Will Reform become a proper threat at the next election
Reform have five MPs and though they are working towards it, they are not currently a party. They are a company. As such they have no official members. They have supporters who they call members.
Despite being so small as to be irrelevant they get more media coverage than the Greens or the Liberal Democrats. Their leaders crumble under proper scrutiny from the media. This said there are some who say they will be a force to be reckoned with at the next general election. They could join with the Conservatives who seem to be afraid of them. In fact Farage has stated he could see this happening as the Cons go further right. Could they grow to be a big player in the next election?
Despite being so small as to be irrelevant they get more media coverage than the Greens or the Liberal Democrats. Their leaders crumble under proper scrutiny from the media. This said there are some who say they will be a force to be reckoned with at the next general election. They could join with the Conservatives who seem to be afraid of them. In fact Farage has stated he could see this happening as the Cons go further right. Could they grow to be a big player in the next election?
Comments
Not only that but they need policies that are not widely loathed - Farage is on record as being anti-NHS and that alone would sink them if it was their official policy.
What question exactly were voters asked? Why should they show preference for a Party which isn’t a Party and doesn’t have a manifesto. What can that poll actually mean?
That's irrelevant to their electoral prospects.
In last year's General Election they got 4,117,610 votes - 14.3% of the total and more than any Party other than Labour and Conservative. The only reason they sit behind the Lib Dems, SNP, Sinn Fein and Independents is because their votes were spread across the whole country rather than concentrated in certain areas. They came second in 98 seats, 89 of which were won by Labour.
They are only small in the House of Commons because of our First Past The Post electoral system - under Proportional Representation they would be the kingmakers.
For better or worse, this is irrelevant in the modern age. They are not appealing to logic, but to emotion.
They are already a big player in the next election. The Tories are dead in the water, and the Lib Dems - with their reliance on localised rather than national campaigning - have probably peaked. The Greens haven't moved in the polls, and Plaid and the Northern Irish Parties are too small to make a difference. In terms of the next election, Reform are the only opposition Party that have the impetus to worry Labour.
Current "if the election was tomorrow" polling has them with at least 39 seats, and at most 280. That "at most" figure won't - God Willing - happen, but their predicted number of 82 seats would make them a significant player in this putative next parliament, and they could plausibly even end up as the Loyal Opposition facing off across the Dispatch Box against a fragile LAB-LIB coalition.
The interesting thing for me is that fact about Reform being second in 89 seats currently held by Labour. In 20 of those seats Reform were less than 5,000 votes behind Labour, and those seats could therefore be plausibly considered LAB-REF marginals (or three-way marginals in some cases). Given the massive swings we've seen in recent General Elections, even more of the 89 are in play. While the received opinion is that Reform's growth is mostly from disaffected Conservative voters, analysis I've read recently suggests that a decent amount of it (especially in the "Red Wall" of Northern and Midlands seats) is from previously-Labour voters. Labour seems to be caught between appealing to traditional working class but socially conservative voters in seats it's held for decades and more affluent but socially liberal voters in seats it took from the Tories last year - and if it tips too far in either direction it risks losing the other. Can they find a way to appeal to both Ashfield and Aylesbury?
The next election is, of course, a long way away - Labour's majority in the HoC is massive enough that there's no reason for Starmer to call an early election for any reason other than the likelihood of significant gains, and that seems very unlikely (understatement!) given his current polling. If people start seeing improvements in their daily lives, standard of living, and/or purchasing power - or if there's a war - then it could all change. Sadly, the economic forecasts are not promising. 2029 is already shaping up to be one tense motherfucker of an election.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Party_of_Canada
Early on, at school (fee paying) he was advised by a sports master (and ex England cricketer) that he was
That’s pretty good. But being persuasive and being a person of substance are definitely two different things. As one can see by looking at Trump.
Perhaps the disillusioned suffer from a particular kind of credulousness?
Or desperation.
Well this is the thing isn't it ? Every time there's been any conversation around falling living standards and the failing economy the media and politicans have been quick to pin it on immigrants. A party comes in on a platform of "Change" and then changes very little. Not surprising that support for an apparently anti-systems party grows.
I suspect that there's a subset of the PTB that believe they can work with Reform, as they are unlikely to actually threaten any economic interests.
If you're right, then that outcome would be the most sure and certain end of Reform's electoral prospects that I can imagine. Becoming just another one of the PTB is death for a Party whose chief selling point is that they're not one of the PTB.
Eventually, yes, maybe, but in the meantime it tends to explain the level and tone of coverage.
I don't think so. Look at Trump. It is quite possible to be part of the elite, take over the Establishment and still successfully portray yourself as a rebel underdog sticking it to the Man.
A significant part of the appeal of Reform is that they present themselves as the alternative to traditional political parties, appealing directly to those who are pissed off with the Labour or Conservative choice but don't fall into either liberal or socialist camps. They're more than a protest vote (we've still got the likes of Monster Loonies for that - though they rarely stand in all elections), because they've managed to present a scapegoat (migrants) onto which people can pin all their displeasures and woes, and then present themselves as the only party who can do anything about it. Which is a vote winner (among a sizeable proportion of the electorate) providing they never get into a position where they can really do anything, because then they'll be in the same position as every other party who's been party to government and find that it's not that easy to "do something" about immigration because the nation depends on migration to function, so either does something and crashes the economy and society or fails to do something to the disgust of all their voters.
If the mainstream parties did something to make all those people less pissed off then there wouldn’t be a political vacuum for Reform (or Trump, or AfD, or any of the other populist parties currently steaming up the polls in the Western World) to fill.
The incentives are now such that for professionals within those parties it doesn't really pay to break away from the current economic consensus, so everything is fought on social issues.
Within this system, anti-systemic parties of the right are easier to accommodate than similar parties situated on the left.
True. Which is the challenge that Reform, Trump, AfD et.al. present to the mainstream parties. Unfortunately, most seem to be trying to ape them (including in scapegoating immigrants who aren't the problem) rather than provide a real, honest policy platform that addresses the real problems people are facing.
Yes. And that's an irony that is lost on most Reform supporters.
I'm afraid I do regard them as a serious threat. Their councillors and candidates are generally very lacking in experience and like UKIP before them the fall-out rate is very high. Once they realise they actually have to do some work and not just spout they soon lose interest.
But with growing support and experience that may change.
I don't see an alliance between Reform and the Tories though, although I'm open to be wrong on that one.
I disagree. They not only crumble when asked to explain policy they eventually start to get snappy as they don’t really have any. Brexit is also a subject they get upset over. Say anything against it and they see red. Showing respect is also important to voters. Particularly to those who tend to vote that far right in the UK. As a working class lad respect was drummed into me. You never snap. I am from a northern city which would be classed as red wall.
They just held a £25K per head fundraiser last Tuesday, reportedly managing to attract a number of former Tory donors.
It's not unlikely that there will be a split in the Tory Party at some point with a number of establishment figures jumping across.
At present the established parties spend most of their time rubbishing the way that the Reform MPs get on in the Commons - great idea but the average voter won't be too troubled about that since the only time most of the general public see anything of what goes on in Westminster is either soundbites on the TV news or coverage of the State Opening. Meanwhile, the Reform MPs will learn quickly, and two of them in particular (Richard Tice and Rupert Lowe) should worry both Labour and Conservatives because these have been serious operators before entering Parliament.
Unless Starmer and Labour get a firm grip on things and bring about some serious improvement in the day-to-day lives ordinary voters, and of people outside the South East in particular, I think they could pose a serious threat because everybody, bar GB News, just writes them off as an irrelevant sideshow.
But as you say, people won't generally see that. Particularly those who rely on GB News.
Sadly, people are taken in by these clowns. Dangerous clowns.
I'd be wary of idea that their judgement is necessarily the product of total ignorance. There is plenty to criticise in the way Parliament conducts itself, and there are plenty of people who find the element of theatre off putting.
If people believe Parliament needs to be reformed in some way but haven't heard arguments for reform articulated, they may well be tempted to select the 'burn it all down' option.
Indeed and I've come across Reform supporters who are banging on about this. It's an own-goal.
Meanwhile, sadly I think @chrisstiles is onto something with the popular appeal of a 'burn it all down' approach. I heard of a recent poll in which a significant number of young people said that they'd like to see a 'strong leader' approach with Parliament sidelined. Think Trump. Think Putin.
The rest of us have got to get our acts together.
The irony with Farage et al isn't just that they are even more 'establishment' than the establishment they criticise but their behaviour in the Commons is worse than those they criticise too. Word has it that they heckle, make snide remarks and reek from their bilious sessions in the bar before PM Question Time.
At yet still they gain traction.
They are like 'anti-matter', they feed off gaps and negativity. They have nothing constructive or positive to offer but play on people's fears and discontent.
I wish it were true @Hugal that their 'crown is slipping' but sadly many people can't see that the Emperor has no clothes.
That's a very particular reading of a somewhat more nuanced poll (and was occasion for David Mitchell to throw a rattle); Reform support isn't coming from the young for the most part.
I think that has so far been true. But I think that could change rapidly. Populism at the moment seems outrageous and rebellious and entertaining. This is often a good sell to the young.
Yes, and by extension those saying they should be ignored or have nothing worthwhile to say are perceived as saying those peoples fears and grievances are also to be ignored and not worthwhile. Which only drives them further towards Reform.
What, @Marvin the Martian have you got to offer the 'pissed off' in stead of what Reform offers, something which is no more than a more braggart version of 'vote for me because I'm pissed off too'?
And before other shipmates take the opportunity to leap in with some version of 'true socialism' rather than the vapid pale pink version you accuse Starmer of having sold out to, I'd remind you that that didn't get Corbyn into office.
I hesitate to say what my offer would be. Having expressed earlier today on the Brexit thread how disengaged, disenchanted and deracinated I have felt since June 2016, what might inspire me is hardly likely to inspire my disenchanted fellow electors. But what @Marvin the Martian is yours? What is your offer to fill the political vacuum that Reform, Trump, or the AfD exploit, to detach the disaffected from them and to recreate a politics that will deliver good rather than evil for those that vote.
Nobody thinks Starmer sold out to socialism of any shade.
There are better standard bearers than Corbyn, and I find it awfully convenient that you try to throw the policy baby out with the personal bathwater. Much as I like the man he lacks the ruthless streak needed in a party leader. Had John McDonnell been the candidate in 2015 things might have been very different. They might be again with someone like Zarah Sultana at the helm. Faiza Shaheen would be even better, but Starmer's mob felt threatened by her and decided to keep IDS in parliament instead.
Many people have real grievances - cost of living increases meaning they can no longer afford to pay rent/mortgage, the utility bill and buy food (much less new clothes or a chance of a holiday); renting a property where the owner keeps putting up rent above inflation and doesn't fix things that go wrong; people who can't see the doctor when they need to or have been waiting for treatment. These are real and legitimate concerns and need politicians who are going to do something that addresses those - but I'm not seeing much action from either Labour or Conservative (or, SNP) to prevent price gouging rent increases, nor much to reorganise utilities suppliers so that services improve and costs are cut (why, for example, are electricity prices pegged to gas when wind and solar is much cheaper than that?), and though there has been some action to increase health service funding it's still a long way from fixing the problems of 14 years of chronic underfunding. But, on these issues I'm not seeing any sensible policy from Reform either.
But, many fears and grievances are entirely manufactured by media and politicians simply to have things they can play off to get votes. Concerns about migration fall into that category, as do the whole culture war calling LGBTQ+ people a threat to anyone. A rational "solution" to imaginary fears isn't to persecute people who are not at fault. Legislation to deny trans people medical treatment they need, or state that they don't exist, doesn't help anyone because trans people are not a problem - all that happens is that trans people are denied their rights and often their lives. Stopping people coming to the UK to claim asylum doesn't address problems with finding housing or getting access to a doctor, because asylum seekers aren't the people who haven't invested in building homes or training doctors. Forcing people not born in the UK (or, even worse, people who were but have recent ancestors who weren't born in the UK) to leave, or making it harder for people to move here to live and work, just makes issues with housing and health care worse - because these people are often those we rely on to build homes or harvest food or work in our hospitals - and also because the costs of providing services for them are less than the tax income they directly (and, even more so indirectly) generate to pay for those services. But, how do you sell rational and sensible policy options to people who have been conned into believing rubbish? It's easy to say they're wrong, but that can also easily make people think you're calling them an idiot for believing rubbish. And, that's guaranteed to get people's back up, and won't make them listen to being told where they've been mislead.
AFAICR last time you expressed a preference here it was for a government that would change nothing but do so in a professional way. Which is certainly a view, albeit a somewhat privileged one and that offers few people anything at all (bar the fairly comfortably retired).
But it is more nuanced than you are making out to be. More people turned out to vote for Corbyn’s Labour at each election than turned out when Starmer won. Turn out is important. Let that sink in. When Corbyn lost he had more votes than Starmer won with.
It has been said many many times on here that Starmer’s Labour didn’t win the last election the Conservatives lost it.
Now he is being described as nothing more than a puppet of the Labour right. No one can say Corbyn was a puppet. In fact people called him out for not fitting in. So yes Starmer won but the comparison you are trying to make does stand up to scrutiny
Labour kept one ward, with a turnout of around 24%, but Reform won the other two - with a turnout of just 16%...
The danger lies in apathy and indifference, I fear.
So true
The flip side of this is that local council elections always have low turnout, especially outside the normal election cycle.
Additionally, if Labour continue running to the right they aren't going to motivate their normal electoral coalition to turn out for them, and that's on them.
I'm not sure we can think I'm those terms any more.
I see growing support for Reform in what we might call 'traditional' Labour areas, certainly around here.
It seems that Labour is becoming - or has become - the party of school teachers, health professionals and public sector workers. I'm not knocking that. But socially-conservative traditional Labour voters are either not voting at all - particularly in local elections - or considering Reform.
That's how it looks to me on the ground. The left/liberal vote is split between Labour, the Greens and the Lib Dems. Round here Reform are not just a threat to the Tories -
but to Labour.
Yes, I could envisage some defections to Reform from the Tory right - and they'd love to have Braverman - but most Tory activists I come across hate Reform with a passion.
At any rate, I'm not sure that it's as simple as a swing to the left restoring Labour's standing in its traditional 'red wall' heartlands.
That stable door is open and the horse has bolted.
I'm not sure what the answer is.
There's no substance whatsoever to the Reform message but somehow they are successfully getting it across in a way that more nuanced parties aren't.
It's all bollocks but people believe it.
Once they get more experience and a proper infrastructure then yes, they will pose a considerable threat.
How do we counter that threat?
That's the big question.