Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Labour had less people vote for them in 2024 than in 2019.

How is it possible they got a landslide victory, not a landslide defeat?

Firstly, the maths. Lanour's vote share went up from 32% to 34% but the overall election turnout was much lower this time (60% vrs 68%). So more people did vote labour in. 2019. The said election result was widely reported as a disaster for labour.

The real story, is of course, the total collapse in the Tory vote. Much of their base stayed at home or voted for Reform. The depth of anti-toryism in the country also meant a lot of tactical voting. 'Anti-tories' didn't care whether it was a Lib Dem or Labour candidate as long as team blue got a kicking. Also, the SNP (deeply affected by their own crisis) suffered to Lanour's gain.

This just shows the real absurdity of our electoral system that you can get a landslide victory and a dominant house majority from a third of the vote.
SunshineGirl · 36-40, F
All the parties knew the system in advance. Labour managed to navigate it most successfully.

But at the end of the day, we vote local politicians who decide how best their constituency should be represented in parliament. Despite popular belief and collusion of the media, it is not supposed to be a popularity contest for a party or prime minister. I think this misunderstanding accounts for a lot of the subsequent disillusionment.

If we adopt PR, the whole parliamentary and electoral system will have to be redrawn. However flawed the current system, I am today personally very grateful that the party which obtained the third largest share of the vote has only obtained four seats.
AdaXI · 41-45, T
Yeah I wonder how many didn't vote due to photo ID issues.. I mean there's bound to of been a small percentage due to that one maybe?

That all said though, bigger picture wise I get what you're saying here. I mean there was a major collapse in the Tory vote of something like 20% but it wasn't like Labour really picked up a significant amount of them, they pretty much maintained what they had last time out.

So seems a lot of the smaller parties shared out what the Tories actually lost or they voted Tories last time but didn't bother voting at all this time out. All in all though it probably means well over two thirds of the country are not really too sure if Starmer's Labour are really the right guys for the job...

Which to be fair I don't know anyone that particularly likes Starmer but considering the complete joke the Tory party had become with 4 different leaders in as many years, countless blunders and political scandals, I didn't know anyone who was going to vote for them either.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@AdaXI A point that I want to add us that - though labour got a similar number of voters to last time - it's probably not all the same people.

We are yet to see the deep number crunch but the I'll bet that the labour electorate this time veered towards more middle aged and centrist, rather than young or leftwing from last time.

I think labour did pick up a number of Tory voters but lost at least the same number to other parties, especially the Greens.

We know why.
AdaXI · 41-45, T
@Burnley123 Yeah I totally agree my friend I mean it won't be exactly the same people who voted Labour last time but we all know the Tories lost out big time and for good reason.

I mean what do you think of Starmer's Labour?

I just don't think it's like when Tony Blair's New Labour won where they'll be completely untouchable for the first 4 years or so where they had like a euphoria of 'change' about them.

That all said I'm just banding ideas about here and it's hard to really say what the vote figures mean this time around because the political spectrum has changed so much. Like Boris got a big vote the last time purely through the Brexit situation which obviously isn't a factor anymore.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@AdaXI In terms of Starmer's labour: I think they'll become fairly unpopular within a year to eighteen months when people realise how little different they are to the conservatives

People aren't ready to hear this yet because I'm 'radical left' and will need to experience this for themselves. I hope I'm wrong.
Northwest · M
People believed the polls and thought: my vote is not going to matter, so I might as well enjoy the nice weather?
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@Northwest that may be true, but, historically that one vote magnified by similar ones products less democracy. On the US, in 2016, a few more votes, in the right states, would have altered history!
Northwest · M
@samueltyler2 Same in 2000 but a massively different scale. A hundred or so votes, in Florida, could have meant that:

- The "Bin Laden is up to something" memo could have been acted upon.

- Iraq would not have been invaded.

- There would be peace between Israel and Palestinians.

- The tectonic shift caused by the refugee crisis would not have happened, and the neo-Nazi movements in Europe, and the USA would not have happened.

- We could be breathing cleaner air.
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
@Northwest actually the votes were probably there in 2000, the decision was not made by actually recounting the ballots, the hanging chad problem, but by SCOTUS and Al Gore being a gentleman.
MartinII · 70-79, M
I'm not sure it's quite as absurd as it seems at first sight. The election produced what almost everyone, irrespective of their general political views, would have thought was the right result on this occasion, namely a Labour government and a good kicking for the Conservatives. Any other electoral system would I think have produced the same result, though perhaps with less dramatic numbers.

That said, the relatively low vote share for Labour does I think contain a warning for Starmer, or rather two warnings, one from the right, one from the left. They hardly matter at the moment, but they will begin to in a few years time when minds turn to the next election, especially if (if!) the Tories manage to get their act together.
smiler2012 · 56-60
@Burnley123 i think there was an about a sixty percent bothered too vote for either tactical or what ever reason . no matter how many vote the result is based on this and the fact only three fifth eligable to vote did labour got the lions share of the votes cast
Philth · 46-50, M
I've just been looking at the results for Islington North, won by Corbyn who is now an independent and therefore, standing against Labour.
If you want to see a true landslide victory, this is it.
RedBaron · M
*FEWER people took LESS time to cast FEWER votes.

We Americans shouldn’t have to correct your English. 🤣
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Well I'm happy with the result- lots of British just whinge whinge whinge, I'm quite optimistic about what Labour can do.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@BritishFailedAesthetic Listen to your wife more. 😜
@Burnley123 I'm a boring Blairite. My only real Corbynista view is on housing.

Plus I am suspicious of the far left censoring views, taxing churches, etc. 😅
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@BritishFailedAesthetic like I said...

Just think... Rishi had at least two years he spent moaning about immigrants and Rwanda that he could have used to bring in reforms of the electoral system instead...
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@HootyTheNightOwl The electoral system has normally helped the Conservatives but in this election, it was the opposite
@Burnley123 It's probably the amount of people that the Tories pissed off that came home to roost for the party as a whole.

I'm still not even sure what prompted Rishi to come out of the gate in the campaign with his "National Service" idea. On paper, it sounded reasonably good - but in theory, I still don't understand how he logically thought it would work out.

26 weekends is only 6 months - so, what's the point in taking an 18 year old and training them for 2 months to carry out a voluntary role for 4 months??? The time and energy would have been better spent on building up work experience programmes for the sick and disabled to try different jobs before they have to take the plunge and apply for a job that they might not be able to do when it comes to the crunch.

They want the number of long term sick and disabled to go down, yet they're happy to push them into cleaning jobs (where they need a driving licence that they might or might not be able to hold) rather than helping them to establish if there are any jobs they might be able to do that they haven't otherwise considered.
OldBrit · 61-69, M
Yep but long has it been daft. Tory majority last time in a minority vote share so whatever. Lib Democrats very clever targeted seats so lower share than Reform but way more sears.
samueltyler2 · 80-89, M
Sadly in the "free world" voting is not required, and many take it as more a luxury.
kutee · T
mp's thats how, it how many mp's you get that makes oyu win simplse
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@kutee I understand lolz.

Post Comment