Some remarkable research from Onward today re: voting intentions of under-40s and the factors influencing how they're leaning.

Something potentially pivotal from it... have we underestimated whether or not you're married as a key factor in voting intention? Bringing this over from t'other place:

The Simpsons being right yet again...! :P

Posted this on t'other place y/day, in context of govt's also-surreal response to the Glasto discourse.

Problem with all this (dogged Israel-backing, perseverance w/ welfare cuts) is the public are asking why. And a govt without (convincing) answers risks losing its (moral) authority on everything.

Yes, we can extrapolate the victory of Zohran Mamdani to national and global politics. But not in the way you might immediately think.

My thoughts below. (TL;DR? Establishment/moderate flagbearers of the Left letting go of the arrogance that caused their loss y/day might save them in the long run).

Some fascinating breakdowns posted here.

But I feel these, in comparison to each other, say a lot about the type of voter Labour courted (or *needed* to court) to enable their GE win - and says a lot more about the type of voter Lab have managed to keep during their implosion these last few months.

Precedent. I found 2021 research identifying non-prevalance of c-left -> 'rad. right' switching in Europe.

"largest share of voters that switched to radical right parties in the past 20 years previously supported a mainstream right party. The second largest group are non-voters."

Hear it, Labour?!

I posited LAB holding up among young is due to role as CON govt main oppo (to organise around). Those coming of age then 'bought in' to LAB as best vehicle for change (+ became party of aspiration once CON sullied mortgage rates) → unusual high loyalty to a party these days? bsky.app/profile/matt...

This isn't the existential crisis for Labour that Farage hopes for, though. It's a shot across the bow.

This graph of motivation of voting choices supports that.

Farage is right to rebuke suggestions Reform's *purely* a protest vote... but it's dangerous for him to assume the exact opposite. 3/5

So... I can add the 'has beaten Labour' string to my bow...

I have sympathy for Chris here, but it doesn't matter one iota when this stuff isn't cutting through.

Labour's comms just suck. I'm a political junkie but would struggle to come up with a positive thing Labour have done other than planning liberalisation - and that was a *couple days* post-GE!

This from laudable @liberalcurrents.com piece exemplifies this in US. No policy defines GOP anymore other than oppo to establishment, which is now machines/institutions of govt itself.

Not yet there in UK; change elex here are "they f**ked the economy (for homeowners), vote for us to punish them".

My '(era of) dead parties' theory continues unabated: voters no longer care about parties' actual policies, but rather what they are *seen* to offer or represent (i.e. why Greens struggle to be seen as more than single-issue party and why change-grasping voters discount Reform's extreme elements).

Maybe: as CON/RFM oppo, Lab seen as Left; actions of Lab blamed on Left + vice-versa -> Left 'fails' if Lab does + v-v -> Left loses 'culture war'; Right adopting Left economic views worsens Left rejection as Left now identified by their cultural views?

Postmateriality; cultural views ≥ economical.

5) Common ground between PAs & rest of electorate, esp. on economic issues b/t Left (Lab+Grn) and Right (RFM)... but introspection/insularity among PAs limits out-group approval of their ideas.

Harms Left in general? I.e. 'Dems get blamed for anything anyone on US Left does'; could it happen here?

4) Report explores diversity of aspects of 'going green'; something for Greens to look at?

As new Green member, aren't aware of just how much party does this - but it's not great when impression get is that the party is split in two and captured by 'zero-sum game' between conservation and progress.

3) Is it good that, on scale of newswatching extent, Green support highest among don't/barely watchers?
a) Compounds party's identity crisis if voters don't explore just how Greens will be green
b) Limits party outreach as overall vagueness working but hiding internal conflict (urban v rural Greens)

2) GE vote by PA archetype; 'soft left' archetype more likely to stick w/ Lab AND vote minor/Ind (professional/priv sector workers; more comfortable life want to protect or more knowledgeable enough to protest vote?). Other archetypes feel MIN/Ind vote dilutes recognisable pressure to Lab from Left?

This article - especially this section - is spot on. Collectivism failed, so people assume it won't deliver desired change, and resign themselves to being aware 'you're on your own'... why *not* just partake in the system as is and reap the benefits of working it to your advantage? Dangerous trend.