An embarrassment of hitches: catastrophic leadership ratings for Starmer leave him trailing all of his opponents by light-years

I mentioned yesterday that there was a new (or new-ish) GB-wide poll from More In Common, and although it didn't show any further movement against Labour and in fact showed a minor dip in Reform UK support, it nevertheless served up yet more dreadful leadership ratings for Keir Starmer.

Net ratings (More In Common, 6th-10th December 2024):

Ed Davey (Liberal Democrats): -8

Kemi Badenoch (Conservatives): -9

Nigel Farage (Reform UK): -10

Keir Starmer (Labour): -35

Rachel Reeves (Labour): -35

The -10 rating for Farage is derived from 27% of the sample having a positive opinion of him and 38% having a negative opinion of him.  (I know those numbers don't quite tally up - the discrepancy is caused by rounding.)  That latter figure is hugely significant, because the equivalent figure in years gone by was often 60% or above.  If 62% of the British electorate are not actively hostile to him, there is no longer any ceiling on Reform support, or at least not one low enough to make it impossible for the party to win a general election.

On the head-to-head question about whether Starmer or Badenoch would be the better Prime Minister, Starmer still leads by a slender margin of 28% to 23%.  But that's nowhere near as big an advantage as it should be, given the general consensus that Badenoch is hapless, and the 49% of the sample who answered "neither of the above" should be of huge concern to both leaders.  With increasing evidence that British politics is now a three-way battle for power, I'm not sure how much longer More in Common can really justify excluding Farage from the head-to-head.  There'll probably end up being three questions - Starmer v Badenoch, Starmer v Farage, and Badenoch v Farage.

Incidentally, there are also approval ratings for the two largest parties, and they show the Tories on a dismal -28, with Labour on an even more dismal -35.  So, oddly, Badenoch is outperforming her party for now, although that's probably just because she's still relatively little-known and many people have yet to form an opinion of her.

*  *  *

Poll commissions, poll analysis, election analysis, podcasts, videos, truly independent political commentary - that's Scot Goes Pop, running since 2008 and currently the fifth most-read political blog in Scotland.  It's only been possible due to your incredibly generous support.  If you find the site useful and would like to help it to continue, donations by card payment are welcome HERE, or alternatively donations can be made direct by PayPal.  My PayPal email address is:  jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk

An under-appreciated side-effect of the Reform UK surge: it may put proportional representation for Westminster back on the agenda

Since the penny started to drop that Nigel Farage and Reform may be emerging as serious contenders for power at the next general election, I've been repeatedly making the point that this could potentially have the side-benefit of jolting the Scottish public into recognising the urgent need for independence.  But I've also been trying to think if there are any other more direct benefits.  It suddenly struck me that, amazing though it may seem, Reform do actually have one genuinely good policy, and it relates to something that I've supported for even longer than I've supported independence - namely proportional representation.  So, on paper at least, a Reform government ought to finally deliver a cherished dream of progressive politicians down the ages, going back to the likes of Jo Grimond, Roy Jenkins and Shirley Williams.

There is, of course, a snag.  Suppose the Reform bandwagon keeps rolling to such an extent that they get into the mid-to-high 30s and end up winning an outright majority.  Would they really stick to their policy on proportional representation, or would they (like PR-curious Prime Ministers such as Tony Blair before them) suddenly become born-again converts to the dubious virtues of first-past-the-post?  Forgive me for being cynical about NIGEL FARAGE of all people, but I think it would be the latter.  He probably wouldn't officially ditch the policy, but he would say there wasn't enough time for it because there are so many other more important things to be getting on with.

In truth, though, it's hard to imagine Reform going from single digits to an outright majority in one jump.  A more likely scenario for them 'winning' the general election might be something more like this, which is based on yesterday's Techne poll but with the numbers swapped around to put Reform ahead - 

Reform UK 27%

Conservatives 25%

Labour 22%

Liberal Democrats 11%

Greens 7%

SNP 3%

Let me make clear that I agree with everyone who says that Electoral Calculus is a dud projection model, but as it's the easiest one to find and use, here is what it says the above would translate into in terms of seats - 

Conservatives 179

Reform UK 176

Labour 164

Liberal Democrats 70

SNP 23

Greens 5

Plaid Cymru 4

Others 29

The only viable government in this scenario would involve some kind of deal between the Tories and Reform UK, probably a full coalition with Kemi Badenoch as Prime Minister.  But there would still be a very, very strong incentive for Reform to make proportional representation a condition of that deal.  They'd know it might make them kingmakers for decades to come, and would increase their chances of sometimes being the largest party and getting their leader installed as PM.  Unlike Nick Clegg in 2010, they might not back off from the demand, and they would have far more numerical leverage than he did anyway.

So it would be a straightforward choice for the Tories - buy themselves five years in government but at the cost of probably never being able to win an overall majority ever again, or do what Harold Wilson did in February 1974, ie. reject all overtures, form a minority government on a caretaker basis, and hope for the best in a snap election a few months later.  I'm really not sure the Tories would make the same choice as Wilson, because with the momentum that would be behind Reform by that stage, a deal might look necessary if the Tories are to survive as an electoral force.

There's also another point: if a major Reform UK breakthrough starts to look inevitable as the next election approaches, and if Labour's chances of winning a majority or remaining the largest party look slim to non-existent, would it not make sense for the Labour government to pre-empt the situation and introduce proportional representation themselves?  In many ways it would, but I still don't think they would do it.  Rational self-interest has its limits, as we've seen many times before.

*  *  *

Poll commissions, poll analysis, election analysis, podcasts, videos, truly independent political commentary - that's Scot Goes Pop, running since 2008 and currently the fifth most-read political blog in Scotland.  It's only been possible due to your incredibly generous support.  If you find the site useful and would like to help it to continue, donations by card payment are welcome HERE, or alternatively donations can be made direct by PayPal.  My PayPal email address is:  jkellysta@yahoo.co.uk