, as the writing has been on the wall for a while.

Some people on twitter (whatever that's worth) are more interested in the 10% of votes to parties further right than the Cons. They say it should be read as demand for Sunak to move right, while ignoring the 20% of votes that moved leftwards. The bells rung, and whistles whistled, are not good choices that represent the country.

 

[edwin_m]

That seems unlikely as for the Conservatives to come third, they need to get fewer seats than the SNP, and the SNP only put themselves forward in Scotland. Moreover, it would also need the Liberal Democrats to have a resurgence and that doesn't seem to be happening.

A proper resurgence of the Liberal Democrats could push the Conservatives to fourth.

A collapse of the SNP and a resurgence of the LibDems are both strong possibilities for the next election, and between them could restore the historic situation of the LibDems being the third largest party. I agree it's unlikely the Conservatives would drop below either.