Analysis Breaking

Labour’s polling lead fell by more than half since October

Now voters’ attention is back on Starmer instead of Bozo and the Turnip, the Brylcreem curse is back and Starmer’s toxicity with the public is starting to show again – even against the awful Sunak

Hartlepool was just one of a string of seats in which the more the public saw of Starmer, the worse Labour performed at the ballot box

Labour’s polling lead over the Tories has fallen by more than half since late October last year. At that point, Labour’s lead over the recently Johnson-led party, that was then suffering the ravages of the appalling Liz Truss’s laughably short premiership, was 37%:

• Omnisis 20/10/22 35%
• YouGov 21/10/22 37%
• Redfield 19/10/22 36%
• People P 20/10/22 39%

Now, even against the dire Rishi Sunak, the average lead has dropped by more than half from the October high, to 17.4%:

• Survation 11/3/23 16%
• Teche 11/3/23 17%
• Savanta 11/3/23 11%
• Omnisis 11/3/23 24%
• PeopleP 11/3/23 19%

With the clownish walking catastrophes of Boris Johnson and Liz Truss out of the way, even against the appallingly bad and deeply irritating Rishi Sunak, Starmer’s Hartlepool curse is re-emerging.

The by-election in the north-eastern coastal town, where Starmer campaigned heavily, was one of the first to show that the more voters saw of him, the worse Labour did. Without the distraction of the Johnson-Truss farces, voters are noticing Starmer again – for a recent example, see the faces on a group of students forced to listen to Starmer last week and the reaction they had afterward – and the polls are plummeting accordingly.

SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.

If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.


  1. The Labour Party led by Keir have been consistently ahead in the polls for over a year now, compare this with where both Labour and Corbyn were in the polls when JC was in tenure, 🤔

      1. When I came across this article and started reading it, I just KNEW that our resident fascist-supporting paid shill SteveH would have posted the first comment (and probably within a minute or two of it being posted), and needless to say, I was right!

        It’s astonishing really…. everyone knows he’s a paid full-time Establishment shill, and yet he just goes on posting and replying and sniping and trying to defend the fascist scum who now run and control the LP, but for WHY! He obviously knows that no-one who follws Skwawkbox is taken in or influenced by anything he says and, as such, it’s just a pointless exercise, and you would have thought that his paymasters would have realised that long before now.

        Oh, right, and yet again he makes his fraudulent comparison between Starmer and Jeremy, and does so knowing that he, Jeremy, is/was probably the most smeared politician EVER, on the whole planet, as just about everyone on the left knows of course. And SteveH knows that of course, so why does he keep repeating it!

        The only conclusion I can come to (as for why they fund and engage him) is that the main objective is as a spoiler and disrupter of the comments section, which is precsely what he does on a daily basis.

      2. And out of the 81 comments posted prior to me posting this one and my initial comment, the resident fascist-supporting paid shill and disrupter posted 35 of them!

      3. The following is from a Media Lens article posted in March 2019:

        Corbyn first became an MP in 1983. He stood for the Labour leadership 32 years later, in May 2015. We searched the ProQuest database for UK newspaper articles containing:

        ‘Jeremy Corbyn’ and ‘anti-semitism’ before 1 May 2015 = 18 hits

        ‘Jeremy Corbyn’ and ‘anti-semitism’ after 1 May 2015 = 11,251 hits

        None of the 18 hits accused Corbyn of anti-semitism. For his first 32 years as an MP, it just wasn’t a theme associated with him.

        And this is from a Media Lens article posted on December 3, 2019:

        Our ProQuest database search of newspaper articles for ‘Corbyn’ and ‘anti-semitism’ shows how intensively the issue has been used to attack Corbyn prior to the looming election on December 12:

        September = 337 hits

        October = 222 hits

        November = 1,620 hits

        And that was just newspapers! If you included news items on TV and radio news bulletins etc re A/S you could easily double that. And these were just in respect of anti-semitism, and there were numerous other smears of course. Needless to say, SteveH is well aware of all this, AND, that it was all concocted and contrived to vilify and demonise Jeremy and, as such, subvert democracy.

      4. Allan – Yes it was bad, but it also illustrates how ineffectual he and his ‘crack team’ were at tackling these issues

      5. Any half wit can stand on the sidelines and declare in a superior manner that the way someone responded to something was “ineffectual”.

        The key test as to whether such a declaration has any substance beyond that of an empty vessel making a lot of noise for the sake of it is whether those who make such lofty declarations can substantiate their bluster with a workable and practical solution, in light of all the facts and CONTEXT, as to how it could and should have been handled to better effect.

        So steveH. We are all ears. Continuing to patiently wait to see if you have got any substance to your chuntering other than running away when challenged to back up the bluster.

  2. Even if you select the worst result above and then enter the polling results into a projected seat calculator (applying the boundary changes) Labour would still have a majority of 70+ seats (80+ seats using the current boundaries)

    1. SteveH the right of the LP exploited Corbyn’s Achiles’s heel: his political integrity in speaking up for the oppressed been against Apartheid South Africa, discrimination against Catholics in Northern Ireland of against Israel human right abuses against the Palestinians.
      Starmers has his Achiles’ s heel too, one the other political Parties and the many members of the Labour Party that led in disgust at Starmer haven’t started exploiting yet:Jimmy Savile and Millie Dowler.
      What is it that you English say? What goes around, comes around? Well, good luck with your idol Starmer explaining out why while he was DPP he couldn’t enough evidence to prosecute Jimmy Savile and why not one has every been charged for hacking the phone of Millie Dowler allowing her parents to believe that she was still alive while she was already death.
      Many Labour voters saw Corbyn as traitor over his support of the Irish Republican, but their dislike of Corbyn would be nothing in comparison to their disgust toward Starmer once they start realising that he stop the prosecution of Jimmy Saville and the Mirror editors that were at the centre of the phone hacking scandal, all very well connected to the Labour Party.

      1. Maria – Is it any surprise that despite ‘the left’ haveing repeatedly tried their best to discredit Keir and Labour nothing has gained any traction. All the smears that they’ve tried to date have lacked any substance once subjected to closer inspection.

      2. Lots of STUPID people obviously saw Corbyn as a “traitor” over his support for Irish rights: instead of perceiving that he was part of the peace process that stopped bombings both in NI and in England. 😏

      3. oneoflokis – Or maybe after being subjected (amongst other things) to month after bloody month of him hiding behind ‘constructive ambiguity’ they had no idea what he stood for and just lost faith in Corbyn . Given that Keir has now placed the ball firmly in JC’s court then I’m struggling to see why Jeremy is repeating this lack of decisiveness now. Unless of course he intends to do as I suspect and stand down (retire), in which case continuing his prevarication would suite his purpose,
        It’s a scary fact that in 2019 for the first time ever a larger proportion of the working class voters (C2DE) voted Tory than voted Labour. (by a massive 15% margin). At the time Boris even claimed that the Tories could now legitimately claim to be the party of the working class.

      4. Reply to Steve H
        Successive governments whether real Tory or faux Labour have run the state education system into the ground. Working class people are totally dependent on state education and as a result we have, too often, over the last 40 years received a poor standard of education.
        Keeping the working class in ignorance is a deliberate policy devised to ensure that many of us know very little about economics ,history or politics. This makes it easier to get us to believe the daily dose of propaganda put out by the BBC and MSM.
        In 2019 their propaganda was hatefilled and targeted at Jeremy Corbyn.He was vilified on a daily basis -portrayed as a spy, a Trotskite, a Stalinist, a terrorist supporter, an antsemite , a threat to national security, not patriotic etc etc
        His supporters like me were called dogs, scum, bullies, homophobes, antisemites, thugs vandals every day in the newspapers and on TV.
        Members of the PLP, Zionists and others lied about Jeremy and about us as part of a really dirty campaign to overturn his democratic election as leader by the membership and every lie was embellished and duly reported and commented on by the BBC and MSM.
        So no Steve H it isn’t in the least surprising that many working class people voted Tory at the last election. They were made complete fools of and it seems likely that they have now realised this

      5. Smartboy – Why have you conveniently forgotten all the additional funds that Labour invested in education during their time in office? Are you really that forgetful or was it more a case of the substantial increases in spending during the Blair/Brown years simply didn’t fit your weird narrative?

      6. Toffee – Well Labour’s current policy platform is undeniably a considerable improvement on what Sunak is offering and an even bigger improvement on the zilch that you and your comrades are offering. Whether you like it or not Labour’s proposed Employment Rights Bill will constitute a considerably improvement to the working rights of millions in the UK. Have you even read it yet because surprise, surprise your comments strongly suggest that you haven’t a clue what you are talking about?
        It is fairly obvious that the only reason you are pathetically mocking this excellent bill is because you are embarrassed that you have literally nothing to offer the electorate beyond a selection of silly childish expletives. It’s not my fault that Corbyn has let you down and ‘the left’ have yet again failed to get their act together.

      7. Reply to Steve H
        In my opinion Blairs/ Browns record on Education is abysmal, the low points being tuition fees and PFI .
        I note you do not dispute the rest of my post and therefore assume that you accept that the reasons we lost the 2019 election were as I have stated

      8. Smartboy – Not at all, you have a tendency to assume far too much.

      9. Smartboy – Not at all, you have an unfortunate tendency to assume far too much.

      10. “Why have you conveniently forgotten all the additional funds that Labour invested in education during their time in office?”

        You just displayed in a single sentence, steveH, what your problem is.

        Which is you cannot or will not think things through properly.

        Putting money into something does not automatically equate to that something, whatever it happens to be, becoming more effective.

        Take the example of the US military – which outspends in dollar amounts by many multiples the military spending by most of countries on the planet combined. Right now it struggles to get a test hypersonic off the ground. Much of its so called high tech kit from the the expensive white elephant F-35 to the Bradley to the Abraham’s is not fit for purpose junk. In military terms its ultra expensive navel carrier groups are obsolete.

        In exercise after exercise run by the US military it gets its arse kicked against a peer military spending far less and getting a lot more bang for the buck. Hell, it cannot even prevail against third world adversaries like Afghanistan and Iraq without getting its arse handed to it by sheep herders with small arms. Kipling’s poem “Arithmetic on the Frontier” is as relevant now as it was a century and half or more ago.

        And its the same across the board. Including with education. Just because they spent a lot of money does not mean it was effectively spent. And that’s because of this fixation they had, and continue to have, with private sector ways of doing things.

        New Labour’s basic problem here was the tick in a box mentality which treated people – students, school children – like tins of peas on a production line. If it could not get shoehorned into an excel spreadsheet or power point presentation it just got ignored. They used the wrong criteria, the wrong organisational model and the wrong ethos right the way through the system. Destroying public based co-operation models with private sector atomised competitive structures via specialist schools and academies. Changing public education to a private money making operation where much of that money ended up in the pockets of private shareholders all the way through the system from play group level all the way up to university level.

        And that is replicated in every sector. Look. I’ll do you a favour – though I don’t know why because you are a living breathing example of the confusion between schooling – which is what New Labour have bequeathed us and Starmer will continue to foist on us as a society – and education.

        Acquaint yourself with the basic problems dealt with here :

        Starting with the one dated January 31 2018. Maybe than you might get out of this cycle of continually getting your arse handed to you steveH because you won’t learn.

      11. Dave – I’m surprised that the penny hasn’t dropped yet, Why on earth would I care what a joke wannabe bully like yourself thinks,

      12. I’m not telling you what I think steveH I’m stating facts and presenting evidence

        Because that is the normal way of engaging. It is no one else’s fault but your own that you cannot refute counter argument in the same way other than running away and refusing point blank to answer counter arguments to the drivel you post.

        Responding with playground level vitriol like “delusional” and similar without backing that up any evidence or fact based substance to anyone and everyone who has the temerity to contradict you.

        I see you’ve abandoned alzeimer’s and gone back the tried and tested projection of your own obnoxious behaviours. Which fools no one but yourself on this site or anywhere else.

        Behaviour which more accurately represents that of a bully – as well as a coward – which you so freely project onto everyone else who stands up to you and your bullshit bluster.

        If you wish to continually make yourself look stupid in public because you cannot deal with real world facts which don’t fit with your delusions that’s your problem.

        So just to formalise where we are:

        When confronted with evidence based facts and arguments which do not match your woke definitions of what the world should be you have a typical hissy fit and spit your dummy out rather than deal with the evidence and facts presented.

        You pathetic little boy.

      13. Dave – Wow, and you’ve managed to extrapolate all that from my simple little reminder that when they were in office Labour increased the funding for Education. Over the last decade+ we’ve all seen and many have suffered from the impact of the Tory’s hollowing out of of public services

        “I’m not telling you what I think steveH I’m stating facts and presenting evidence”
        Did I say that you were, my impression is that you are desperately looking for an argument, whether this is because you are just bored or because you have a desperate need to ‘prove’ to yourself how clever you are

        Because that is the normal way of engaging. It is no one else’s fault but your own that you cannot refute counter argument….”
        The counter argument to what, that when Labour were in office they increased the funding for education? I really didn’t think that was in dispute?

        “Responding with playground level vitriol like “delusional” and similar without backing that up any evidence or fact based substance to anyone and everyone who has the temerity to contradict you.”
        Don’t you think that it is delusional for ‘the left’ to expect to win seats when they literally have nothing to offer the electorate

        I see you’ve abandoned alzeimer’s and gone back the tried and tested projection of your own obnoxious behaviours. Which fools no one but yourself on this site or anywhere else.
        A very bold statement, perhaps you could elaborate on what you claim to have seen..

        Behaviour which more accurately represents that of a bully – as well as a coward – which you so freely project onto everyone else who stands up to you and your bullshit bluster.
        Forgive me for being incredulous, but this is what you wrote to me just a few days ago when you were doing your best to play the part of a wannabe bully boy
        “No hiding place now. You either answer the question or fuck off from this site.
        And I will hound you every day, across every thread with a comment section for a grown up response till you either back up your bullshit or bugger off.
        Your choice.”

        If you wish to continually make yourself look stupid in public because you cannot deal with real world facts which don’t fit with your delusions that’s your problem.
        In the context that my comments were made why was it stupid to point out that Labour had increased spending or that ‘the left’ were being delusional?

        “So just to formalise where we are: [you are speaking for yourself, not me]
        When confronted with evidence based facts and arguments which do not match your woke definitions of what the world should be you have a typical hissy fit and spit your dummy out rather than deal with the evidence and facts presented.”

        Perhaps you could give some specific evidenced examples.

        You pathetic little boy.
        What were you saying earlier about the language of the playground?

        Please feel free to write me yet another essay.

      14. Dave – Are we to take it that as an HR professional you support Labour’s proposed Employment Rights legislation, have you read it yet?

        “Oh! Hang on though. Best not. That course of action has already been designated as an act of bullying by this site’s resident woke troll steveH.”
        Has it really, not by me it hasn’t. All I’ve done is point out how ridiculously funny your attempts at being a bully-boy were. I was embarrassed for you when you tried to play the ‘big man’ and wrote this nonsense.
        “No hiding place now. You either answer the question or fuck off from this site.
        And I will hound you every day, across every thread with a comment section for a grown up response till you either back up your bullshit or bugger off.
        Your choice.”
        (I can dig out the link for you if you’ve ‘forgotten’ that you said this plus multiple other comments along the same lines)

        However I do agree with your opposition to letting these untrustworthy individuals back into the party, but having said that surely you haven’t forgotten that the left’s leadership candidate said the following at one of the hustings
        “Asked about the Labour whistleblowers who appeared on Panorama, however, Long-Bailey was willing to criticise the leadership. She said: “I don’t think the party gave the right response. We should not have called out or attacked former members of staff… We should apologise for how we behaved. We should settle any claims that were made.” She also confirmed that she would welcome Luciana Berger and Louise Ellman back into the party, saying what they “have been through was absolutely shocking”.

      15. Oh do stop bellyaching steveH. If you can’t take it you shouldn’t dish it out.

        You kicked it off. I’m merely trying to get you to follow your own advice.

        02/03/2023 at 4:50 pm

        Dave – “The overwhelming evidence suggests that only fools or rogues believe this nonsense you are trotting out.”
        Whether you choose to believe the facts or not is of little consequence to me or anyone else.
        It is not my fault or problem that you’ve felt the need to resort to using denial as your coping mechanism.”

        You are very quick to constantly demand answers from others to the very selective points you make. Yet when others respond with their own facts, evidence, arguments and questions along the same lines all we hear from you is evasion at best and more often than not vitriol to avoid following the advice you so freely dish out to others.

        It is not unreasonable to expect from you the same as you demand from others. Clearly, however, that is not how it is supposed to work with those like yourself with your do as I say not as I do attitude.

        But go on. Take your bat and ball home. You are unlikely to get much sympathy from many, if any, here on this site in which you spend nearly all day every day (almost like you were paid to do as a job) abusing and projecting your own behaviour onto everyone else.

    2. Except ACTUAL polling returns a far different scenario, doesn’t it?!

      I KNEW you’d be first up. I KNEW you’d be desperately scrabbling around, bandying your shite “but Corbyn” excuses first, and confounding the issue with more opinion polling…And so it has come to pass.

      You were on with the first three posts…At time of me typing this, you’ve made 6 out of 8 posts. And all because your smarmer-idolising delusion that he’s gonna have a blockbusting landslide is being challenged. And backed up with the same evidence you use.

      And because it demonstrates keef isn’t as popular as you have decided, you’ve made those posts over a five-hour timespan, staying up late

      Seeing you sweat it out; watching you squirm and shriek…Now that’s what I call entertaining 😏

      Skwawky’s right. Remember when keef complained that the pandemic hadn’t given him the opportunity to get out and meet the electorate? In more ways than one, I’m glad lockdown’s over. 😏

      But the winner is your one about the shit not sticking to keef.

      It’s unlikely to when most of it isn’t reported; while murdoch and the toerag bbc decide keef might be of minimal use.

      Keep squirming. 😏

      1. Toffee – This is fun. ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯

      2. Fun? Really?

        Your passive/aggressive bullshit has come unstuck again for ALL to see.

        Now you’re calling Dave Hansell a bully for calling you out on your idiocy.

        Added to your pathetic all-too-predictable desperate defence of the shite that is keef smarmer. Full of piss & vinegar in his self-appointed capacity as “vanquisher of (fabricsted) antisemitism” , but who absolutely shits himself and is stunned into terrified silence when confronted by a pensioner with a few home truths.

        THAT is what’s fun

      3. Toffee – Yes

        Oh dear, how ’embarrassing’

        That’s not what I said – I pointed out that Dave is a “joke wannabe bully”, for some reason you’ve unjustifiably chosen to promote him

        I have no idea what you are ranting about, do you?

        I am happy to have brought a little joy into your life

    3. Two Cheeks
      That’s your prediction, worst case scenario 70 seat majority, that makes you as thick as my doorstep
      In that scenario how many Scottish seats contribute to the result, they are closer than ever to Independence
      How many Red Wall seats, they will never trust Starmer on Brexit or Immigration
      Finally remind us what JC could do to Red Tories
      My prediction, a 4 way Coalition Government between SNP, Lib Dums, Peace and Prosperity and Red Tories

      1. Two Cheeks
        Once the Red Wall is reminded of how poisonous, 2nd Referendum Keef is, how on earth do you expect them to react

  3. From a previous post in October last year:

    The extent of that lead in the polls is somewhat questionable. Stats for Lefties has an interactive map of all the predicted results from ‘that YouGov poll’ for each UK constituency. In my case, one of the safest Tory seats in England, it more than doubles Labour’s %age while almost halving the Tory’s, with the LibDem %age rising by less than half.

    Even before boundary changes prior to 1997, Labour have never won this seat. It first entered a candidate in 1918, has stood one in every election since, and has only come within 10% of the Tory vote on 3 occasions — 1922 (3.6%), 1945 (7.6%), and 1966 (9.3%) — with the last 2 being (effectively) the single opponent against the Tories. Generally speaking, they do much better without a third LibDem/Alliance/Liberal candidate, which virtually always splits the alternative vote, and which was what caught my attention.

    With a LibDem/Alliance/Liberal candidate standing, apart from in 1922, Labour have only manged to get within 11% of the Tory vote at best. Also, in half the years the former have stood (10) they have beaten Labour’s share to take second place! Since 1997, the best Labour have done is 17.9% behind the Tories in that year. Since then, twice in 2010 and 2015, the Labour vote collapsed; first to the LibDems, then to UKIP.

    While I wouldn’t dispute they have a poll lead due to the Tories present gross unpopularity but, from this analysis, Labour’s only chance is if they are the only opposition candidate — and even then it is highly doubtful if they could take it, despite what the polls suggest.

    Furthermore, as recent results have shown, the LibDems have dramatically outperformed Labour in other by-elections, and yet this doesn’t appear to have been reflected in this poll at all. In fact, knowing this constituency well, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least that if anyone else were to win it, then it would be the LibDems and not Labour.

    I see no reason to alter this assessment in light of the boundary changes.

    1. PW – If you should be proved right then please feel free to come back and tell me ‘I told you so’ after the next GE. At the moment my money is still firmly on Labour winning with a substantial majority.
      Unless you want Sunak’s Tories to win the next GE then you should be celebrating the consistent uplift in Labour’s fortunes.

  4. PW – Firstly the results that I have given above relate to the usual national vote share poll and are for Labour having only an 11% lead in the national vote share. The results are however in-line with the actual results that the Tories got when they had an accurately predicted 11% their vote share for the 19GE.
    If we are looking at the results for individual constituencies then you should take a look at an MRP poll which tend to by necessity involve a much larger sample.
    Eg (for this one 28,000 as opposed to a typical sample size of around one or two thousand for a national poll). If you look down the right hand column of the page linked to you will see the option for you enter your postcode and check out your constituency’s local results.
    ps, Attempting to extrapolate ‘odd’ by election results to predict the results of a General Election is not a sensible thing to do

    1. Attempting to extrapolate ‘odd’ by election results to predict the results of a General Election is not a sensible thing to do

      As usual you misconstrue a post to suit your own argument.

      My analysis is from every General Election — got that General Election — since Labour first stood in 1918. It had nothing to do with by-elections, my ‘attempt’ was merely taking note of recent surprising results. The fact remains, Labour have never taken this seat and there is no reason to suppose the LibDems will do as badly as is being suggested by the poll in question.

      As for the link to the Calculus poll, it now shows Labour losing the seat but somehow their vote share almost doubles at the expense of the LibDems – nothing historically suggests this is likely to happen, even at times when the Tories were at a low ebb.

      1. …..and yet the people polled across all the polling companies consistently disagree with you and have been doing so for some time now.. I wonder why. 🤔

  5. It is difficult to post whilst laughing.

    Great article Skwawkie! As evidenced by the indignation below the line lol.

    It’s occured to me that we owe Starmer for what he’s done to us. What’s the best way to pay the fellah back?

  6. What’s the best way to pay the fellah back?

    Campaign for the scab to host motd? I’m surprised he didn’t already throw his name in the hat.

    1. That’s a good idea. Mind you, he would have to listen to the assessments of the pundits before deciding that he agreed with them.

      1. Oh, dear Jesus…what an unedifying spectacle…And perhaps the end of an institution

        The thought of Keef, alongside danny ‘kin murphy. Keef going on about how he was DPP, and murphy with his endless supply of ripping yarns of playing alongside the whiston hardcase shithouse, stevie (me) gerrard.

        Urrrgh. 🤢

  7. It’s irrelevant what the polls say and which party wins the next GE. The rest of us lose.
    What happens in the UK will be decided by global events that are out of our control.
    All we can hope for is that Tintin will be consigned to the dustbin of history.

  8. Although the polls show that Labour currently has a huge 21 point lead over the Tories (47% to 26%) Labour only has to drop 6% to the Tories and it will fail to obtain an over all majority in Parliament.
    Although the Tories are unlikely to win the next General Election themselves they still have time to ensure that if the next Government is Labour it will be a minority Government. Given the support the Tories receive from the meadia the General Election campaign itself could easily account for a reducton of 3% in Labours lead & we don’t yet know how the parties will be placed when the Tories call the next election.
    Having lost its seats in Scotland Labour is even more at they mercy of the FPTP system which means that the bar in terms of the % of votes cast is set much higher for it than it is for the Tories. That huge Parliamentary majority that Labour predicts may well be a lot further from it’s grasp than people care to believe

    1. Really, if that is the case, could you explain how the Tories managed to achieve an 80 seat majority with an 11% lead in the vote share over Labour and why Labour wouldn’t have a similar majority with a similar lead?

      1. “could you explain how the Tories managed to achieve an 80 seat majority with an 11% lead in the vote share over Labour…”

        Well, Stevieh, it’s to do with the absolute rottenness of FPTP. How much power your vote has to decide the complexion of the next government depends on your postcode.

        And btw, the two people who run electoralcalculus .co .uk, are you absolutely certain they are not CIA-financed stooges? I’m not.

      2. As the Tory and Labour Parties merge and their policies become even more idistinguishable, it will not be surprising that MSM will lend support to Starmer, who has become ‘the acceptable face’ of the Labour Party, garnering even more support than his mentor, Tony Blair. Socialism has been successfully eliminated from English politics as we become a one state autocracy, similar to USA. Polls may change marginally, but freedom of choice has been removed from the ballot box, ensuring that once again voting can change nothing.

      3. qwertboi – I was under the impression that they adjusted for factors such as this (hence the difference between the results given for 2 similar vote share figures when applied to different parties) but even if you were right then how do you explain the MRP polling results which do take a multitude of factors such as this into consideration?

        CIA??? I see that you’ve been down your 🐰🕳️ again playing with yourself again. 😏

      4. SteveH

        Red team better than blue team!

        Nah,na,na, nah,na!

        With barely a cig paper difference in terms of policies, why do you even care?

      5. Andy – Is that playground nonsense really the best you could manage. What are you actually hoping to achieve by doing all you can within your limited powers to ensure Labour lose to the Conservatives.

  9. I’d be interested in knowing the percentage of people polled who would ACTUALLY vote for either. We know that just 21% of the electorate voted for Blair in 2005, even though Blairites tell us he was immensely popular. I have a feeling that Starmer currently would get about 16% of the electorate vote in an election that will see the lowest turnout ever. Under the bizarre UK system, this might even be sufficient to give Mr Woodentop an overall majority of seats in the HoC. More an illustration of a dreadfully broken system, than an endorsement of his non-policies,but I’m sure he would say (or rather read from a script prepared for him) that this gave him a mandate!

  10. “LEFT activists in Welsh Labour are planning to devolve the national party’s rule book to Wales at the party’s conference this weekend in Llandudno.

    “The Welsh Labour Grassroots (WLG) group want to bring clear, red water between the party in Wales and the Keir Starmer-led British party….here

    See SteieiH, the ‘new party’ might have nothing to do with Jeremy’s Peace & Justice Project. After all, we have a party to disable, before a ‘new’ one can serve a good purpose.

    1. qwertboi – Or in other words you and your little band of comrades are acknowledging that you are incapable of putting forward a policy platform that competes with Labour’s. What is it that you are offering the electorate, or are you still trying to work out something that will sound even vaguely credible.

      1. The success of non-labour real left candidates is not to form a Government, but to reduce support and votes for Starmer, or whichever CIA-backed name is leader at the time of a general election.

      2. qwertboi – I’m sorry but I think that you are deluding yourself. You literally have nothing to offer the electorate
        Which of Labour’s policies are you so keen to block, or are you still working that one out?

      1. ,,,,,and here is the full transcript of today’s speech by Keir’ Starmer’s to the Welsh Labour Conference
        “Today, I can announce that the next Labour government will return power over its economic destiny to Wales. The decision-making role for the Welsh government on structural funds, will be restored. It’s time for Wales to take back control.”

  11. Yet AGAIN the wee gobshite is persisting with his claim that keef is different to the toerags .

    STILL point-blank refuses to explain how, even after almost three years of smarmerist labour not telling anyone of a policy of theirs, and either abstaining, or openly supporting, current/future toerag policy.

    What are the smarmerists offering people like me, wee fella? What are they offering the homeless? The disenfranchised? The unemployed? The unpaid carer? The ordinary working Joe on a pittance? The environment?

    The sum total of fuck-all. That’s what. Not even a measly 1% of what Corbyn was offering, but you bull up keef’s miracle green paper as though it’s a fucking panacea, and THE most radical change to UK politics in history.

    It’s nothing of the sort. You hear me?

    Nothing of the sort So take your “credible alternative” AND CRAM IT.

    1. Toffee – Are we to take that this is your confession that you and your comrades don’t have anything credible to offer the electorate.

  12. Meanwhile, since the silly Three Men in a Boat Nord Stream story has been laughed out of court, a new crazy story seems to be about to be floated (no pun intended).
    Business Insider has a story that says that a Greek-registered ship named Minerva Julie spent a week waiting around the pipeline area shortly before the attack, implying that this was how the dastardly attack was mounted.
    Minerva Julie is owned by a company called Minerva Marine, a maritime transport company. The ship transports oil or chemicals. Minerva marine is owned by a Greek businessman called Thanasis Martinos, who may get a little cheesed off if the western media starts pushing the idea floated in Business Insider.
    Seymour Hersh has really shown them all up for the unprincipled fools that they are.

  13. Just read that Bill Tidy’s passed at the age of 89. An all-round good egg.

    Used to love the fosdyke saga as a nipper !Usually an elder brother or me dad would read it for me – but I was too young to fully understand it.).

    RIP, Bill. 🌹

    1. When I lived in Manchester I didn’t find that the streets were paved with meat pies.

  14. Not been on SB for ages but I’ve come round to thinking Starmer is the real deal. A bunch of angry pensioners on here aren’t going to change that either way.
    JC has disappeared into a cloud of confusing statements, like a really old Baby Yoda from Star Wars.

  15. Labour’s 2019 defeat was indeed the worst since 1935 in terms of seats but not in votes which remained credibly high.

    The explanation is to be found in how the single-member, simple-majority electoral system works for or against a party with focused gains or losses in support. Compare the vote/seat-won ratio of the SNP to the Liberal Party.

    In the case of Labour in 2019 two factors interacted.

    1. The long-term decline of local parties in ‘Red Wall’ seats as vote-creating organisations. I helped in one such constituency; its debilitated organisation had to be experienced to be believed. Since 2019 it has been smashed at local government level. My guess is that this process is ongoing.

    2. The policy of a second referendum which opened the way for the Johnson-led Conservatives. This was a suicidal policy, soon dropped once Corbyn had resigned but the damage had been done. (I voted to remain in the EU but accepted the referendum result.)

    The rest is history.

    1. Indeed. Labour’s 200+,000 ‘dearly departed’.members will have reduced Labour’s vote-harnessing ability considerably. Even before the MSM shamed itself with Covid misinformation and lies, corbyn had found that the Daily Mail’s vehemence increased his support In key seats. Since then, of.course, Ukraine and Cost of Living reporting hardly restores them.

  16. You can tell the Nazi Labour Party are rattled by the way it sends the Starmer Fan Boys on here to try and polish the turd…..

    Good try Chaps…..

    1. baz2001 – …..and the credible alternative that you are offering the electorate is?

      1. baz2001 – …..and the credible alternative that you are offering the electorate is?

        Answer these and gain yourself some credibility, because you’ve had none since you began posting here and won’t do until you provide us with something that keefs’ offering that’s both credible AND alternative.

        So then….

        What’s keefs’ credible alternative to the privatisation of the NHS?

        MORE privatisation. MORE outsourcing.?

        What’s keefs’ credible alternative to continued private ownership of mail, rail & the utilitiy companies?

        Because he’s already told us: “Nowhere does that say renationalisation”

        Or how about his credible alternative to the toerags’ plans to force the disabled into work?

        I’ll tell you what they are.

        The same as his credible alternative to his (universally panned) six tests for brexit…Which ended up becoming:“We’ll make brexit work (as well as the disabled).

        The falsely perceived “choice” between smarmerism and outright toryism is akin to one between gonorrhea and syphilis.

        Unless, of course, you can convince us all otherwise…?


      2. The Monster Raving Loony Party….You’ll be their pin up. I can see it now, giant posters with you and your polishing cloth.

  17. ” the more voters saw of him, the worse Labour did

    10 pledges and 10 refusals to say when he invited former secret services employee Sue Gray to be his Chief of Staff.

    “Not improper” my arse . Labour leaders are not Trilateral Commission members or hirers of spooks Israeli or British.

      1. goldbach – and the significance that you are attaching to this ‘startling revelation’ is? 🙄

      2. You seem to be very keen on amassing numbers, so I thought that you might like a couple more of them. Sorry that they startled you.

  18. Toffee – Well, what?

    Followed later by:

    Well Labour’s current policy platform is undeniably a considerable improvement on what Sunak is offering and an even bigger improvement on the zilch that you and your comrades are offering.

    Is it indeed?

    More NHS privatisation. SAME as the rags. No ifs, no buts.

    NO renationalisation of mail rail and utilities. Same as the rags. No ifs, no buts.


    And now keef has NOTHING to offer.

    But once AGAIN you default to your employment rights bill aka your“miracle” green paper

    Partly, PARTLY what Corbyn had ALREADY offered. And by the time smarmer and co get to #10 (IF they do) will ONLY look PARTLY like it does NOW.


    1. Toffee,

      Every school in the Country has a formal written down policy on bullying.

      Problem is, which steveH does not and will not ever understand because it does not suit his woke persona, putting it into effect. Because when you raise a bullying issue the standard bureaucratic response is always along the lines of ‘well, we have anti-bullying policy in this school. Look, here’s several sheets of paper with it written down in formal language.’

      As though the existence of a piece of paper and the writing on it makes it impossible for bullying to exist. And when confronted with reality they hide behind the piece of paper as though its existence is sufficient in itself to to make the problem go away. for the most part there is no effective wider systemic process for putting the policy into practical effect when a breach arises.

      Anyone who has studied and practiced Industrial Relations and Human Resource Management (MA and over a decade of practical experience by the way) knows that the same problem exists with this proposed policy.

      This is because industrial relations in the UK is based on a very simplistic legal fallacy. which is at odds with reality.

      Which is that it considers the employing organisation as an individual in legal terms. This means that as far as employment legislation is concerned the contract of employment, which is the very basis of employment law in the UK, is between two individuals – the employee and the employer – who both have EQUAL amounts and level’s of power in the relationship between them.

      Any cursory and honest consideration of this notion that the resources enjoyed by an employing organisation (finances, time, personnel, legal access and so on) are available in equal measure to an employee would conclude this is rabbit out of a hat piece of fiction upon which to construct a legal contract.

      It puts a lot more power in the hands of the employing organisation – which is what employers are (ie organisations rather than an individual) then it does the individual employee. Even an individual employee who is a member of a Union.

      Because the first thing an employing organisation will do via its management structure in any dispute is remind individual employees, as individuals, that if they take industrial action, even via a legal ballot, they are breaking their individual contract of employment.

      Having personally been through and subject to this process – in which individuals are sent in one by one to face not just their own line manager but the two line management levels above – I can attest to the impact on undermining solidarity during a dispute.

      And, as a current article in Unherd observes:

      “Strikes are double-edged swords, which hurt those who deploy them. When a manager sacks or disciplines an employee, only the employee suffers, whereas workers who take industrial action may have to diminish their already slim resources in order to try to increment them. Strikes are also purely negative strategies, and trade unions largely defensive bodies. We’re a long way from peasants with pitchforks marching on the lord’s castle. Bosses have a number of positive ways of exercising power over their employees: firing them, slashing their pay, cutting their tea breaks, imposing longer hours, speeding up their work and so on. Unions, by contrast, have the single option of withdrawing their labour, which is hardly a revolutionary move. Like those who practise civil disobedience, all they can do is take a stand and cry “Enough!”, aware that they will then be travestied as wreckers and hooligans who are holding the country to ransom.”

      But don’t take my word for it consult the acknowledged expert the late Lord Bill Wedderburn.

      Oh! Hang on though. Best not. That course of action has already been designated as an act of bullying by this site’s resident woke troll steveH.

      Nevertheless, in the terms which steveH argues his case on this point unless Starmer’s Labour Party is going to address this very basic built in legal fiction and its practical effects the policy steveH is ignorantly waxing lyrical about as being the equivalent of the Oracle is worth diddly squat.

      For snowflakes like steveH that means it won’t do what you, steveH, says it will on the tin.

      Like the bullying policies of too many schools.

      And we have not even addressed the record of Starmer’s Labour Party in terms of adhering to and delivering when it comes to the issue of rules, legal or otherwise.

      With people like Angela Smith, among others, allowed back into the Party recently well within the five year period the Party Rules state is the minimum term barring any member who has stood in an election against the Labour Party.

      Compare and contrast that with the way many ordinary members, including Jewish members, are pursued out of the Party on the basis of RETROSPECTIVELY having shared a platform with or agreed with an organisation now proscribed BEFORE it was proscribed.

      No sensible person would trust this bunch of charlatans to do what it says on the tin (even when, as in this case, what it says on the tin is worthless drivel in all practical senses) as far as you could throw a grand piano.

      So right now the question is has steveH got a coherent evidence based argument to substantiate all his big talk?

      Or is he going to run away again with some pathetic excuse involving some playground level one liner which includes words like ‘delusional’ etc with nothing to substantiate them?

  19. More news on the rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran – The agreement does not simply cover the exchange of diplomats. It covers cooperation in a range of areas from cultural to technological. It also includes the purchase by both SA and Iran of the most advanced air defence systems from Russia, and the purchase of the most advanced fighter jets by Iran. The conclusion must be that there are guarantees that Iran will scale back its uranium enrichment programme to levels which are comfortably within the energy generation range, so allaying any possible concerns from SA. This could have knock on effect regarding Israel’s perception that there could be a “threat” from Iran.
    Oh, and the UAE and Qatar were in on brokering the negotiations, which is another reason to think that the war in Yemen may be on the way out.

    1. This deal is insane. And I don’t mean in a bad way.

      We’re going to be seeing peace between Shia and Sunni. This is massive. And it’s all down to the Chinese. That it’s ruined the game for America and others in West Asia is all the better.

      Chinese are on a roll diplomatically. They’ve just appointed a new Head of the PLA. He’s currently sanctioned by the US, so if they want to talk to him, they’ve gotta drop the sanctions.

      It’s a wonderful time to be alive

      1. We’re going to be seeing peace between Shia and Sunni.

        Don’t count your chickens, NVLA.

        The yanks’ll have something up their sleeves. And I fully expect the Saudis will remain complicit in their not-so-secret accord of funding the Pakistani nuclear programme in return for maintaining a proxy nuclear arsenal –
        pointed not just at India, but also at Iran.

        Ever since I found out that was the case, I’ve been convinced that any nuclear conflict in the middle east and South Asia won’t be preempted by israel on Iran, or India on Pakistan; it will be Pakistan on Iran – quite probably by Saudi request.

      2. “The yanks’ll have something up their sleeves.”
        You’re certainly right about that, but a “colour revolution” in Saudi seems highly improbable to me.
        And I think that we are past the scenario that you paint regarding Pakistan. China is very busy working on its diplomatic moves with Pakistan, and there could easily be a move to get Pakistan into the SCO soon. It’s a matter of whether or not the US can destabilise Pakistan even further than it already has.

      3. One thing that they have up their sleeve, and not at all well concealed, is Georgia.
        Looks like they are heading for a coup in Tbilisi.
        Lunatics in the ranks of the “protestors” are demanding an attack on Russia.
        Of course, the US neocons couldn’t care less about the people of Georgia.
        They are solely interested in their elaborate game of geopolitical chess, and the Georgians are the pawns.

      4. As analysed here:

        “The Western-backed activists, who took to the streets with EU flags against the “foreign agents” bill, were actually marching against the Georgian version of a law enacted by the USA in 1939.

        In summary, the Western-backed activists, who took to the streets with EU flags against the “foreign agents” bill, were actually marching against the Georgian version of a law enacted by the USA in 1939, even though they were shouting slogans against Russia. Moreover, the American version of the bill applies not only to legal entities, but also to individuals.

        It was remarkable that activists sang anti-Russian slogans along with anti-government slogans and wore the flags of the United States, the European Union and Ukraine.

        The trigger for all these actions was the bill “On the transparency of foreign influence” adopted by the Georgian parliament. The law stipulates that organisations that receive more than 20 percent of their funds abroad will be registered as “foreign agents” or face large fines.”

        This practice of conveniently applying or not applying rules and laws to suit is one which sounds somewhat familiar. Just where have we encountered this before?

        Perhaps someone could remind us?

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: