A preview of the local elections - are the Tories going to be electorally massacred come May the 4th? Part of me would like the Tories to have a bad day on May 4th because it will give us some indication that this government is going to lose the next general election, something which I am rooting for. I think a bigger part of me just wants a few weeks’ rest from the “Sunak is leading the Tories to victory” bullshit; the puff pieces in Conservative adjacent publications, desperately searching for any signs of life. It’s tiresome; it makes it a drag to pay any attention to British politics. It would be nice to shut them up for at least a little while.
Why in your scenario 2 do you think the Lib Dems _should_ flop? I take this to mean that in the circumstances this is what we should expect, not that you'd like this outcome (although you might).
But the Lib Dems traditionally are pretty good at local election campaigns, and there are lots of places where dissatisfied Tories can migrate to the Lib Dems, either because there is no real Labour presence or because we're talking about small 'l' liberal conservatives who're happy to vote LD but for whom Labour would be a stretch.
Full disclosure: we're hoping to seize control of Chichester District from the Tories on the 4th...
Mainly because the Lib Dems did so well in this round of elections four years ago, one might be tempted to say they've reached maximum flex in the parts of England up for grabs. Having said that, if the Lib Dems do take a lot of seats off the Tories, that should worry them given the 2019 results.
Hi Nick, what is your feeling as regards tactical voting? According to Election Maps UK, the Tories are standing candidates in 93% of seats, Labour in 77%, the Lib Dems in 59%, and the Greens in 41%. I wonder if this is suggestive of frequent (if unstated/unofficial) local pacts, or a pragmatic commitment of resources only to areas where the parties believe they can win. Is there a scenario where Labour, LD and even Greens all do well at the Tories' expense? Or is that less likely than one specific opposition party making significant gains?
I suppose there's another one where Labour does as well as scenario 2 and the Lib Dems do as well as scenario 1 - ie the tactical voting pincers actually close. I doubt it, but it's certainly what the Lib Dems are playing for (and Labour in Lab-Con areas; my experience is that Labour aren't as inclined to back off in LD-Con areas as the Lib Dems are in Lab-Con areas, probably just because they have much more resources).
If that happens, then the Tories will be into full brown trousers territory, because that's what did for them in 1997 and 2001 (and in basically no other general election ever; even in 2005, there was major tactical unwind. The other two big Labour wins in 1966 and 1945 were accompanied by a collapse in the Liberal vote, not a tactical advance in Lib-Con areas).
One of the things I think Tory MPs are insufficiently afraid of is the tail of the probability distribution. If it goes much better than reasonable expectation, then they might stay in power. But if it goes worse than expectation by about the same amount, then they might end up as the fourth party in the Commons.
Nick, the very fact you won't really pin your colours to the mast, yet still doing your best to spin all results save for Tories pulling their fingers out, suggests to me that despite your bravado, you're really not confident at all.
And tbh after reading multiple Tweets from you praising Starmer's recent attack dog messaging, I'm not sure you're really reading the mood music out there. I may not as well, but then again I'm not the guy with a Substack putting forth my views.
Right now, the Tories should be dead and buried. The fact they're not suggests that like all the best zombie movies, Labour better not turn their back. And the fact Starmer hasn't really driven the stake into the Tory corpse really reflects badly on him.
Why in your scenario 2 do you think the Lib Dems _should_ flop? I take this to mean that in the circumstances this is what we should expect, not that you'd like this outcome (although you might).
But the Lib Dems traditionally are pretty good at local election campaigns, and there are lots of places where dissatisfied Tories can migrate to the Lib Dems, either because there is no real Labour presence or because we're talking about small 'l' liberal conservatives who're happy to vote LD but for whom Labour would be a stretch.
Full disclosure: we're hoping to seize control of Chichester District from the Tories on the 4th...
Mainly because the Lib Dems did so well in this round of elections four years ago, one might be tempted to say they've reached maximum flex in the parts of England up for grabs. Having said that, if the Lib Dems do take a lot of seats off the Tories, that should worry them given the 2019 results.
Thanks, that does make sense.
I guess I'm standing in one of those areas... We did very well in 2019, but are expecting to do significantly better this time. Fingers crossed...
Best of luck of the 4th.
Thanks! I've moved wards so although I think we'll do well, it's going to be harder for me personally this time than it was last time...
Hi Nick, what is your feeling as regards tactical voting? According to Election Maps UK, the Tories are standing candidates in 93% of seats, Labour in 77%, the Lib Dems in 59%, and the Greens in 41%. I wonder if this is suggestive of frequent (if unstated/unofficial) local pacts, or a pragmatic commitment of resources only to areas where the parties believe they can win. Is there a scenario where Labour, LD and even Greens all do well at the Tories' expense? Or is that less likely than one specific opposition party making significant gains?
I suppose there's another one where Labour does as well as scenario 2 and the Lib Dems do as well as scenario 1 - ie the tactical voting pincers actually close. I doubt it, but it's certainly what the Lib Dems are playing for (and Labour in Lab-Con areas; my experience is that Labour aren't as inclined to back off in LD-Con areas as the Lib Dems are in Lab-Con areas, probably just because they have much more resources).
If that happens, then the Tories will be into full brown trousers territory, because that's what did for them in 1997 and 2001 (and in basically no other general election ever; even in 2005, there was major tactical unwind. The other two big Labour wins in 1966 and 1945 were accompanied by a collapse in the Liberal vote, not a tactical advance in Lib-Con areas).
One of the things I think Tory MPs are insufficiently afraid of is the tail of the probability distribution. If it goes much better than reasonable expectation, then they might stay in power. But if it goes worse than expectation by about the same amount, then they might end up as the fourth party in the Commons.
Nick, the very fact you won't really pin your colours to the mast, yet still doing your best to spin all results save for Tories pulling their fingers out, suggests to me that despite your bravado, you're really not confident at all.
And tbh after reading multiple Tweets from you praising Starmer's recent attack dog messaging, I'm not sure you're really reading the mood music out there. I may not as well, but then again I'm not the guy with a Substack putting forth my views.
Right now, the Tories should be dead and buried. The fact they're not suggests that like all the best zombie movies, Labour better not turn their back. And the fact Starmer hasn't really driven the stake into the Tory corpse really reflects badly on him.