collapse is kind of silly since it was about a 15% turnout and the labour candidate only lost by about 100 and had 20 more votes than reform but still.
Wtf?
The drop in vote share or squawkbox’s rather hysterical analysis?
Fucking far right taking 65% in total.
Lumping the Tories and Reform together as far right is certainly a choice but whatever. Wild swings are always going to be more likely with individual ward results because the total number is electors is quite small (~1500 votes in this case). There aren’t many details online but it looks like some local scandal combined with low turnout has lead to a collapse of the vote for Labour. Reform didn’t even stand in the previous campaign and it looks like they have split the Tory vote fairly evenly.
So yes it’s a loss for a ward that was strongly Labour before but it looks driven by local issues and it’s hardly a harbinger referendum on national politics that the article paints it as.
Lumping the Tories and Reform together as far right is certainly a choice but whatever
I haven’t noticed much difference since around 2016.
Reform will always be a little more far right, because they get to say the racist things the Tories wanted to say, but need the waters tested first.
Not by much, but always about 3-4 steps in that direction.
Is this for a town council ward?!
Yes
Why are people up in arms about a ward seat changing hands?
What a horseshit analysis.
You don’t get wholesale movement of votes from Labour to Reform without those Labour voters not actually paying attention to Labour policies.
They obviously felt that Labour had a better chance at making the Tories feel rejected by their base, and once they passed on their “message”, they moved back to their fascist base.
If Starmer really was viewed as right wing as Sqwarkbox claimed, then why would they bother changing their vote? If they replaced Starmer with a communist do they honestly think the votes would have stayed?
What a load of bollocks from the gulag press.
