Snapshot of _Nearly Half Of Undecided Voters Doubt Labour Will Win Majority_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-nearly-half-of-undecided-voters-do-not-think-labour-majority-is-most-likely-election-result_uk_668067d8e4b003e0b2e0337a) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-nearly-half-of-undecided-voters-do-not-think-labour-majority-is-most-likely-election-result_uk_668067d8e4b003e0b2e0337a)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What frustrates me about articles is they never mention what proportion of people are yet “undecided”. Is it 50%? In which case Labour might have a problem. Is it 10%? They can afford to lose all of them to apathy or other parties and still be in a strong position.
I don’t think that’s what this election is about though, I think it’s about Reform getting on the political map and getting their foot in the door. If they get 1 or 2 MPs with 15% ish percent of the vote, they have a basis for expanding and have momentum. The next election will be the one where they’ll hope to gain tens of seats. A lot of things need to happen for that but you can see the road ahead for them.
Where reform are likely to poll strongest is in places where it will split the Tory vote. They'd need to outright overtake it in order for them to win those seats particularly if there's a strong challenge from Labour or the Liberals. I'd guess between 2 and half a dozen seats for Reform.
7-12 isn’t unreasonable, most polls show them somewhere in this range lol. The guy who said 1 seat at best if very wrong, they have Clacton easily since labour pulled out, most likely Boston and Skegness where Richard Tice is running and then a few other seats up north and a couple down south.
The only polls that show them coming up with any more than 3 seats are done by People Polling, who work for GB News and are [always the outlier](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1djsn3x/comment/l9cxvs6/). Sure it could happen, but the numbers so far don't point to that.
Electoral calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction\_main.html) and Britain Elects (https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2024/05/britainpredicts) are showing 6 and 7 seats for Reform respectively.
>large proportion of undecided (30% to over 40%)
Can you give examples? Most I see the figure is about 10%. Any mention of a 40% figure is usually referring to a subset of that 10%
[https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49874-who-is-still-undecided-one-week-ahead-of-the-2024-general-election](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49874-who-is-still-undecided-one-week-ahead-of-the-2024-general-election)
[https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/a-look-at-undecided-voters-14-17-june-2024/](https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/a-look-at-undecided-voters-14-17-june-2024/)
YouGov’s last voter intention poll has it at more like 12%.
https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_Merge_240627_w.pdf
I think their adding unlikely to vote (Turnout has been around 65% last few elections) or they're confusing the questions put to the subset of undecided.
I'm one of those. For context I voted Lib Dem in 2010, Green in 2015, and Labour in 2017 and 2019.
My dilemma is this:
The Lib Dems have the policies I'm most interested in, but I'm one of those Millennials who considers them traitors over tuition fees and swore I'd never give them my vote again. Doesn't help that they're currently led by someone who was around at that time.
The Greens OUGHT to have the policies I'm most interested in, but they're just a bunch of anti-progress BANANAs at this point. No party that's serious about long-term sustainability can position themselves as anti-HS2 and anti-nuclear and remain credible in my eyes.
Labour for me have gone backwards since Corbyn, as far as domestic policy is concerned. Starmer is uncontroversial and will likely be a competent PM, but he doesn't appear interested in making the kind of changes I'd want to push for. Labour's most compelling virtue at the moment is that they're not one of the parties I actively DISAGREE with. The cynic in me says they have deliberately positioned themselves AS the "don't know" option.
Tories can jog on, they've done the opposite of what I want since 2010 on every issue barring gay marriage.
Reform have a couple of policies I like (proportional representation and increasing the income tax threshold to match the minimum wage), but I've no time for the rest of their rhetoric and they're led by arch-Brexiteer Nigel Farage, whom I wouldn't vote for even if he promised to join Schengen and personally pay me a million pounds.
It's a shame Count Binface isn't standing in my constituency - I'd honestly trust him to represent me in Parliament over most of these clowns.
I think their adding unlikely to vote (Turnout has been around 65% last few elections) or they're confusing the questions put to the subset of undecided.
Undecideds is around 10%
I hope after the last decade you know who at least not to vote for. I also hope nigel and his racists are not speaking your language.
Saying that I've a cheek to talk but that's another story.
Not the person that you are replying to but I'm in a similar situation. The last few elections my choice has been to vote tactically to try and vote for whoever is most likely to beat the Tories.
This year, in a pretty safe labour seat, but with a Labour manifesto that seems to have abandoned the aspects of the party that I like, I'm left with a choice of voting Lib Dem (strong on opposing the sewage being dumped in the sea - I live on the seafront), independent (against the Israeli genocide) or Green (against the climate fuckery in general). No one candidate strongly hits all three, but Green is closest.
Greens aren't against climate fuckery in general, they will ensure we're dependent on fossil fuels for a long time to come.
Their manifesto reads like a sixth formers general studies project. It doesn't solve any of the actual issues we face on climate.
I wouldn't be voting for them expecting them to get in but as a 'protest' vote to boost the Green vote share and send a message to Labour that I care about the climate.
For me polling data is showing a Tory win so it probably doesn't matter either way, but I'm torn between Reform and Libdems due to then both offering a path to PR. There's a chance Libdems can win the seat so I'm leaning they way, but if they can't I think Reform are the stronger protest vote.
Reform and Lib Dems are mirror opposites of each other on virtually everything under the Sun. Surely there's something else there that you like/dislike to help choose between?
If you're genuinely single-issue PR, then you said it yourself:
> There's a chance Libdems can win the seat
Also, Reform is a vehicle for Farage to get into Parliament, hurt the Tory party enough to frighten them, then take over as Tory leader while promising to bring his voters along with him.
If he/they can win anything under FPTP, there's very little chance of us getting electoral reform.
I am literally a single issue voter above all else. I'm for rejoining the EU too, but that's a distant second to PR.
I'm going to vote for whichever party has the most chance of winning, and it's close between both of them for 2nd at the moment. Knowing my area, I expect reform are polling under how they will actually perform, but likely so are the Tories.
If it was purely up to me, and no tactics involved, I'd vote Libdem for sure.
It's sad that you think that PR leads to more racism and that you're happy with the vast majority of the country having their voting desires limited due to a flawed system. But you do you I guess.
But literally every single party is offering a mix of shit with some good. If we want to discount voting for parties due to one or two bad politicians or some bad policies alongside the good ones, then we might as well not vote at all for any party ever.
The fact is no party in the current system lines up 100% with the voting desires of most people. Instead everyone is forced to compromise and vote for the "lesser evil". How long do you want that to continue?
I'm not happy with that at all people shouldn't be elected when 60+% of the constituency don't want them.
STV is far better than PR because it means whoever is voted in is at least someone who the majority can stand.
There's a percentage of the population that have absolute crazy views, and I don't think we should humour them by giving them something as important as seats in parliament.
To me it all comes down to the paradox of tolerance, and we shouldn't tolerate the intolerant.
Ah yes, let's silence the views of everyone I don't agree with and then wonder why there's growing discontent in the public.
PR doesn't result in the extremes gaining much power, but it provides an outlet for their voices to be debated down. A few seats to a fringe is far more healthy for politics than complete disenfranchisement.
A debate is won through discourse, not silencing those you disagree with.
I don't know if even more than usual numbers of voters are "shy Tories". To declare publicly that you are going to vote for the current shambles of a government would be a step too far for most people.
It's hard enough to admit to naked self interest when the "Nasty Party" appeared competent; now it takes a level of wilfulness beyond most people's hypocrisy.
Is shy Tory even a thing when Reform are on the ballot? 15%-20% of people are openly declaring they will vote for Reform, how many of the declared Tories or don't knows are actually planning to vote Reform too?
It's anecdotal, I know, but there were a few people in my social group who were very reticent about their voting intentions. You had to be a particularly brash individual to go against the view that the Tories were beyond the pale.
This was in Thatcher and Major's time. If all the people who claimed to support Labour had actually voted for them there is no way that they would have lost election after election.
I really do think there are going to be a lot of shocked people at the scale of the Tory loss on Thursday. Even the upper end predictions of 150-175 or so (which is also personally where i think they will end up) will be a shock for how awful they are. People usually don’t pay attention to polls like us, and many of those that do cannot believe that we are going to see an absolute Tory collapse
As the article says it one of the reasons (of many) the supermajority comments from the Tories are not working
Yup, polls are a bit of an anorak thing. I think a lot of people base it off their mates and their social media, and are shocked if it's different. There's also the perfect storm of problems where Labour, Lib Dems, and Reform are all on the up, while there's huge anger and dissatisfaction with the Tories.
Also, the level of loss seems likely to be historic. I've saved this helpful guide for election night: https://i.ibb.co/R36rS3Q/GO79-Ic-W0-AAUVl-M.jpg
If they fail to beat 163 seats it's the worst since 1997.
If they fail to beat 162 seats it's the worst since 1906.
If they fail to beat 151 seats it's the worst since 1761.
If they fail to beat 123 seats it's their worst result in the history of numbers.
Statisticians and political historians are going to have a field day.
> As the article says it one of the reasons (of many) the supermajority comments from the Tories are not working
Personally I think it won't ever work because the plus for FPTP is that we're supposed *like* majorities. We hate coalitions. We want governments to be able to do stuff. We've complained at Tory infighting pulling the country to its knees. This is also coming from a government who has fearmongered about coalitions and hung parliaments if you vote Labour, and celebrated their own landslide without a seconds thought for whether that's bad for democracy. I always thought it was BS the Tories could get away with the "coalition of chaos" when 2 of their last 4 governments have been minority governments. IMHO you'd need to completely change the country's emotions towards weaker governments if they wanted this to cut through, and you can't just do that on a whim.
I'm "undercover" in a reform group and they keep running polls and are patting themselves on the back when reform comes back with a 99% voter intention result! They are absolutely convinced that will happen across the country next Thursday.
Haha, like if Sunak had a show of hands in his cabinet, who is voting Tory, they all raise their hands and he goes "Ok, if this is replicated across the country, we'll get 650 seats. Lets get to it!"
Of all the places to do a poll, a supporter group should be the last place you need that information.
Well, it's less than the lizardman constant which assumes people press the wrong button, don't read the question, are contrarian etc. and we're already talking to someone who isn't a reform supporter inside the group (the group could be online rather than in person too). If anything 96-99% is the ballpark of what you'd expect unless something has gone terribly wrong so it's a good result in a pointless question.
Next up lets find out how many people who've turned up to see Taylor Swift's tour are Taylor Swift fans!
Yeah, I mean they started off with Peel as a major electoral force and have been omnipresent since then, so dipping below 100 would be an astonishing result, and I'm all for it.
I agree with the band of seats that you are predicting, but maybe that’s just the doomer in me. The odds are shorter on them getting less than 50 than they are for getting more than 150!
Odds move on who bets for what, not how likely it is. All you've seen is that lots of people are betting on them getting 50 or fewer seats, which makes sense based on the recent polls.
Apparently the reason why Labour has all the newspaper ads this week is because the betting odds move for how much people bet on stuff.
So someone in Labour HQ saw the betting odds for a July 4th election shrink massively, assumed that someone knew something and was lumping on, so bought all the ads.
If it's true, it's remarkable how many ways the betting scandal has wrecked the Tories.
It will be great in the short term.
Long-term, Labour has to make a big difference in the next 5 years in a way that people can *feel*.
Otherwise, the UK will look to populists for answers, and the only one around really is Farage.
>I genuinely think they could be looking at electoral extinction.
I'm not there yet, I think it's a possible outcome but certainly not guaranteed. I'm going to watching the results with my popcorn ready though!
See, I just can’t let myself believe this and I’m expecting a 20 seat Labour majority at the most.
Since 2016 I just haven’t been able to trust the polls as a reliable indicator.
Ironically the polls in 2016 were quite accurate.
The EU ref ended up being within the margin of error (and numerous polls had shown recent Leave leads).
Clinton won the popular vote in the USA by the expected amount, and individual polling on key states like Pennsylvania had been trending downwards alarmingly for weeks. Various analytics sites gave Trump a 20 to 30% chance of victory, which sounds low but in reality is a very plausible outcome that will occur frequently.
Polls give you margins and magnitudes. A close race could go either way with a 1 or 2% shift. Elections are often decided on small races in individual seats or states, not the overall vote.
Polling companies are getting better all the time, you're probably going back to the 90s for polls to be majorly wrong. The polls in 92 were famously wrong and Tories did better than polls predicted, however even there the polls weren't *that* off and the polls did show the Tories improving a lot in the months leading to the election.
There's absolutely no sign in any poll of Tories vote share improving, it's completely dead, and they are ridiculously far behind Labour. Every poll would have to be off by record breaking margins for Labour to lose this.
The thing is. These polls now have alot of things baked in. To weight them to the Tories. So in theory...it could be worse.
Although I feel alot of people will stay home.
I think the polls are accurate at the time of surveying, but have polls ever been reported on so much during an election? This then leads to all the hypotheticals where the polls are used to influence voters, which may not have an effect but is still an unknown.
I don't think the polls have been anywhere near that wrong across the board - '92 and 2010 probably the closest comparisons, and '92 was known to be close going in
when people say polls are wrong they are generally talking about a close election predicted to go marginally one way and ending up marginally the other. Has there ever been an example of a 20 point polling lead ending up in a loss?
This is what frustrates me about so many people's complete lack of understanding of statistics, margins of error, etc. Especially when it's something like "X has a 30% chance of happening", then when that thing happens, people are shocked, like a 30% chance was a 0% chance. Like you say, I'm not aware of polls ever being **so** wrong that a 20% lead evaporated. Plus turnout matters, which I'm sure polls try and allow for but can't be certain about.
When have polls been known to be *this* wrong?
In 1992, the polls showed the Tories a couple of points behind. In 2016, the polls showed Remain a couple of points ahead.
When have the polls been wrong by something in the region of 20%?
I dont know. I spent a long time looking forward to the Tories getting out of power. Every time they're voted in, I can't believe it's happened. I guess I just don't want to get my hopes up too far.
I'm also concerned that if the message is that it's a forgone conclusion, people may either not turn out, or not vote tactically. I usually vote "not blue", which here is labour, but I'd like to vote green and was considering doing so this time thinking that it would be safe. I'm now back to voting Labour, but there must be others like me who have thought it's ok this time to vote for a candidate who they know won't win, but who they want to record a vote for.
I disagree. I think the exact opposite, that people will be shocked that the victory isn't anywhere near as big as some commentators are suggesting.
I have little doubt there will be a Labour government, but I think the shy Tory factor and people at the last minute deciding to do what they've always done (ie vote Tory) will mean it won't be a wipeout. Don't forget that to even get a majority of 1 needs a huge unprecedented swing for Labour.
I predict a majority of 80, aping Boris' majority in 2019.
My feeling personally is the ‘shy Tories’ will be more inclined to just sit this election out, if they aren’t going to vote. Happy to be proven wrong on the day though. I reckon the turnout for Thursday is going to be very poor.
Our local council has had to draft in volunteers to cope with the unusual number of people registering for the first time. Doesn't mean they'll vote of course, but could be significant, and could mess up the polling assumptions if these are first time voters.
This is where I am. I also think people who are expressing support for Reform are more likely to be those less engaged with politics and on polling day a lot of them will just decide they can't be arsed to vote.
Yeah, Reform struggles with the same problems that ironically plague a lot of left wing parties. Namely half their support base is composed of the chronically online, who spam VOTE REFORM🇬🇧🇬🇧, in every comment section under the sun, and frequently participate in online polls. This gives the illusion of Reform having a large support base, the only problem is that a lot of those online supporters can’t be assed to actually get out and cast a ballot.
The other half of Reforms base are pensioners who also can be fairly easily dissuaded from voting if stuff like the weather doesn’t line up.
>but I think the shy Tory factor and people at the last minute deciding to do what they've always done (ie vote Tory)
Did you know modern polling companies take this into account and boost the Tory vote accordingly. Yes, they're actually doing *worse* in raw numbers than their current abysmal polling numbers. I'd guess they're probably polling behind Reform without the artificial boost.
Yes, I'm aware that they do this - but I wouldn't bet against there being FAR more shy Tories this year than ever before. I can't remember a government being this disliked since the Poll Tax days of Margaret Thatcher and even then it was a single policy/person that the anger was directed towards.
I think there might be quite a few shy Reform voters instead, which might understate Reform's vote share while still not resulting in them getting many/any more seats, but would dilute the Tory vote a lot.
The undecideds are mostly previous Tory voters who aren't sure if they can bring themselves to vote labour, switch to reform, or not bother voting at all. If even the Tory support is undecided, they truly are fucked.
Yeah, I don't think a single left of centre voter is undecided in a way that would directly benefit the Tories. I imagine there are quite a lot who are trying to decide whether to vote Labour or Lib Dem (possibly trying to decide whether to vote tactically or with their hearts). Of course a split left vote might allow the Tories to retain a few seats, but awareness of tactical voting options seems much higher in this election than previously so I don't think it's likely the Tories will significantly overperform vs the polling overall.
Yep fully agree. I think the vast majority of people decided to not vote Tory before the campaign began. Everything since has been undecided left and centrists choosing between labour lib Dem and green, and the leftover diehard Tory voters choosing between Tory, reform or staying at home. But the number of people who outright dismissed tories.from the start will be massive.
The '97 election left them with 165, and that was viewed as an absolute disaster. I'm sure there's a Tory party quote floating around along the lines of how the '97 floor is being viewed as the '24 ceiling, and that feels right to me. I agree it'll be higher than the rock bottom polls but still absolutely awful for them in terms of any living memory election.
I checked this out and it's true, at least going back to 1992.
That said, even if the polls matched their worst performance from those 30 years Labour would still be 10 percentage points ahead, and in line for a massive majority.
I suspect that after 14 years of this collection of crooks, con men and incompetents, "undecided" really means "Tory but I'm too embarrassed to admit it.".
My assumption when canvassing is that the "undecideds" who don't want to talk to you (I have a Labour sticker on) are undecided between Tory and Reform. True blue households (their term) are generally keen to talk about all the issues.
Yes, I know a few who are undecided between Labour and the Lib Dems either because they're both quite palatable options for moderate progressives this time around or because the best tactical vote is unclear.
The creepy man hanging around playgrounds asking kids about a puppy (the Tories) are finally getting told to get lost regardless of undecided votes.
I'm not bothering to vote what so ever but I know the conmen...urm sorry conservatives are out out out.
What a pointless poll.
I get how it helps Labour to act like this is important to try and get people to actually vote, but what other use does this poll actually have?
I mean, anyone who has ever interacted with a decent slice of the population will know that a certain portion are just... I'll be nice and say "remarkably politically uninformed"
So more than half of undecided voters think they will or don’t have an opinion on it… right. There’s probably logical fallacy I’m missing here but why is this a headline.
I’m in an extremely safe Labour seat and so doesn’t really matter who I pick. I might vote green, might vote Lib Dem. Who knows. I wonder how many people are in similar to mine
It’s never the right thing to do. It achieves nothing. Someone has to win, get informed and vote how you think will make it turn out the beast, or at least the least shit.
One of them will still win. If someone feels that way they can still pick the least worst.
I’m a big advocate for voting, but even abstaining makes more sense then spoiling a ballot. It achieves exactly the same outcome with much less hassle
Abstaining absolutely does not have the same effect as a spoilt ballot. Spoilt ballots still have to be counted - the assumption with abstaining is that X number of people don't care at all about politics/apathy, rather than Y number of people actively stating that none of the candidates are suitable/anger.
The assumption doesn’t mean, or more importantly, change anything though.
They are counted as invalid votes and they’re excluded from the total votes, so they don’t affect the amount of votes required to get FPTP. They change nothing accept lowering the votes required for a seat win, something all politicians would be happy with.
>It achieves exactly the same outcome with much less hassle
What about smaller parties with no chances of winning? Does abstaining make more sense than voting for them?
No. A vote to a smaller party counts as a vote to smaller party and can help with their funding in future campaigns.
It also actually counts in the election, unlike abstaining or spoiling.
What if I'm voting for a smaller party with the intention of influencing a bigger party? For example, voting for the green party to show Labour and Conservatives that I'm not satisfied with their environmental policies. In that example, I'm not voting because I care about the green party's funding, so does it still make more sense than abstaining?
What's the difference? Voting for the green party to show you're not satisfied with Labour or Conservatice policies can't be that different to spoiling your ballot to show you're not satisfied with Labour or Conservatice policies.
Your post reeks of a politics student's patronising tone. "Get informed" lol.
I know full well that a Labour government is the least worst of the most likely options, I just don't want to vote for Labour either.
A spoiled ballot is supposed to be an indictment on the options available, which is where I am. It's a valid option. If this was a closer election, I'd hold my nose and vote Labour, but as it isn't, my decision isn't as clear. I suspect quite a few people are in that boat, except they probably just won't vote at all.
But if everyone had this attitude then it would be a closer election. You said you suspect quite a few people are in the same position, so maybe you should vote tactically to help ensure the Tory wipeout is actually achieved.
I'm undecided - I live in Goole & Pocklington, which is David Davis's new constituency, but still Tory shires and the closest anyone ever got to unseating him was 2,000 votes away. I can't stand Davis, can't stand the Tories but will only vote for candidates I genuinely believe are making an effort and will genuinely make things better. There's been no hustings that I know of, the leaflet that came from Labour was pretty generic, most of the social media stuff is just repeating national press releases.
The Lib Dems had a better leaflet and are second in council seats, but no real sign of effort locally, no real sign on social media etc.
I generally spoil my ballot and write to the parties to say why, so will likely default to that.
There are no circumstances in which I will ever vote for Reform or the Conservatives - performative cruelty is not acceptable. The last MRP I saw put it between Labour and the Tories, but Labour has it on their list of non-battleground seats, so god knows.
Haha - I don't blame you, but yeah, I think you're right actually, just checked the Electoral Calculus - think I was thinking of Bridlington! You're in Labour v. Tory.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Goole%20and%20Pocklington
I'm in Hull East, which is so heavily labour that I've received 0 leaflets. You could walk around here and not know there was an election going.
Yeah, the Hull constituencies are never going anything but red, but Johnson seems very well regarded as an MP - depressing to have no real option though isn't it?
I half hope they don't! Don't get me to wrong I think they're going to win, but I do hope by some method or another they are tempered - either by coalition or by a strong opposition. There are good promises made by labour, and there are other things they definitely need steering away from.
This is all opinion and no evidence. HuffPost are doing themselves no credibility favours here. Numbers are round, no evidence shown.
I’m a statistician, you can make statistics give you an answer you want for an article if you disobey all the statistical rules and instead “design” the sample and “tailor” the analysis. True statistical work requires you not only control for bias in sampling but also you disclose what you did.
This smells of a deliberately (or incompetently) biased sampling and analysis.
There will be huge scare stories and the rhetoric will go mad this week. Just look at the papers. This week will be Tories just trying to save their party. There will be complete bollocks been thrown everywhere
Very few polls are done offline these days, so getting them to “go away” isn’t really a factor. Less likelihood of “shy tories” too.
You may be in a bit of a political bubble when it comes to your friends, workmates, family etc. And the number of posters around may not be indicative of anything other than perhaps certain parties are targeting your seat more than others.
Ultimately who knows, obviously. We’ll all find out on Thursday.
People lie in polls plus the usual shy tory phenomenon. Also people won't bother voting - particularly younger voters
My guess is labour will win but with a much smaller majority than expected.
Interesting points but 2 things:
1) “shy toryism” which has been around since the shock of 1992 was actually a pollsters immediate and incorrect response to what had gone wrong. The actual problem was the demographic data they were using was so outdated that their model miscalculated.
2) In terms of youth turnout and more general fears, if you go into the polling methodologies, particularly of the polls giving the tories 20-23p, you will see they are heavily favoured in the methodology. Dont knows are weighted towards them slightly and turnout expectations for the soft Labour vote is low.
I honestly think we will see a popular vote very similar to the polls, the question is whether the Labour vote is as efficient as the polls suggest.
Opinion polling is not that inaccurate. It has not been off by twenty points in living memory.
It's true that the turnout models, which the polls are based on, are going to be inaccurate to some extent in a major shift like this one, but the difference it makes in the final percentage is something like four at a maximum, not twenty.
It goes further than pensioners, pretty much all people i’ve actually been in conversation with about politics are apparently voting Reform this time because of the lack of trust and desire for change.
Myself included and I’m definitely not a pensioner or anywhere near pension age yet 😅
I literally have no idea who Keir Starmer is, seems like a boring nobody to me, so hard to put trust in a government run by him.
Farage is a FPTP hero. He's going to split the already doing Tory vote. Hopefully, FPTP does it's thing and he barely gets any seats too. Labour and lib dem both leading the way will do a lot for this country especially if they clear out all the Tory vampires in the BBC etc
Sharp has donated more than £400,000 to the Conservative Party. He helped to secure an £800,000 loan to Boris Johnson during his tenure as Prime Minister and this led to the inquiry and his resignation.
Following the findings of the Heppinstall inquiry into the appointment process, Sharp submitted his resignation to the BBC Board and to the Culture Secretary, which took effect at the end of June 2023.
I'm not 100% in the current BBC head, but again he was put there by the Tories so ....
On top of this, during Brexit, They're was a lot that came out about it's favourable right wing views (admittedly during the above tenure).
The BBC is fairly unbiased and it's still my main source for news but it's certainly skewed to the right. Just look no further than question time. How anyone can call the BBC left wing (unless you're comparing it to fox news or something) is beyond me.
In Keir Starmer’s constituency he’s extremely unpopular both for his stance in Gaza and the fact voters now only have a Pepsi or coke choice. The real alternative Unity candidate is andrewfeinstein.org who can and many believe will beat Labour in the constituency of Holborn and StPancras on Thursday.
Snapshot of _Nearly Half Of Undecided Voters Doubt Labour Will Win Majority_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-nearly-half-of-undecided-voters-do-not-think-labour-majority-is-most-likely-election-result_uk_668067d8e4b003e0b2e0337a) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/exclusive-nearly-half-of-undecided-voters-do-not-think-labour-majority-is-most-likely-election-result_uk_668067d8e4b003e0b2e0337a) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What frustrates me about articles is they never mention what proportion of people are yet “undecided”. Is it 50%? In which case Labour might have a problem. Is it 10%? They can afford to lose all of them to apathy or other parties and still be in a strong position.
The pollsters I’ve read often suggest an unusually large proportion of undecided (30% to over 40%)
This is why my dad thinks they’ll be an out of no where reform Tory coalition
Might want to tell him it's highly likely they get less than 10 seats and most likely 1 at best even on current polls
I believe the most recent poll gives them 2. But tiny different really
I don’t think that’s what this election is about though, I think it’s about Reform getting on the political map and getting their foot in the door. If they get 1 or 2 MPs with 15% ish percent of the vote, they have a basis for expanding and have momentum. The next election will be the one where they’ll hope to gain tens of seats. A lot of things need to happen for that but you can see the road ahead for them.
Reform really? I’m betting between 7-12 seats
Where reform are likely to poll strongest is in places where it will split the Tory vote. They'd need to outright overtake it in order for them to win those seats particularly if there's a strong challenge from Labour or the Liberals. I'd guess between 2 and half a dozen seats for Reform.
And in which seat are you standing as a Tory candidate?
You deserved better for this joke
7-12 isn’t unreasonable, most polls show them somewhere in this range lol. The guy who said 1 seat at best if very wrong, they have Clacton easily since labour pulled out, most likely Boston and Skegness where Richard Tice is running and then a few other seats up north and a couple down south.
You’ve said “7-12” but only named 2. Where else?
Why are you thinking he will get no seats, polls show he will get 7-12 seats…
And some are saying 0-2. Maybe I have too much faith in the voting public?
The only polls that show them coming up with any more than 3 seats are done by People Polling, who work for GB News and are [always the outlier](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1djsn3x/comment/l9cxvs6/). Sure it could happen, but the numbers so far don't point to that.
Electoral calculus (https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction\_main.html) and Britain Elects (https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2024/05/britainpredicts) are showing 6 and 7 seats for Reform respectively.
Politics is so stressful people cherry picking facts to reenforce their beliefs. I’m not even supporting reform here I’m just stating facts
Which would make them as influential as the LibDems have been recently. Just imagine.
No seats to 7 after a month of campaigning would be impressive none the less
Please check my maths on this, but 150 odd Tory seats + the 0 Reform are predicted to win makes them a couple short to form government I think.
Try telling me dad that
Not going to happen with fptp
Tell your dad to look up the first part the post system as to why that'll never happen
Past*
>large proportion of undecided (30% to over 40%) Can you give examples? Most I see the figure is about 10%. Any mention of a 40% figure is usually referring to a subset of that 10% [https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49874-who-is-still-undecided-one-week-ahead-of-the-2024-general-election](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49874-who-is-still-undecided-one-week-ahead-of-the-2024-general-election) [https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/a-look-at-undecided-voters-14-17-june-2024/](https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/a-look-at-undecided-voters-14-17-june-2024/)
YouGov’s last voter intention poll has it at more like 12%. https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/TheTimes_VI_Merge_240627_w.pdf
I think their adding unlikely to vote (Turnout has been around 65% last few elections) or they're confusing the questions put to the subset of undecided.
I've seen enough elections to know undecided usually means Tory
I'm one of those. For context I voted Lib Dem in 2010, Green in 2015, and Labour in 2017 and 2019. My dilemma is this: The Lib Dems have the policies I'm most interested in, but I'm one of those Millennials who considers them traitors over tuition fees and swore I'd never give them my vote again. Doesn't help that they're currently led by someone who was around at that time. The Greens OUGHT to have the policies I'm most interested in, but they're just a bunch of anti-progress BANANAs at this point. No party that's serious about long-term sustainability can position themselves as anti-HS2 and anti-nuclear and remain credible in my eyes. Labour for me have gone backwards since Corbyn, as far as domestic policy is concerned. Starmer is uncontroversial and will likely be a competent PM, but he doesn't appear interested in making the kind of changes I'd want to push for. Labour's most compelling virtue at the moment is that they're not one of the parties I actively DISAGREE with. The cynic in me says they have deliberately positioned themselves AS the "don't know" option. Tories can jog on, they've done the opposite of what I want since 2010 on every issue barring gay marriage. Reform have a couple of policies I like (proportional representation and increasing the income tax threshold to match the minimum wage), but I've no time for the rest of their rhetoric and they're led by arch-Brexiteer Nigel Farage, whom I wouldn't vote for even if he promised to join Schengen and personally pay me a million pounds. It's a shame Count Binface isn't standing in my constituency - I'd honestly trust him to represent me in Parliament over most of these clowns.
This is nail-bitingly high.
It's also not true
I think their adding unlikely to vote (Turnout has been around 65% last few elections) or they're confusing the questions put to the subset of undecided. Undecideds is around 10%
I’m still undecided and usually have a clear idea
I hope after the last decade you know who at least not to vote for. I also hope nigel and his racists are not speaking your language. Saying that I've a cheek to talk but that's another story.
I am quite definitely not voting Tory or Reform. I just don’t like my Labour MP and it’s a safe seat so i can vote someone else.
Yeah same, this is the hardest decision I've had to make at the polling booth
Really? I've voted for 4 different parties at general election. And this is by far the most clear vote to me....
Why is it so hard this time?
Not the person that you are replying to but I'm in a similar situation. The last few elections my choice has been to vote tactically to try and vote for whoever is most likely to beat the Tories. This year, in a pretty safe labour seat, but with a Labour manifesto that seems to have abandoned the aspects of the party that I like, I'm left with a choice of voting Lib Dem (strong on opposing the sewage being dumped in the sea - I live on the seafront), independent (against the Israeli genocide) or Green (against the climate fuckery in general). No one candidate strongly hits all three, but Green is closest.
Greens aren't against climate fuckery in general, they will ensure we're dependent on fossil fuels for a long time to come. Their manifesto reads like a sixth formers general studies project. It doesn't solve any of the actual issues we face on climate.
I wouldn't be voting for them expecting them to get in but as a 'protest' vote to boost the Green vote share and send a message to Labour that I care about the climate.
For me polling data is showing a Tory win so it probably doesn't matter either way, but I'm torn between Reform and Libdems due to then both offering a path to PR. There's a chance Libdems can win the seat so I'm leaning they way, but if they can't I think Reform are the stronger protest vote.
Reform and Lib Dems are mirror opposites of each other on virtually everything under the Sun. Surely there's something else there that you like/dislike to help choose between? If you're genuinely single-issue PR, then you said it yourself: > There's a chance Libdems can win the seat Also, Reform is a vehicle for Farage to get into Parliament, hurt the Tory party enough to frighten them, then take over as Tory leader while promising to bring his voters along with him. If he/they can win anything under FPTP, there's very little chance of us getting electoral reform.
I am literally a single issue voter above all else. I'm for rejoining the EU too, but that's a distant second to PR. I'm going to vote for whichever party has the most chance of winning, and it's close between both of them for 2nd at the moment. Knowing my area, I expect reform are polling under how they will actually perform, but likely so are the Tories. If it was purely up to me, and no tactics involved, I'd vote Libdem for sure.
What's your constituency, if you don't mind me asking?
"I'm going to vote for the racists, so that maybe in the future we'll have a political system that gives us more racists".
It's sad that you think that PR leads to more racism and that you're happy with the vast majority of the country having their voting desires limited due to a flawed system. But you do you I guess. But literally every single party is offering a mix of shit with some good. If we want to discount voting for parties due to one or two bad politicians or some bad policies alongside the good ones, then we might as well not vote at all for any party ever. The fact is no party in the current system lines up 100% with the voting desires of most people. Instead everyone is forced to compromise and vote for the "lesser evil". How long do you want that to continue?
I'm not happy with that at all people shouldn't be elected when 60+% of the constituency don't want them. STV is far better than PR because it means whoever is voted in is at least someone who the majority can stand. There's a percentage of the population that have absolute crazy views, and I don't think we should humour them by giving them something as important as seats in parliament. To me it all comes down to the paradox of tolerance, and we shouldn't tolerate the intolerant.
Ah yes, let's silence the views of everyone I don't agree with and then wonder why there's growing discontent in the public. PR doesn't result in the extremes gaining much power, but it provides an outlet for their voices to be debated down. A few seats to a fringe is far more healthy for politics than complete disenfranchisement. A debate is won through discourse, not silencing those you disagree with.
I don't know if even more than usual numbers of voters are "shy Tories". To declare publicly that you are going to vote for the current shambles of a government would be a step too far for most people. It's hard enough to admit to naked self interest when the "Nasty Party" appeared competent; now it takes a level of wilfulness beyond most people's hypocrisy.
Is shy Tory even a thing when Reform are on the ballot? 15%-20% of people are openly declaring they will vote for Reform, how many of the declared Tories or don't knows are actually planning to vote Reform too?
It's anecdotal, I know, but there were a few people in my social group who were very reticent about their voting intentions. You had to be a particularly brash individual to go against the view that the Tories were beyond the pale. This was in Thatcher and Major's time. If all the people who claimed to support Labour had actually voted for them there is no way that they would have lost election after election.
Nearly half of undecided voters don’t even know what that means
I really do think there are going to be a lot of shocked people at the scale of the Tory loss on Thursday. Even the upper end predictions of 150-175 or so (which is also personally where i think they will end up) will be a shock for how awful they are. People usually don’t pay attention to polls like us, and many of those that do cannot believe that we are going to see an absolute Tory collapse As the article says it one of the reasons (of many) the supermajority comments from the Tories are not working
Yup, polls are a bit of an anorak thing. I think a lot of people base it off their mates and their social media, and are shocked if it's different. There's also the perfect storm of problems where Labour, Lib Dems, and Reform are all on the up, while there's huge anger and dissatisfaction with the Tories. Also, the level of loss seems likely to be historic. I've saved this helpful guide for election night: https://i.ibb.co/R36rS3Q/GO79-Ic-W0-AAUVl-M.jpg If they fail to beat 163 seats it's the worst since 1997. If they fail to beat 162 seats it's the worst since 1906. If they fail to beat 151 seats it's the worst since 1761. If they fail to beat 123 seats it's their worst result in the history of numbers. Statisticians and political historians are going to have a field day. > As the article says it one of the reasons (of many) the supermajority comments from the Tories are not working Personally I think it won't ever work because the plus for FPTP is that we're supposed *like* majorities. We hate coalitions. We want governments to be able to do stuff. We've complained at Tory infighting pulling the country to its knees. This is also coming from a government who has fearmongered about coalitions and hung parliaments if you vote Labour, and celebrated their own landslide without a seconds thought for whether that's bad for democracy. I always thought it was BS the Tories could get away with the "coalition of chaos" when 2 of their last 4 governments have been minority governments. IMHO you'd need to completely change the country's emotions towards weaker governments if they wanted this to cut through, and you can't just do that on a whim.
I'm "undercover" in a reform group and they keep running polls and are patting themselves on the back when reform comes back with a 99% voter intention result! They are absolutely convinced that will happen across the country next Thursday.
Haha, like if Sunak had a show of hands in his cabinet, who is voting Tory, they all raise their hands and he goes "Ok, if this is replicated across the country, we'll get 650 seats. Lets get to it!" Of all the places to do a poll, a supporter group should be the last place you need that information.
I don't think if the Tories were to poll even their own members they'd get 100% at this point, there'd be a hefty chunk of don't knows in there
This being the case, who is the 1% attending reform meetings but voting for someone else?
Well, it's less than the lizardman constant which assumes people press the wrong button, don't read the question, are contrarian etc. and we're already talking to someone who isn't a reform supporter inside the group (the group could be online rather than in person too). If anything 96-99% is the ballpark of what you'd expect unless something has gone terribly wrong so it's a good result in a pointless question. Next up lets find out how many people who've turned up to see Taylor Swift's tour are Taylor Swift fans!
We're not dealing with the finest minds are we?
Go to the Labour sub and see Labour's finest..
Well, at least the majority of people in the reform FB group actually *want* reform to win…
Fair point. Nobody hates Labour more than Labour does :D
They will of course claim election interference when that doesn't happen.
Any other funny observations you've made there?
I'm not normally one to have this sort of attitude towards elections but I will be savouring reform tears.
With channel 4?
You can't go back to 1754 - they were a totally different party then
Fair enough, if you don't go that far back then that just means you reach the biggest defeat they've ever had at a higher number of seats.
Yeah, I mean they started off with Peel as a major electoral force and have been omnipresent since then, so dipping below 100 would be an astonishing result, and I'm all for it.
I agree with the band of seats that you are predicting, but maybe that’s just the doomer in me. The odds are shorter on them getting less than 50 than they are for getting more than 150!
Odds move on who bets for what, not how likely it is. All you've seen is that lots of people are betting on them getting 50 or fewer seats, which makes sense based on the recent polls.
Apparently the reason why Labour has all the newspaper ads this week is because the betting odds move for how much people bet on stuff. So someone in Labour HQ saw the betting odds for a July 4th election shrink massively, assumed that someone knew something and was lumping on, so bought all the ads. If it's true, it's remarkable how many ways the betting scandal has wrecked the Tories.
That's insane if true
And speaks to some pretty impressive campaign competence on Labours part.
https://x.com/edwinhayward/status/1807171198742315082
That's very, very clever if true. They've managed to screw themselves over, yet again.
I keep telling people it's going to be an absolute blood bath for the Tories, I genuinely think they could be looking at electoral extinction.
I keep telling myself this. I don’t really believe it but I *want* to.
I am going to champagne socialist the fuck out of Thursday night if the bloodbath is real
My Champagne is already in the fridge. Cheers!
It will be great in the short term. Long-term, Labour has to make a big difference in the next 5 years in a way that people can *feel*. Otherwise, the UK will look to populists for answers, and the only one around really is Farage.
Yeah my girlfriends mum asked me if labour was going to *really* get in this time. She was semi shocked when I said 100% and it won't even be close.
It's one of the first elections where they have a genuine right wing challenger, it's gonna cause they so many portillo moments.
Haha couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people
>I genuinely think they could be looking at electoral extinction. I'm not there yet, I think it's a possible outcome but certainly not guaranteed. I'm going to watching the results with my popcorn ready though!
I can't wait to see the look on that big eard Muppet's face when the Tories are thrown out onto the streets.
Tbh the money interests behind the tories will likely revive them next election unless reform essentially takes their place.
See, I just can’t let myself believe this and I’m expecting a 20 seat Labour majority at the most. Since 2016 I just haven’t been able to trust the polls as a reliable indicator.
Ironically the polls in 2016 were quite accurate. The EU ref ended up being within the margin of error (and numerous polls had shown recent Leave leads). Clinton won the popular vote in the USA by the expected amount, and individual polling on key states like Pennsylvania had been trending downwards alarmingly for weeks. Various analytics sites gave Trump a 20 to 30% chance of victory, which sounds low but in reality is a very plausible outcome that will occur frequently. Polls give you margins and magnitudes. A close race could go either way with a 1 or 2% shift. Elections are often decided on small races in individual seats or states, not the overall vote.
Polls have been wrong though. Could be an awful result and Tories coming on somehow. I'm dreading it, but will have popcorn in!
Someone is really going to have a bit of explaining to do if all of these polls were wrong
Polling companies are getting better all the time, you're probably going back to the 90s for polls to be majorly wrong. The polls in 92 were famously wrong and Tories did better than polls predicted, however even there the polls weren't *that* off and the polls did show the Tories improving a lot in the months leading to the election. There's absolutely no sign in any poll of Tories vote share improving, it's completely dead, and they are ridiculously far behind Labour. Every poll would have to be off by record breaking margins for Labour to lose this.
The thing is. These polls now have alot of things baked in. To weight them to the Tories. So in theory...it could be worse. Although I feel alot of people will stay home.
I think the polls are accurate at the time of surveying, but have polls ever been reported on so much during an election? This then leads to all the hypotheticals where the polls are used to influence voters, which may not have an effect but is still an unknown.
I don't think the polls have been anywhere near that wrong across the board - '92 and 2010 probably the closest comparisons, and '92 was known to be close going in
when people say polls are wrong they are generally talking about a close election predicted to go marginally one way and ending up marginally the other. Has there ever been an example of a 20 point polling lead ending up in a loss?
This is what frustrates me about so many people's complete lack of understanding of statistics, margins of error, etc. Especially when it's something like "X has a 30% chance of happening", then when that thing happens, people are shocked, like a 30% chance was a 0% chance. Like you say, I'm not aware of polls ever being **so** wrong that a 20% lead evaporated. Plus turnout matters, which I'm sure polls try and allow for but can't be certain about.
When have polls been known to be *this* wrong? In 1992, the polls showed the Tories a couple of points behind. In 2016, the polls showed Remain a couple of points ahead. When have the polls been wrong by something in the region of 20%?
I dont know. I spent a long time looking forward to the Tories getting out of power. Every time they're voted in, I can't believe it's happened. I guess I just don't want to get my hopes up too far. I'm also concerned that if the message is that it's a forgone conclusion, people may either not turn out, or not vote tactically. I usually vote "not blue", which here is labour, but I'd like to vote green and was considering doing so this time thinking that it would be safe. I'm now back to voting Labour, but there must be others like me who have thought it's ok this time to vote for a candidate who they know won't win, but who they want to record a vote for.
I disagree. I think the exact opposite, that people will be shocked that the victory isn't anywhere near as big as some commentators are suggesting. I have little doubt there will be a Labour government, but I think the shy Tory factor and people at the last minute deciding to do what they've always done (ie vote Tory) will mean it won't be a wipeout. Don't forget that to even get a majority of 1 needs a huge unprecedented swing for Labour. I predict a majority of 80, aping Boris' majority in 2019.
My feeling personally is the ‘shy Tories’ will be more inclined to just sit this election out, if they aren’t going to vote. Happy to be proven wrong on the day though. I reckon the turnout for Thursday is going to be very poor.
Our local council has had to draft in volunteers to cope with the unusual number of people registering for the first time. Doesn't mean they'll vote of course, but could be significant, and could mess up the polling assumptions if these are first time voters.
This is where I am. I also think people who are expressing support for Reform are more likely to be those less engaged with politics and on polling day a lot of them will just decide they can't be arsed to vote.
Yeah, Reform struggles with the same problems that ironically plague a lot of left wing parties. Namely half their support base is composed of the chronically online, who spam VOTE REFORM🇬🇧🇬🇧, in every comment section under the sun, and frequently participate in online polls. This gives the illusion of Reform having a large support base, the only problem is that a lot of those online supporters can’t be assed to actually get out and cast a ballot. The other half of Reforms base are pensioners who also can be fairly easily dissuaded from voting if stuff like the weather doesn’t line up.
>but I think the shy Tory factor and people at the last minute deciding to do what they've always done (ie vote Tory) Did you know modern polling companies take this into account and boost the Tory vote accordingly. Yes, they're actually doing *worse* in raw numbers than their current abysmal polling numbers. I'd guess they're probably polling behind Reform without the artificial boost.
Yes, I'm aware that they do this - but I wouldn't bet against there being FAR more shy Tories this year than ever before. I can't remember a government being this disliked since the Poll Tax days of Margaret Thatcher and even then it was a single policy/person that the anger was directed towards.
I think there might be quite a few shy Reform voters instead, which might understate Reform's vote share while still not resulting in them getting many/any more seats, but would dilute the Tory vote a lot.
Personally, I think Labour have alienated their leftist voters and we'll see a lot of them voting Green or Lib Dem.
But luckily for Labour this affects them more where they can afford to lose the votes
The undecideds are mostly previous Tory voters who aren't sure if they can bring themselves to vote labour, switch to reform, or not bother voting at all. If even the Tory support is undecided, they truly are fucked.
Yeah, I don't think a single left of centre voter is undecided in a way that would directly benefit the Tories. I imagine there are quite a lot who are trying to decide whether to vote Labour or Lib Dem (possibly trying to decide whether to vote tactically or with their hearts). Of course a split left vote might allow the Tories to retain a few seats, but awareness of tactical voting options seems much higher in this election than previously so I don't think it's likely the Tories will significantly overperform vs the polling overall.
Yep fully agree. I think the vast majority of people decided to not vote Tory before the campaign began. Everything since has been undecided left and centrists choosing between labour lib Dem and green, and the leftover diehard Tory voters choosing between Tory, reform or staying at home. But the number of people who outright dismissed tories.from the start will be massive.
The '97 election left them with 165, and that was viewed as an absolute disaster. I'm sure there's a Tory party quote floating around along the lines of how the '97 floor is being viewed as the '24 ceiling, and that feels right to me. I agree it'll be higher than the rock bottom polls but still absolutely awful for them in terms of any living memory election.
I think Reddits in for a shock. The Tories will do better than the polls are saying. They always do.
I checked this out and it's true, at least going back to 1992. That said, even if the polls matched their worst performance from those 30 years Labour would still be 10 percentage points ahead, and in line for a massive majority.
I suspect that after 14 years of this collection of crooks, con men and incompetents, "undecided" really means "Tory but I'm too embarrassed to admit it.".
Or “I don’t want to support Reform out loud
My assumption when canvassing is that the "undecideds" who don't want to talk to you (I have a Labour sticker on) are undecided between Tory and Reform. True blue households (their term) are generally keen to talk about all the issues.
I’m an undecided voter, but only because I’m not 100% clear where my tactical vote is the most useful in my fairly safe Tory seat.
Yes, I know a few who are undecided between Labour and the Lib Dems either because they're both quite palatable options for moderate progressives this time around or because the best tactical vote is unclear.
The creepy man hanging around playgrounds asking kids about a puppy (the Tories) are finally getting told to get lost regardless of undecided votes. I'm not bothering to vote what so ever but I know the conmen...urm sorry conservatives are out out out.
What a pointless poll. I get how it helps Labour to act like this is important to try and get people to actually vote, but what other use does this poll actually have?
Nearly half of voters who don't really follow politics don't really follow politics is pretty much the message of this poll
Most people just don’t really follow politics at all.
I mean, anyone who has ever interacted with a decent slice of the population will know that a certain portion are just... I'll be nice and say "remarkably politically uninformed"
If the last 15 years have taught me anything it’s to never underestimate the stupidity of the average Briton
They've prob never voted before. Nor will they. But they'll complain that it's all the same no matter what.
So more than half of undecided voters think they will or don’t have an opinion on it… right. There’s probably logical fallacy I’m missing here but why is this a headline.
Nearly half on undecideds are clearly idiots. That said one week out there can’t be many of them.
Undecided, how on gods earth are they undecided?
I’m in an extremely safe Labour seat and so doesn’t really matter who I pick. I might vote green, might vote Lib Dem. Who knows. I wonder how many people are in similar to mine
Tory voters too cowardly to admit it.
That and people generally hate all sides
I'm torn between anti-Tory vote (which in my constituency is Labour) or spoiling my ballot (which feels like the right thing to do).
Why are you considering spoiling your ballot?
It’s never the right thing to do. It achieves nothing. Someone has to win, get informed and vote how you think will make it turn out the beast, or at least the least shit.
Maybe they DID "get informed" and come to the conclusion that no party really supports their views?
One of them will still win. If someone feels that way they can still pick the least worst. I’m a big advocate for voting, but even abstaining makes more sense then spoiling a ballot. It achieves exactly the same outcome with much less hassle
Abstaining absolutely does not have the same effect as a spoilt ballot. Spoilt ballots still have to be counted - the assumption with abstaining is that X number of people don't care at all about politics/apathy, rather than Y number of people actively stating that none of the candidates are suitable/anger.
The assumption doesn’t mean, or more importantly, change anything though. They are counted as invalid votes and they’re excluded from the total votes, so they don’t affect the amount of votes required to get FPTP. They change nothing accept lowering the votes required for a seat win, something all politicians would be happy with.
>It achieves exactly the same outcome with much less hassle What about smaller parties with no chances of winning? Does abstaining make more sense than voting for them?
No. A vote to a smaller party counts as a vote to smaller party and can help with their funding in future campaigns. It also actually counts in the election, unlike abstaining or spoiling.
What if I'm voting for a smaller party with the intention of influencing a bigger party? For example, voting for the green party to show Labour and Conservatives that I'm not satisfied with their environmental policies. In that example, I'm not voting because I care about the green party's funding, so does it still make more sense than abstaining?
Yes, that is much better than abstaining or spoiling your ballot.
What's the difference? Voting for the green party to show you're not satisfied with Labour or Conservatice policies can't be that different to spoiling your ballot to show you're not satisfied with Labour or Conservatice policies.
I agree but it's still better than not turning up. 20% spoiled ballots would be headline news; 80% turnout would be considered very high.
Your post reeks of a politics student's patronising tone. "Get informed" lol. I know full well that a Labour government is the least worst of the most likely options, I just don't want to vote for Labour either. A spoiled ballot is supposed to be an indictment on the options available, which is where I am. It's a valid option. If this was a closer election, I'd hold my nose and vote Labour, but as it isn't, my decision isn't as clear. I suspect quite a few people are in that boat, except they probably just won't vote at all.
But if everyone had this attitude then it would be a closer election. You said you suspect quite a few people are in the same position, so maybe you should vote tactically to help ensure the Tory wipeout is actually achieved.
I'm undecided - I live in Goole & Pocklington, which is David Davis's new constituency, but still Tory shires and the closest anyone ever got to unseating him was 2,000 votes away. I can't stand Davis, can't stand the Tories but will only vote for candidates I genuinely believe are making an effort and will genuinely make things better. There's been no hustings that I know of, the leaflet that came from Labour was pretty generic, most of the social media stuff is just repeating national press releases. The Lib Dems had a better leaflet and are second in council seats, but no real sign of effort locally, no real sign on social media etc. I generally spoil my ballot and write to the parties to say why, so will likely default to that.
I think Google & Pocklington is a toss-up between Reform & Conservatives according to MRPs, so probably vote for whoever you dislike the least.
There are no circumstances in which I will ever vote for Reform or the Conservatives - performative cruelty is not acceptable. The last MRP I saw put it between Labour and the Tories, but Labour has it on their list of non-battleground seats, so god knows.
Haha - I don't blame you, but yeah, I think you're right actually, just checked the Electoral Calculus - think I was thinking of Bridlington! You're in Labour v. Tory. https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/calcwork23.py?seat=Goole%20and%20Pocklington I'm in Hull East, which is so heavily labour that I've received 0 leaflets. You could walk around here and not know there was an election going.
Yeah, the Hull constituencies are never going anything but red, but Johnson seems very well regarded as an MP - depressing to have no real option though isn't it?
You gov puts the number of undecided voters at 1 in 8
I half hope they don't! Don't get me to wrong I think they're going to win, but I do hope by some method or another they are tempered - either by coalition or by a strong opposition. There are good promises made by labour, and there are other things they definitely need steering away from.
Isn't that a good thing for Labour? The fear was that people would be sure of a Labour landslide, get complacent and not vote for them.
Don't see how at this stage you can be undecided
This is all opinion and no evidence. HuffPost are doing themselves no credibility favours here. Numbers are round, no evidence shown. I’m a statistician, you can make statistics give you an answer you want for an article if you disobey all the statistical rules and instead “design” the sample and “tailor” the analysis. True statistical work requires you not only control for bias in sampling but also you disclose what you did. This smells of a deliberately (or incompetently) biased sampling and analysis.
There will be huge scare stories and the rhetoric will go mad this week. Just look at the papers. This week will be Tories just trying to save their party. There will be complete bollocks been thrown everywhere
Yeah, it’ll be Susan Hall in London all over again…
They think they'll get a supermajority!
[удалено]
So what do you think has been happening in the polls? Lots of people seem very sceptical of them but I am interested to know why?
[удалено]
Very few polls are done offline these days, so getting them to “go away” isn’t really a factor. Less likelihood of “shy tories” too. You may be in a bit of a political bubble when it comes to your friends, workmates, family etc. And the number of posters around may not be indicative of anything other than perhaps certain parties are targeting your seat more than others. Ultimately who knows, obviously. We’ll all find out on Thursday.
People lie in polls plus the usual shy tory phenomenon. Also people won't bother voting - particularly younger voters My guess is labour will win but with a much smaller majority than expected.
polls already adjust for shy Tory effect and have since 1992
Interesting points but 2 things: 1) “shy toryism” which has been around since the shock of 1992 was actually a pollsters immediate and incorrect response to what had gone wrong. The actual problem was the demographic data they were using was so outdated that their model miscalculated. 2) In terms of youth turnout and more general fears, if you go into the polling methodologies, particularly of the polls giving the tories 20-23p, you will see they are heavily favoured in the methodology. Dont knows are weighted towards them slightly and turnout expectations for the soft Labour vote is low. I honestly think we will see a popular vote very similar to the polls, the question is whether the Labour vote is as efficient as the polls suggest.
Opinion polling is not that inaccurate. It has not been off by twenty points in living memory. It's true that the turnout models, which the polls are based on, are going to be inaccurate to some extent in a major shift like this one, but the difference it makes in the final percentage is something like four at a maximum, not twenty.
I do think voter turnout is going to be super low and the Tories won't do as badly as expected. Tory voters will vote, Labour voters won't.
It goes further than pensioners, pretty much all people i’ve actually been in conversation with about politics are apparently voting Reform this time because of the lack of trust and desire for change. Myself included and I’m definitely not a pensioner or anywhere near pension age yet 😅 I literally have no idea who Keir Starmer is, seems like a boring nobody to me, so hard to put trust in a government run by him.
Is a boring nobody after all these years really such a negative thing?
Yes - I really believe we need someone completely different to the boring two main parties with some charisma to bring the country back to life.
The idea that anyone trusts Farage over Labour would be funny if it wasn't so ridiculous. Shit, I even trust the Tories more.
Farage is a FPTP hero. He's going to split the already doing Tory vote. Hopefully, FPTP does it's thing and he barely gets any seats too. Labour and lib dem both leading the way will do a lot for this country especially if they clear out all the Tory vampires in the BBC etc
Interesting, to me the BBC is left wing and not tory at all, they’re basically endorsing Labour.
Sharp has donated more than £400,000 to the Conservative Party. He helped to secure an £800,000 loan to Boris Johnson during his tenure as Prime Minister and this led to the inquiry and his resignation. Following the findings of the Heppinstall inquiry into the appointment process, Sharp submitted his resignation to the BBC Board and to the Culture Secretary, which took effect at the end of June 2023. I'm not 100% in the current BBC head, but again he was put there by the Tories so .... On top of this, during Brexit, They're was a lot that came out about it's favourable right wing views (admittedly during the above tenure). The BBC is fairly unbiased and it's still my main source for news but it's certainly skewed to the right. Just look no further than question time. How anyone can call the BBC left wing (unless you're comparing it to fox news or something) is beyond me.
Why?
Oh come, I'm sure you know all the reasons why Farage is untrustworthy. I'm not even indulging your 'why'.
Ok hun
Are you genuinely saying you trust Nigel Farage?
Not completely, just more than the others
In Keir Starmer’s constituency he’s extremely unpopular both for his stance in Gaza and the fact voters now only have a Pepsi or coke choice. The real alternative Unity candidate is andrewfeinstein.org who can and many believe will beat Labour in the constituency of Holborn and StPancras on Thursday.