Worth mentioning that no-one has yet polled the public on whether they think Britain should join in offensive strikes. Net support before the Iraq invasion in 2003 reached -50s and Britain still went ahead
But importantly, that doesn't mean that Brits want offensive action against Iran. Brits are much more strongly opposed to military action overseas than Americans (who are already net opposed), and this opposition has only strengthend over the last 20 years since Iraq (and Libya)
Most Brits also think it is important to stop Iran developing a nuclear weapon
However, Brits are very worried about the threat from Iran (from some polling @moreincommonuk.bsky.social did last year during the 12 day war) - net +40/50s for most statements about Iran being a threat, including that their they pose a significant threat to the UK (net +31 think true)
Firstly, per Yougov Brits are strongly opposed to the US/Israeli attacks (net -21 support)
Pressure on Keir Starmer from some quarters to launch offensive strikes against Iran (as opposed to just shooting down drones/missiles as they are launched at British bases), but what do the public actually think? 🧵
But they still got a decent swing (nearly 15pp) - and, come a general election, might be looking to expand their target list (if the split on the left persists)
For Reform, they might be feeling a bit silly for hyping themselves up so much in a seat that was always really an outside chance, but it shows they are willing to play on divisions within the left to come through the middle (or far right) and take seats in a GE
That said, the same is true if you tell people it is close between Reform and Green, but the Greens benefit from not being in national gov't and the opprobrium that brings (even when you aren't cocking it up as badly as Labour are)
Labour had a real uphill battle given their national standing (but god knows they tried with all those terrible squeeze leaflets) - see that, even if you tell people it is a close race between Reform and Labour, you still get 26pc of Green voters choosing Green
But the Greens did incredibly well both to set themselves up as the main alternative to Reform (and therefore to attract that 52pc of Lab voters who fear them) and to mobilise those 19pc of their own supporters who wouldn't think to vote Labour
Green and Labour supporters really really dislike Reform - it's overwhelmingly the party they would vote against (Reform supporters also really hate Lab, and are indifferent about Greens), so you might think Labour would have won this by-election
Cost of living hasn't stopped been top issue since pandemic, comes up without fail across focus groups with energy and food prices biggest drivers. If Govt can own this fall in prices it will be an opportunity to do claim a tangible 'we've made your life better' win.
The Resolution Foundation confronting the effects of its policy recommendations
🧵Reform’s promise to scrap the employees’ rights act as part of the Great Repeal Bill could risk alienating a group of their potential voters. Here's why it's a risk
Firstly, as polling we've done for @jrf-uk.bsky.social shows - Brits across voter groups support key elements of the act
Take all these together and that points to a substantial protest and mistrust component underpinning Reform’s vote
The anti-system sentiment is spread across several options in this question: reasons like ‘the country needs something new’ (30%) and ‘the mainstream parties are incompetent’ (29%) capture that mood in different ways
But… we forget how much support for Reform is also driven by a deep deep distrust and dislike of the established parties and ‘politics’ in general
62% say Reform’s immigration policies are a top reason they’d vote for the party: more than double any other single factor
In our latest poll at @moreincommonuk.bsky.social, we show that Reform voters are still overwhelmingly motivated by one issue: immigration
Pork barrel spending isn't all bad... (levelling up spending was overwhelmingly in Tory/Lab marginals) People like big, visible investments in their area, even if they're superficial at first glance to most
So, polling is as much an art (with a lot of judgment) as a science, and right now different pollsters are trying to answer subtly different questions in subtly different ways (which could make a big difference with FPTP) (10/10)
…then this risks bias from panel attrition (and the kind of people who regularly participate in these things generally being more politically engaged) (9/10)
A second big difference between pollsters is how we weight by past vote. More in common asks people how they voted in 2024 - this risks false recalls (people are surprisingly bad at remembering how they voted) but if you use a longitudinal panel use actual prev vote... (8/10)
(Of course, polls are only snapshots in time, not forecasts and the difference between how people might vote in abstract and in their constituency will converge as an election comes closer) (7/10)
This can be helpful, but the risk of doing this, by asking people explicitly how they would vote in their constituency is that tactical voting is significantly shaped by an actual election campaign, and how this narrows people’s perspectives (6/10)
Why is YouGov lower on Reform? Because they ask a different Q: not just ‘who would you vote for?’, but also how you’d vote in your own constituency, to which they apply a tactical voting model (5/10)
Right now all pollsters are struggling with the rise over the last few elections in tactical voting, and huge voter volatility that means far more people change their vote from election to election than in the past (4/10)
@yougov.co.uk shows Reform flat around 24–26% since the new year. @moreincommonuk.bsky.social shows them flat around 29–31% (3/10)
While right now there is not a huge variation between vote shares for different pollsters, we are in crazy multi party first-past-the-post world where small differences in vote share can translate into huge seat differences, so this matters (2/10)
