Now same trend in Denmark as UK and elsewhere – main parties on centre-left and centre-right get worst scores in a century while vote rises on the populist right *and the farther left. Almost as though frustrations with the old party system aren’t only about one issue like immigration?
So much for the genius ‘Danish model’ of the anti-immigration left! Whoever ends up making the next government, that strategy got Frederiksen’s Social Democrats their worst result since 1903 while the populist right surged back – despite Trump’s threat on Greenland, the only reason it wasn’t worse.
All results point to clearest possible demand for change. Young, urban, educated and Muslim voters feel left out - and so do rural & post-industrial voters w/o uni degrees. Right now those 2 blocs are split. Anyone who could pitch to both could run the table. But who’s thinking that far ahead?
Unless Labour manages total break, best case scenario for left-of-centre may look like Spain: (tactical voting in UK to get) a coalition of old centre left and new left party rallying the disaffected. *Real problem is even that is 100% urban and will be eaten alive outside cities - see France, US
Labour Party Starmer Greens Reform Gorton and Denton Polanski Hannah Spencer
Who’d have guessed current Starmer Labour Strategy would lose urban voters and we’d end up with Reform and Greens top of national polls? 🤔 Historic: 1st time in a century neither Tories nor Labour in top two. (Same trend as almost all western democracies mutatis mutandis.)
Not sure about Andy Burnham, yet, but should be clear to anyone in Labour that afraid of voters is not a good look. I’d be curious to see him run a campaign with national issues and see if he’s gotten any better since losing leadership to Corbyn in 2015.
Don’t so often agree w/Kuenssberg but have been saying this for a while. Same thing in France, Sweden, elsewhere. Young giving up on traditional parties in which they feel they have no voice. Same reason rural and post-industrial voters bailing too. Expand the coalition, people!
I get that the idea must be - no waves, get an interest rate cut and hope growth recovers. not crazy, but trust is over and people will vote for 3rd and 4th parties. This govt is living in the past when everyone you had to convince was in the PLP, and if people tired of Tories you were in by default
Sigh. Not great if 3% say better off and still nearly 50% say unfair. So you lose on self-interest and on principle too. YouGov notes elsewhere only Truss mini budget had higher ‘unfair’ score since they started polling. almost as if govt doesn’t have a vision or message for most voters?
Oh right, that’s why
yougov.co.uk/topics/polit...
I’m afraid the BBC headline on Rachel Reeves’ Labour budget is rather apt and just about says it all. I suspect voters will feel a bold reset, finally responding to an electorate broadly convinced the country’s on the wrong track and clamouring for change, it ain’t. But why change course now?
Just sayin’: Danish Social Democrats lose Copenhagen for 1st time in 122 years. They could have done worse, but sign of a shift. Here’s a thought - why not do something *else for rural regions that doesn’t alienate the young, urban and diverse on principle?
#Mahmood #asylum #immigration #Labour
Think anyone in Downing Street or UK Labour actually knows anyone in Denmark? Like who follows politics there? Too bad the Kinnock Thorning-Schmidts moved to Kilburn. A vote to watch!
Shabana Mahmood asylum refugee immigration policy
Source: Edison exit polls, CNN, NYT. Line is median 1980-2024, 17.5 pts. Gender gap in US Presidential elections, 1972-2024
Longer story if you’re interested is big gender gap opens up with Reagan in 1980, since then has fluctuated around a median of 17.5 points. Size of the recent gap doesn’t correlate to candidate’s gender - or even running a campaign centred on abortion rights, after Dobbs
Gender Gap, US Presidential elections, 2000-2024, Kamala Harris v Donald Trump, source: Edison exit polls, CNN, NYT. Line is mean 2000-2024, 19 pts.
Fun fact #2: In the 2024 US Prez election, gender gap was *smaller* than 2020. That’s right, Kamala Harris *lost more votes from women*, compared to Biden, than from men!
Sure, gap still big and important in other ways, but been big on avg for decades and doesn’t explain why Biden won & Harris lost
I know it’s old news, but when I try to go on the other platform, this is literally what ‘my’ algorithm sends me! (And I assure I unfollowed/blocked as much as I could) Anyone for Orwell? 😂
I like ‘pulverizer of all things’
Democratic Party deficit among white voters, US Presidential elections 2000 to 2024, Kamala Harris Donald Trump
Democratic Party advantage among Black voters, US Presidential elections 2000 to 2024, Kamala Harris Donald Trump
Fact to remember: In 2024 Harris did worse with Black voters than *any Dem this century*. And *better with white voters* than anybody except Al Gore and - Barack Obama! Of course race & racism matter, but no good reason to think Harris lost because of her race.
Great piece – nearly 100% agree, tho I’d stress in ‘reshaping identity’ much is about groups who feel politically alienated from what they see as an ‘establishment’ that disrespects them. You know, like 1960s students critics of ‘technocracy’. So not just soulcraft from top down, also giving a say!
OK – just when news cycle was ‘Dems win’ for a few days some decided a better headline was ‘Dems give up’? I get the complexity and risks but now how do you run in 2026 on we’ll fight Trump for working people and not just give up the day after the election when he says no? How do you win back trust?
& don’t get complacent - NYC is 100% urban, & NJ & VA dominated by suburbs, why none voted for Trump. & Trump hammered NJ & especially VA suburbs hard! His strategy is to polarise and lose there to win elsewhere, so don’t assume same swing replicates e.g. in postindustrial Midwest! Rural matters
+ big gender gap in NJ & VA. The whole debate about ‘centre’ vs. ‘Left’ seems to just reflect balance of suburban vs urban voters! Question is how to play in states w/ more RURAL too - probably need a 3rd plank to round out the coalition! Got values & interests, now how about respect?
What’s striking about Mamdani, Sherrill, and Spanberger is how *similar the campaigns were: 1 Stand up to Trump + 2 Affordability for working people (=v. Fed job cuts in VA, electricity prices in NJ, health costs all over). & they won w/ mostly the same voters: young, educated, minority & left
Critique’s right - but answer isn’t just (somehow?) being the cool kid on the playground. Missing issue is Trust - and Respect. If some voters think you ignored and deplored them for 30 years, they’re going to tune out what you’re saying. Winning policies show voters whose side you’re on!
Lucy Powell’s win sends a message: 1) even die-hard Labour supporters want a course correction, 2) but most weren’t too excited about Powell either - turnout was 16.6%! Imagine if instead of talking about rotating personnel someone ran on a programme that spoke to voters?
Yes, some progressive policies, for educated, urban voters and young people, *and also some policies for rural voters without university degrees. In Wales Plaid speaks to both but in England Greens or Corbyn target urban or educated only. And current govt is losing both groups at once!
& Caerphilly is *not a failure for Farage’s Reform - from 1.7% to 36%, & there’s no Welsh nationalist party to compete in most of UK. Solution isn’t to copy their programme - but it does start with seeing we’re on a cliff edge and need to stop talking only to the same limited circle of voters
Afraid this was predictable: in a seat Labour held for a century they pulled 11% - almost exactly approval rating of the current government. Same exact trend in nearly all OECD democracies! What was that one about a river in Egypt?
www.theguardian.com/politics/202...
yougov.co.uk/topics/polit...
Sure economics matters in politics, but not just ‘the economy’. Distrustful - & non-university - voters see policy as showing ‘which side are you on?’ Thus Trump’s tariffs, Mamdani’s rent freeze. Both register where Biden-Bernie soft-pedalled investment did not. It’s about trust, not ‘abundance’