|
Post by Merseymike on Jul 21, 2021 10:55:48 GMT
Labour need a reasonably strong LibDem option to appear credible to wavering Tories who won't vote Labour.The problem Labour has is that it does not appear to be making inroads into the former-Labour voters motivated by Brexit, and that it is not motivating a section of its 2019 membership who are more likely to stay voting Labour if anything, but may well decide not to bother at all. The problem is that the sort of person who would be willing to vote Lib Dem but not Labour nationally is increasingly the sort of person who Labour needs to be winning over directly now they’ve lost so many other voters to the Conservatives. For example, in 2017 Corbyn’s Labour got 25% of the1/9th most ‘Libertarian right’ section of the electorate, and Starmer’s Labour seems like it will be even more reliant on winning over these traditionally not Labour voters. But they are exactly the sort of people who would be lockdown sceptics, and Starmer's approach really doesn't appeal to them at all
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Jul 21, 2021 10:55:49 GMT
Like it or not, we aren't in a position to challenge in many Labour seats or Labour targets. (There are also a few Conservative seats where I reckon we'd be a stronger challenge than Labour, but we're in 3rd place so won't). And I think Ed Davey is pretty clear on trying to replicate Ashdown's strategy rather than trying to present himself as an alternative PM/LOTO, so I expect any campaign to reflect that. The danger for Labour would be if a national rise in LD VI ate into Labour among the less well-informed in no-hope areas for us. That's fixable with proper campaigning and dare I say bar charts. Relatively high scores for the Greens would worry me more if I was Starmer - I doubt any of them would vote Conservative so I don't see it peeling off Tory votes in Lab targets, and there are no Con-Green marginals that might help with the HoC arithmetic in the way that Con-LD ones do. 6-7% Green VI looks like about 2-3% lost votes for Labour to me I rather agree re- the Green vote , but in reality I would be surprised to see the Greens exceed 3% in a GE - particularly if national polls tightened in the way being suggested by this Survation poll. Any problems with the LDs are likely to be confined to specific constituencies - particularly a handful of seats where a 2019 LD second place is likely to have been an aberration due to local factors relevant at the time but no longer so. I would expect Labour to recover its position as the main challenger in Finchley & Golders Green and the Cities of London & Westminster. The seat of Wimbledon is much more difficult to call - in that the LDs came very close there in 2019 yet Labour did hold the seat 1997 - 2005 and performed strongly there in 2017.Personally I fail to see the case for Labour voters switching in that seat to LDs for tactical reasons.We seem to be doing quite well in Wimbledon longer term than just the 2019 GE, with 6 councillors in Merton (all I think in Wimbledon constituency) - pretty sure it was zero 1997-2005 (I actually helped with the 97 Lab campaign when I lived in Mitcham due to zero LD presence in Merton). But we did have an excellent candidate in 2019 and I'm not sure he'll stand again, possibly for health reasons.
|
|
|
Post by Merseymike on Jul 21, 2021 10:57:25 GMT
Wait and see if this is not an outlier, though, as the YouGov poll on the same day saw a 13% Tory lead. The Yougov fieldwork is a few days older though. Survation uses UK - rather than GB - data. On a GB basis ,therefore, the figures would be Con 40% Lab 36% LD 11%.A 36% GB poll figure matches what Labour managed under Blair in 2005 and is a bit hihjer than obtained under Kinnock in 1992.Beyond that , the loss of Scotland post-2015 has effectively chipped circa 2% off Labour's GB vote share - so that 36% today is effectively the equivalent of 38% pre-2015 as far as the party's strength in England & Wales is concerned. Which makes me even more convinced that this is an outlier, if I'm honest.
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Jul 21, 2021 11:02:47 GMT
The Yougov fieldwork is a few days older though. Survation uses UK - rather than GB - data. On a GB basis ,therefore, the figures would be Con 40% Lab 36% LD 11%.A 36% GB poll figure matches what Labour managed under Blair in 2005 and is a bit hihjer than obtained under Kinnock in 1992.Beyond that , the loss of Scotland post-2015 has effectively chipped circa 2% off Labour's GB vote share - so that 36% today is effectively the equivalent of 38% pre-2015 as far as the party's strength in England & Wales is concerned. Which makes me even more convinced that this is an outlier, if I'm honest. Comres also recorded a 5% Con lead last week. Yougov has pretty consistently been showing bigger Tory leads for months - there appears to be a 'house effect' there.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,607
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 21, 2021 11:06:48 GMT
I wonder if the clear attempt by Johnson to avoid the rules imposed on so many people in the "pingdemic", coupled with the general chaos of "freedom day" will turn out to be a turning point for this hapless government? (or even a watershed, since when you reach a watershed you then go downwards for an extended period). I wonder if Labour can manage to get "the Johnson variant" to stick? Starmer is still not seen as PM and that is their big problem Wait and see if this is not an outlier, though, as the YouGov poll on the same day saw a 13% Tory lead. Taken earlier though, and YouGov are well known for boosting the Tories when they are doing well.
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Jul 21, 2021 11:16:41 GMT
I rather agree re- the Green vote , but in reality I would be surprised to see the Greens exceed 3% in a GE - particularly if national polls tightened in the way being suggested by this Survation poll. Any problems with the LDs are likely to be confined to specific constituencies - particularly a handful of seats where a 2019 LD second place is likely to have been an aberration due to local factors relevant at the time but no longer so. I would expect Labour to recover its position as the main challenger in Finchley & Golders Green and the Cities of London & Westminster. The seat of Wimbledon is much more difficult to call - in that the LDs came very close there in 2019 yet Labour did hold the seat 1997 - 2005 and performed strongly there in 2017.Personally I fail to see the case for Labour voters switching in that seat to LDs for tactical reasons.We seem to be doing quite well in Wimbledon longer term than just the 2019 GE, with 6 councillors in Merton (all I think in Wimbledon constituency) - pretty sure it was zero 1997-2005 (I actually helped with the 97 Lab campaign when I lived in Mitcham due to zero LD presence in Merton). But we did have an excellent candidate in 2019 and I'm not sure he'll stand again, possibly for health reasons. Labour's strength in Wimbledon is likely to be too recent to justify their voters switching on a tactical basis. Too many will recall having had a Labour MP and the strong 2017 performance there. For different reasons, Carshalton & Wallington could also be interesting. When the seat was created in 1974 , it was seen as a Tory/Labour marginal with the Tory - Robert Carr - having been forced to move from his former Mitcham seat due to boundary changes. Despite that, he was not thought to be safe in his new seat - though he won by 5,500 or so in Feb 1974 with Labour reducing his majority to 3,500 in October. Labour remained the main anti-Tory challenger there until the Alliance surge in the 1980s , and for some reason failed to recover its position in 1997.The LDs benefiited from Labour tactical voting on a considerable scale - particularly after winning the seat. I just wonder whether the LD loss there in 2019 might cause that tactical vote to unwind and switch back to Labour - in a way similar to what happened at Portsmouth South in 2017 following the LD loss there in 2015.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jul 21, 2021 11:32:57 GMT
''Survation’s latest political polling, fieldwork 19th-20th July, sees an 11 point Conservative lead a week ago cut to just 4 points.
The Conservatives are today on 39%, down 4 points from last week, and Labour on 35%, up 3 points.''
I wonder if the clear attempt by Johnson to avoid the rules imposed on so many people in the "pingdemic", coupled with the general chaos of "freedom day" will turn out to be a turning point for this hapless government? (or even a watershed, since when you reach a watershed you then go downwards for an extended period). I wonder if Labour can manage to get "the Johnson variant" to stick? Starmer is still not seen as PM and that is their big problem The crucial point of the watershed is not the going 'down', that is implicit, and does go on 'going down' until the sea level is reached; the crucial point, is that the water 'goes down' in different directions to different river systems frpm that water shed!
|
|
|
Post by froome on Jul 21, 2021 12:07:11 GMT
Like it or not, we aren't in a position to challenge in many Labour seats or Labour targets. (There are also a few Conservative seats where I reckon we'd be a stronger challenge than Labour, but we're in 3rd place so won't). And I think Ed Davey is pretty clear on trying to replicate Ashdown's strategy rather than trying to present himself as an alternative PM/LOTO, so I expect any campaign to reflect that. The danger for Labour would be if a national rise in LD VI ate into Labour among the less well-informed in no-hope areas for us. That's fixable with proper campaigning and dare I say bar charts. Relatively high scores for the Greens would worry me more if I was Starmer - I doubt any of them would vote Conservative so I don't see it peeling off Tory votes in Lab targets, and there are no Con-Green marginals that might help with the HoC arithmetic in the way that Con-LD ones do. 6-7% Green VI looks like about 2-3% lost votes for Labour to me I rather agree re- the Green vote , but in reality I would be surprised to see the Greens exceed 3% in a GE - particularly if national polls tightened in the way being suggested by this Survation poll. Any problems with the LDs are likely to be confined to specific constituencies - particularly a handful of seats where a 2019 LD second place is likely to have been an aberration due to local factors relevant at the time but no longer so. I would expect Labour to recover its position as the main challenger in Finchley & Golders Green and the Cities of London & Westminster. The seat of Wimbledon is much more difficult to call - in that the LDs came very close there in 2019 yet Labour did hold the seat 1997 - 2005 and performed strongly there in 2017.Personally I fail to see the case for Labour voters switching in that seat to LDs for tactical reasons. I actually disagree about that aspect of the Green vote, and it is a mistake all parties (including mine) do make. There are plenty of Green-Conservative switchers, as I've found every time I've canvassed for the party. While we would probably take more from Labour overall, our vote can come and does from all sides of the political spectrum.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,607
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Jul 21, 2021 12:12:30 GMT
For different reasons, Carshalton & Wallington could also be interesting. When the seat was created in 1974 , it was seen as a Tory/Labour marginal with the Tory - Robert Carr - having been forced to move from his former Mitcham seat due to boundary changes. Despite that, he was not thought to be safe in his new seat - though he won by 5,500 or so in Feb 1974 with Labour reducing his majority to 3,500 in October. Labour remained the main anti-Tory challenger there until the Alliance surge in the 1980s , and for some reason failed to recover its position in 1997.The LDs benefiited from Labour tactical voting on a considerable scale - particularly after winning the seat. I just wonder whether the LD loss there in 2019 might cause that tactical vote to unwind and switch back to Labour - in a way similar to what happened at Portsmouth South in 2017 following the LD loss there in 2015. LibDems only just lost the seat in 2019, so that alone has to place a question mark over a big Labour revival. Plus the latter has been in gradual decline in their "traditional" stronghold of the former council estates in St Helier, as with quite a few similar places.
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Jul 21, 2021 12:17:51 GMT
I rather agree re- the Green vote , but in reality I would be surprised to see the Greens exceed 3% in a GE - particularly if national polls tightened in the way being suggested by this Survation poll. Any problems with the LDs are likely to be confined to specific constituencies - particularly a handful of seats where a 2019 LD second place is likely to have been an aberration due to local factors relevant at the time but no longer so. I would expect Labour to recover its position as the main challenger in Finchley & Golders Green and the Cities of London & Westminster. The seat of Wimbledon is much more difficult to call - in that the LDs came very close there in 2019 yet Labour did hold the seat 1997 - 2005 and performed strongly there in 2017.Personally I fail to see the case for Labour voters switching in that seat to LDs for tactical reasons. I actually disagree about that aspect of the Green vote, and it is a mistake all parties (including mine) do make. There are plenty of Green-Conservative switchers, as I've found every time I've canvassed for the party. While we would probably take more from Labour overall, our vote can come and does from all sides of the political spectrum. I don't disagree - and indeed know of several Blue tinged Greens. Here in Norwich the Green Party succeeded in getting two County councillors elected at successive elections for the same ward - only to see both subsequently defect to the Tories. Neither resigned their seats. At national level ,however, were the Green vote to be squeezed from 6%/7% to 3% , the bulk of it - say 70% - 75% - would fall in nLabour's direction with a few also switching to the LDs
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Jul 21, 2021 12:24:17 GMT
For different reasons, Carshalton & Wallington could also be interesting. When the seat was created in 1974 , it was seen as a Tory/Labour marginal with the Tory - Robert Carr - having been forced to move from his former Mitcham seat due to boundary changes. Despite that, he was not thought to be safe in his new seat - though he won by 5,500 or so in Feb 1974 with Labour reducing his majority to 3,500 in October. Labour remained the main anti-Tory challenger there until the Alliance surge in the 1980s , and for some reason failed to recover its position in 1997.The LDs benefiited from Labour tactical voting on a considerable scale - particularly after winning the seat. I just wonder whether the LD loss there in 2019 might cause that tactical vote to unwind and switch back to Labour - in a way similar to what happened at Portsmouth South in 2017 following the LD loss there in 2015. LibDems only just lost the seat in 2019, so that alone has to place a question mark over a big Labour revival. Plus the latter has been in gradual decline in their "traditional" stronghold of the former council estates in St Helier as in quite a few similar places. On the other hand, Labour might now have the potential to poll much better in the more middle class areas within the seat than was true back in the 1970s.I have little doubt that the headline voting figures understate the real underlying Labour vote there.Had Labour managed to recover sufficiently to win there in 1997 , it might still be Labour-held today!
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,750
|
Post by iain on Jul 21, 2021 12:48:52 GMT
Wait and see if this is not an outlier, though, as the YouGov poll on the same day saw a 13% Tory lead. Taken earlier though, and YouGov are well known for boosting the Tories when they are doing well. YouGov seems to exaggerate trends, whatever they are - recently they have been the best pollster for Tories and Greens, and the worst for the Lib Dems. Post-Euro elections they were the best for the Lib Dems and worst for the Tories.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Jul 21, 2021 13:45:44 GMT
LibDems only just lost the seat in 2019, so that alone has to place a question mark over a big Labour revival. Plus the latter has been in gradual decline in their "traditional" stronghold of the former council estates in St Helier as in quite a few similar places. On the other hand, Labour might now have the potential to poll much better in the more middle class areas within the seat than was true back in the 1970s.I have little doubt that the headline voting figures understate the real underlying Labour vote there.Had Labour managed to recover sufficiently to win there in 1997 , it might still be Labour-held today! I think you are ignoring the evidence of local election results in both Merton and Sutton. In LB Sutton the LDs dominate local politics and have done so for decades with the Conservatives as main opposition and Labour (as The Bishop notes) confined to the St Helier estate and retreating there in the face of UKIP and the Tories. Whatever happened before 1997 there's a strong LD local party machine there and a weak Labour one; it would be very hard for Labour there to oust LDs as the main alternative to Conservative without a strong national trend. In Merton Labour are strong but overwhelmingly in Mitcham & Morden. In Wimbledon the Tories are the biggest party by far for councillors but at the last locals the LDs took 7 seats to Labour's 3 (one LD to Lab defector since.) Firstly that is something the local LDs can dangle in front of Wimbledon voters as evidence of being the main challenger (along with the 2019 result), secondly it shows the local LDs are active (20 years ago the council was an LD-free zone) and finally this is classic Blue Wall (sorry) territory where Con-LD switching is plausible. What have Labour got to offer the tactical voter other than results from what will be almost two decades ago by the next GE? Of course there was their 2017 result but the trouble with that is that even at the height of Corbynmania and with a near 10% rise in their vote here the Tories still got in with c.11 % point majority, suggesting that for the time being that is Labour's ceiling short of a national surge bigger than Corbyn's (which would merely restore the 2017 result) and probably appealing to a different demographic. Conversely the LD share in 2019 was higher than Labour's in 2017, cut the Tory majority to 1.2%, and still with a healthy 23% Labour vote share to squeeze. The bar charts write themselves and it will surely be a top LD target seat in a GE campaign while Labour not only has better prospects but also surely needs to pitch its national message to a very different target group.
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,854
|
Post by jamie on Jul 21, 2021 14:45:21 GMT
I actually disagree about that aspect of the Green vote, and it is a mistake all parties (including mine) do make. There are plenty of Green-Conservative switchers, as I've found every time I've canvassed for the party. While we would probably take more from Labour overall, our vote can come and does from all sides of the political spectrum. I would differentiate between the local and national Green vote. The local vote is Labour leaning but surprisingly diverse, including a lot of NOTA as well as Conservatives where success is based on local activity. Conversely, the national vote, while somewhat more economically moderate than Labour, is otherwise very similar to the Labour vote and clearly strongly favours the party if it switches from the Greens. This was even more true of the Green vote in 2015, and may be similarly the case this time.
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,750
|
Post by iain on Jul 21, 2021 14:46:32 GMT
On the other hand, Labour might now have the potential to poll much better in the more middle class areas within the seat than was true back in the 1970s.I have little doubt that the headline voting figures understate the real underlying Labour vote there.Had Labour managed to recover sufficiently to win there in 1997 , it might still be Labour-held today! I think you are ignoring the evidence of local election results in both Merton and Sutton. In LB Sutton the LDs dominate local politics and have done so for decades with the Conservatives as main opposition and Labour (as The Bishop notes) confined to the St Helier estate and retreating there in the face of UKIP and the Tories. Whatever happened before 1997 there's a strong LD local party machine there and a weak Labour one; it would be very hard for Labour there to oust LDs as the main alternative to Conservative without a strong national trend. In Merton Labour are strong but overwhelmingly in Mitcham & Morden. In Wimbledon the Tories are the biggest party by far for councillors but at the last locals the LDs took 7 seats to Labour's 3 (one LD to Lab defector since.) Firstly that is something the local LDs can dangle in front of Wimbledon voters as evidence of being the main challenger (along with the 2019 result), secondly it shows the local LDs are active (20 years ago the council was an LD-free zone) and finally this is classic Blue Wall (sorry) territory where Con-LD switching is plausible. What have Labour got to offer the tactical voter other than results from what will be almost two decades ago by the next GE? Of course there was their 2017 result but the trouble with that is that even at the height of Corbynmania and with a near 10% rise in their vote here the Tories still got in with c.11 % point majority, suggesting that for the time being that is Labour's ceiling short of a national surge bigger than Corbyn's (which would merely restore the 2017 result) and probably appealing to a different demographic. Conversely the LD share in 2019 was higher than Labour's in 2017, cut the Tory majority to 1.2%, and still with a healthy 23% Labour vote share to squeeze. The bar charts write themselves and it will surely be a top LD target seat in a GE campaign while Labour not only has better prospects but also surely needs to pitch its national message to a very different target group. There's also been a Lib Dem gain from Labour in a by-election in Wimbledon.
|
|
|
Post by justin124 on Jul 21, 2021 15:44:25 GMT
On the other hand, Labour might now have the potential to poll much better in the more middle class areas within the seat than was true back in the 1970s.I have little doubt that the headline voting figures understate the real underlying Labour vote there.Had Labour managed to recover sufficiently to win there in 1997 , it might still be Labour-held today! I think you are ignoring the evidence of local election results in both Merton and Sutton. In LB Sutton the LDs dominate local politics and have done so for decades with the Conservatives as main opposition and Labour (as The Bishop notes) confined to the St Helier estate and retreating there in the face of UKIP and the Tories. Whatever happened before 1997 there's a strong LD local party machine there and a weak Labour one; it would be very hard for Labour there to oust LDs as the main alternative to Conservative without a strong national trend. In Merton Labour are strong but overwhelmingly in Mitcham & Morden. In Wimbledon the Tories are the biggest party by far for councillors but at the last locals the LDs took 7 seats to Labour's 3 (one LD to Lab defector since.) Firstly that is something the local LDs can dangle in front of Wimbledon voters as evidence of being the main challenger (along with the 2019 result), secondly it shows the local LDs are active (20 years ago the council was an LD-free zone) and finally this is classic Blue Wall (sorry) territory where Con-LD switching is plausible. What have Labour got to offer the tactical voter other than results from what will be almost two decades ago by the next GE? Of course there was their 2017 result but the trouble with that is that even at the height of Corbynmania and with a near 10% rise in their vote here the Tories still got in with c.11 % point majority, suggesting that for the time being that is Labour's ceiling short of a national surge bigger than Corbyn's (which would merely restore the 2017 result) and probably appealing to a different demographic. Conversely the LD share in 2019 was higher than Labour's in 2017, cut the Tory majority to 1.2%, and still with a healthy 23% Labour vote share to squeeze. The bar charts write themselves and it will surely be a top LD target seat in a GE campaign while Labour not only has better prospects but also surely needs to pitch its national message to a very different target group. Whilst all of that is true, Wimbledon still has more of a Labour history than did Portsmouth South in 2017.The 1997 election saw Labour win from third place in several seats - Hastings & Rye , Enfield Southgate and Aberconway come to mind. Labour has also twice won Cambridge from third place - ie in 1992 and 2015.A good local party machine can also achieve success at local elections which fails to be translated into success at Parliamentary elections. I believe the LDs have a formidable machine in Portsmouth - but are no longer in serious contention in Portsmouth South.The party has also fallen back a long way in Watford which has returned to being a Tory/Labour marginal. St Albans,of course, has been a very different.I certainly do not see Labour winning Wimbledon unless it is enjoying a clear poll lead nationally - and am not predicting that at this stage. If, however, by 2023 /2024 we see clear national Labour leads of 5% or so, then the seat could well be in play.
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,563
|
Post by European Lefty on Jul 21, 2021 16:21:33 GMT
I actually disagree about that aspect of the Green vote, and it is a mistake all parties (including mine) do make. There are plenty of Green-Conservative switchers, as I've found every time I've canvassed for the party. While we would probably take more from Labour overall, our vote can come and does from all sides of the political spectrum. I would differentiate between the local and national Green vote. The local vote is Labour leaning but surprisingly diverse, including a lot of NOTA as well as Conservatives where success is based on local activity. Conversely, the national vote, while somewhat more economically moderate than Labour, is otherwise very similar to the Labour vote and clearly strongly favours the party if it switches from the Greens. This was even more true of the Green vote in 2015, and may be similarly the case this time. There are also plenty of "cultural Tories" who grow up and suddenly realise they've quite left-wing. But because they'd could never, ever vote Labour many of them vote Green instead. Those voters are not particularly likely to go to Labour if the Green vote gets squeezed
|
|
iain
Lib Dem
Posts: 10,750
|
Survation
Jul 21, 2021 19:59:02 GMT
via mobile
Post by iain on Jul 21, 2021 19:59:02 GMT
I would differentiate between the local and national Green vote. The local vote is Labour leaning but surprisingly diverse, including a lot of NOTA as well as Conservatives where success is based on local activity. Conversely, the national vote, while somewhat more economically moderate than Labour, is otherwise very similar to the Labour vote and clearly strongly favours the party if it switches from the Greens. This was even more true of the Green vote in 2015, and may be similarly the case this time. There are also plenty of "cultural Tories" who grow up and suddenly realise they've quite left-wing. But because they'd could never, ever vote Labour many of them vote Green instead. Those voters are not particularly likely to go to Labour if the Green vote gets squeezed I’m not sure how true that is generally really - possibly in Stroud due to the Greens basically subsuming the Lib Dems?
|
|
European Lefty
Labour
Can be bribed with salted liquorice
Posts: 5,563
|
Post by European Lefty on Jul 21, 2021 20:53:09 GMT
There are also plenty of "cultural Tories" who grow up and suddenly realise they've quite left-wing. But because they'd could never, ever vote Labour many of them vote Green instead. Those voters are not particularly likely to go to Labour if the Green vote gets squeezed I’m not sure how true that is generally really - possibly in Stroud due to the Greens basically subsuming the Lib Dems? Stroud is certainly one place but I would argue that the Forest of Dean, parts of Devon and Somerset and various other are showing evidence of a similar phenomenon (and it is also part of the reason - although admittedly a small part - why the Greens do so much better with middle-class young people than with young people from more working-class backgrounds who don't have the same uneasiness about voting Labour)
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Jul 21, 2021 22:04:47 GMT
I would differentiate between the local and national Green vote. The local vote is Labour leaning but surprisingly diverse, including a lot of NOTA as well as Conservatives where success is based on local activity. Conversely, the national vote, while somewhat more economically moderate than Labour, is otherwise very similar to the Labour vote and clearly strongly favours the party if it switches from the Greens. This was even more true of the Green vote in 2015, and may be similarly the case this time. There are also plenty of "cultural Tories" who grow up and suddenly realise they've quite left-wing. But because they'd could never, ever vote Labour many of them vote Green instead. Those voters are not particularly likely to go to Labour if the Green vote gets squeezed Much like the "my dad voted Labour" types who are achingly right-wing and sometimes realise it. Fascinating demographics. Wonder if there are any useful studies on this?
|
|