If Labour loses the next UK election,

[toilet towl]

What happened?

[Zinneke]

The media landscape is still pro-Tory and a leadership change could make the Tories seem fresher than they are. In fact, I predict a massive campaign from the broadsheet and tabloids alike about some sort of comeback being beneficial and how labour will lead the UK to a major capital flight scenario, with trans women eating newborn babies.

Starmer is also very dull.

People have much shorter memories than before.

[gerritcole]

Nadia whitcomb tony Blair unity ticket, promise to dissolve the monarchy, apologize for Britain’s past, and give up their final colony Scotland and grant independence, this will deliver labour a victory

[afleitch]

'Better the Tory you know that the Tory you don't.'

[CumbrianLefty]

The media landscape is still pro-Tory and a leadership change could make the Tories seem fresher than they are. In fact, I predict a massive campaign from the broadsheet and tabloids alike about some sort of comeback being beneficial and how labour will lead the UK to a major capital flight scenario, with trans women eating newborn babies.

Starmer is also very dull.

People have much shorter memories than before.

Disagree on most of that tbh. It comes across as both a very "online" perspective (however much the bubble fulminates, bashing trans people is *not* going to influence most voters) and one made from outside the UK - which means you almost certainly underestimate the current extent of sheer fatigue and irritation with the Tory party both amongst the electorate and even the same elite that ensured their electoral triumph so unscrupulously, and on occasion dementedly, last time around.

I do think we can forget about a ferocious, united media campaign to re-elect the Tories next time - it won't be 1992 or 2015, never mind 2019. Quite a few feel residual guilt about being so mendacious then and thus enabling both Johnson and Truss to wreck the country, and on a more intellectual level they recognise the Tories are totally out of ideas and *need* a spell in opposition.

(and that's even before considering the factionalism that now pervades the party, and does so much to impede Sunak's attempts in presenting his regime as a fresh start)

And in some ways Starmer's undoubted dullness is an asset, not least in blunting scare campaigns.

Lastly, do people *really* have shorter memories than before? Would appreciate some evidence there - in particular I think the Fifty Days Of Misrule will haunt the Tories for some time to come.

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Keir Starmer decides to copy Boris and hire loads of Australian advisors.

[CumbrianLefty]

'Better the Tory you know that the Tory you don't.'

In the real world, the number of people who ever vote Tory "because Labour isn't left wing enough" is tiny - though always disproportionately vocal

[Conservatopia]

Realistically to win the Tories need to turn out 85% of the people who voted for them last time. Seeing as these people actually voted for the Tories last time, there's a good chance they do so again.

Essentially what I'm saying is that for the Tories to win there doesn't need to be any dramatic event - just people gradually filtering back to their 2019 votes over the next 15 months.

To be clear, I don't think this will happen, but it's important to realise that a Tory victory in 2024 isn't such a remote prospect and could just happen naturally.

[Zinneke]

The media landscape is still pro-Tory and a leadership change could make the Tories seem fresher than they are. In fact, I predict a massive campaign from the broadsheet and tabloids alike about some sort of comeback being beneficial and how labour will lead the UK to a major capital flight scenario, with trans women eating newborn babies.

Starmer is also very dull.

People have much shorter memories than before.

Disagree on most of that tbh. It comes across as both a very "online" perspective (however much the bubble fulminates, bashing trans people is *not* going to influence most voters) and one made from outside the UK - which means you almost certainly underestimate the current extent of sheer fatigue and irritation with the Tory party both amongst the electorate and even the same elite that ensured their electoral triumph so unscrupulously, and on occasion dementedly, last time around.

To be clear, I do not actually believe it will happen, I am answering OP's question as to what would be the introspection if the Tories pull of a shock win. And that would involve for example :

- inflation and shortages linked to Brexit no longer being headline news, some other issue instead

- loads of anti-Labour/anti-trans op eds about how better the devil you know than the devil you don't.

- Starmer being found out under scrutiny as being uninspiring and failing to get the vote out out of complacency or lack of ambition.

I do think voter fatigue with the tories will come out on top, I'm just saying in the unlikely outcome that the Tories win that's the kind of cocktail we'll see

I do think we can forget about a ferocious, united media campaign to re-elect the Tories next time - it won't be 1992 or 2015, never mind 2019. Quite a few feel residual guilt about being so mendacious then and thus enabling both Johnson and Truss to wreck the country, and on a more intellectual level they recognise the Tories are totally out of ideas and *need* a spell in opposition.

Let's analyse the op eds when the time comes. Right now its full of criticism for the Tories but its easy to do that while there is no election campaign yet.

And in some ways Starmer's undoubted dullness is an asset, not least in blunting scare campaigns.

Is it in modern political times? The post-modern campaign will be full of set pieces, bacon sandwich photo ops and debates rather than actually talking about public policy. If Starmer doesn't come across well in these, it could cost Labour regardless of them overturning the Tories.

Lastly, do people *really* have shorter memories than before? Would appreciate some evidence there - in particular I think the Fifty Days Of Misrule will haunt the Tories for some time to come.

Well we certainly live in a more accelerated society, and I think that acceleration means that voters too yearn for something fresh and new and the Tory Trotsky-redux permanent revolution of PM candidates helps them hug the spotlight and create a semblance of freshness to be able to last 13 years in power. I think people will tire of Starmer because he isn't an entertainer, and despite his best efforts and obviously being qualified for the job, he alone cannot raise the UK's living standards without world affairs playing a role in that either.

I'm still 95% sure Labour will win a crunching majority but I wouldn't overrate their prospects.

[CumbrianLefty]

Well 95% odds of a Labour win is pretty good actually

My own view is that won't now be overturned by "normal" means - we are going to need some sort of at present unforeseen "deux et machina" in the Tories favour.

And btw a lot of Tories are also worried about how Sunak might stand up in an actual GE campaign.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

I would definitely assume sabotage by dead-enders was part of it, although the odds of this seem so low that it's more likely that there was some major world or national event that gave Sunak a leadership aura that was hard to overcome.

[Yeahsayyeah]

A meteor vaporising London?

[CumbrianLefty]

Realistically to win the Tories need to turn out 85% of the people who voted for them last time. Seeing as these people actually voted for the Tories last time, there's a good chance they do so again.

Leaving aside the plausibility of this for now, does it take into account demographic changes since the last GE - in particular "natural wastage" amongst the Tories mainly more elderly supporters?

[Person Man]

Do you want someone to say that Labour will finally give up?

[Benjamin Frank]

I think it would primarily mean that Rishi Sunak was successful with his two or so years of governing. On a number of fronts he seems to be doing a decent job. I'm not quite sure he's 'no drama Sunak' but he seems to pass the minimum competancy threshhold anyway.

[Conservatopia]

Realistically to win the Tories need to turn out 85% of the people who voted for them last time. Seeing as these people actually voted for the Tories last time, there's a good chance they do so again.

Leaving aside the plausibility of this for now, does it take into account demographic changes since the last GE - in particular "natural wastage" amongst the Tories mainly more elderly supporters?

There's not enough of it to make a meaningful difference over one cycle.

The vast, overwhelming majority of the 2019 Tory vote is still alive and leans to the right. Doesn't mean the Tories will them all of course, but it does mean that it's Labour that has to climb the hill, while the Tories need to turn out their 2019 vote.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The trouble is that rather a lot of people who voted Conservative in 2019, and actually also 2017, have no tribal loyalty to the party and are now very angry with it and would rather drink battery acid than vote for it. Casting a vote for a party in one election does not make you more likely to vote for it at the next one: this is a common error made by politicians and political activists who project the psychology of internal elections (where, yes, voting is habit-forming) on to the wider public.

[Epaminondas]

The vast, overwhelming majority of the 2019 Tory vote is still alive and leans to the right. Doesn't mean the Tories will them all of course, but it does mean that it's Labour that has to climb the hill, while the Tories need to turn out their 2019 vote.

Sadly this is true. Apathetic voters are still apathetic after years of hearing Labour are Holocaust-lovers, and old voters will still vote their wallet rather than their morals.

Labour has a steep slope ahead of it to win back any of the '17-'19 Con voters, and right now past polling errors point to a hung parliament in 2024.

[CumbrianLefty]

The vast, overwhelming majority of the 2019 Tory vote is still alive and leans to the right. Doesn't mean the Tories will them all of course, but it does mean that it's Labour that has to climb the hill, while the Tories need to turn out their 2019 vote.

Sadly this is true. Apathetic voters are still apathetic after years of hearing Labour are Holocaust-lovers, and old voters will still vote their wallet rather than their morals.

Labour has a steep slope ahead of it to win back any of the '17-'19 Con voters, and right now past polling errors point to a hung parliament in 2024.

Meanwhile in the real world, surveys regularly show a higher number of Con-Lab switchers than was the case pre-1997. As for the ridiculously lazy hand-wavy bit about "past polling errors"; there hasn't been an election decided by largely mythical "shy Tories" since 1992. Labour support was not majorly overestimated by polling in 2019, 2017, 2010 or even 2005. The one exception to that in recent years was due to one-off factors that are unlikely to occur in that way again.

Anything is possible, but ignorance such as that expressed in your post gets my goat.

[Conservatopia]

The vast, overwhelming majority of the 2019 Tory vote is still alive and leans to the right. Doesn't mean the Tories will them all of course, but it does mean that it's Labour that has to climb the hill, while the Tories need to turn out their 2019 vote.

Sadly this is true. Apathetic voters are still apathetic after years of hearing Labour are Holocaust-lovers, and old voters will still vote their wallet rather than their morals.

Labour has a steep slope ahead of it to win back any of the '17-'19 Con voters, and right now past polling errors point to a hung parliament in 2024.

With respect, that's not what I said in either of my posts. Labour will likely win the election comfortably.

[icc]

The trouble is that rather a lot of people who voted Conservative in 2019, and actually also 2017, have no tribal loyalty to the party and are now very angry with it and would rather drink battery acid than vote for it. Casting a vote for a party in one election does not make you more likely to vote for it at the next one: this is a common error made by politicians and political activists who project the psychology of internal elections (where, yes, voting is habit-forming) on to the wider public.

That’s not correct - there is a lot of research showing that voting *is* habit forming, particularly when people first vote.

[CumbrianLefty]

Realistically to win the Tories need to turn out 85% of the people who voted for them last time. Seeing as these people actually voted for the Tories last time, there's a good chance they do so again.

Leaving aside the plausibility of this for now, does it take into account demographic changes since the last GE - in particular "natural wastage" amongst the Tories mainly more elderly supporters?

There's not enough of it to make a meaningful difference over one cycle.

The vast, overwhelming majority of the 2019 Tory vote is still alive and leans to the right. Doesn't mean the Tories will them all of course, but it does mean that it's Labour that has to climb the hill, while the Tories need to turn out their 2019 vote.

Depends what you define as "meaningful". What is undoubtedly true is that since the 2019 GE there has been a significant number of mostly older voters passing on, combined with an influx of mostly younger voters entering the electoral rolls. Of course this happens between all elections, and only has possible significance now because of the extreme age polarisation we have seen in recent years.

Even if it makes only 1-2% difference overall, that might still be enough to swing a close contest.

[Blair]

A growing economy, a pre election tax cut and a relentless focus on Labour tax rises would be the most likely way to do well- combined with Starmers relatively lukewarm appeal and the struggle to have a good retail offer could mean that it’s closer.

Although it’s worth remembering a lot of leaders of the opposition won without any love; Cameron, Thatcher, Wilson, Heath etc.

[Property Representative of the Harold Holt Swimming Centre]

A growing economy, a pre election tax cut and a relentless focus on Labour tax rises would be the most likely way to do well- combined with Starmers relatively lukewarm appeal and the struggle to have a good retail offer could mean that it’s closer.

Although it’s worth remembering a lot of leaders of the opposition won without any love; Cameron, Thatcher, Wilson, Heath etc.

I don't think Wilson quite belongs in that category. He captured something of the 1960s spirit with the White Heat of Technology and was popular until 1967 or so.

[CumbrianLefty]

I think Wilson was quite popular in 1964 tbf, its one reason why the result being so close was a bit of a shock. Blair's appeal pre 1997, whilst very real, has definitely been exaggerated a bit in retrospect though - a *lot* of people then were still mainly anti-Tory rather than enthusiastic about New Labour.