... to think that Nigel Farage will be our next PM?

[ohime]

Or, more accurately: AIBU to be afraid that truly nasty piece of work Nigel Farage who has, by all accounts, always been utterly useless at (or at least completely uninterested in) the actual business end of governing will be our next PM because everyone is so fed up with all the other parties being, variously or all at once, so corrupt, incompetent and useless that we've collectively abandoned all hope? I will never vote for Farage, who is a horrible man, or any of his party which keeps having to fire people for being just a teensy bit too overtly racist - but it seems from the polls that for many people the choice against the status quo outweighs what we may be choosing. (For an example, I can't believe that Farage's stated position that DOGE in the US didn't go far enough with its swinging cuts to the social safety net would be popular with UK voters who recently elected a government on the basis that it would reverse years of Tory austerity... not that that's worked out so well...)

It's not just the less educated/people who haven't been to university. It's across the education spectrum and both left and right. It's hard to explain but it's a shift to viewing voting/engaging in politics as something you do as a consumer rather than an engaged citizen? I know that sounds pompous. But to try to describe it, it's like if I want to buy trainers I research and buy the trainers I like best. If they wear out quickly/are crap I won't buy those trainers next time. It's not for me as a consumer to worry about what went wrong (maybe the rubber sole was the wrong sort). It's for the trainer seller to figure out. Not my problem. Whereas politics isn't meant to be like that. It's more an act of very clumsy imperfect group reasoning. Whereas across the political spectrum people feel unheard even if the policies they vote for are enacted or the parties they vote for get in. And that's partly the fault of politicians. But I think it's also maybe a fault in is. But it's really hard to have that conversation or even know how to fix it
I blame social media. But it definitely isn't an education/intelligence issue.

Are you seriously claiming Labour are intelligent?
They’ve introduced an education tax as almost the first thing they did LOL, the last time they were in they introduced university tuition fees and the time before that they tried to kill off grammar schools (I’m sure they’ll have a second pop seen as nothing else needs fixing). Maybe they are intelligent, but they seem very keen on keeping everyone else dumb and state dependent.

I have criticised the thinking of some reform voters that it's condescending to have to listen to the views of the ell educated. You have made a bit of a leap to then say that I think the labour party is intelligent. Not least of all because the labour party is a political entity not a person. Anywho that's probably elitist and patronising of me so back to the point.

I do think that there are some very intelligent people in the labour Party; some of them using this for good and sadly some not. Hence the fact that I see them as the least worst option and no more at present.

That's it. I am not saying that people aren't intelligent. But that they are taking pride on voting for populist soundbites over policies of substance. And knowing that is what it is and taking pride in it.

I'm not saying people are dumbed down, but the culture around politics is getting a bit.

Do you realise how presumptive that is? Are you honestly saying that every Cambridge graduate is identical?

Labour use soundbites too. I don’t think they are particularly standing out as intelligent.

What policies of substance would they be? Haven't seen much to write home about from Labour so far.

It happens on the left too. It's like in America where some Arab voters and very left wing voters were so angry with Biden/Harris for their support for Israël they voted Trump. And other pro-Israel voters also voted Trump because Biden/Harris weren't pro Israel enough
It was clear at least one of those groups would be bitterly disappointed. It's not about someone not voting for someone because they feel demoralised- that's normal. It's more valuing someone who "talks directly to you" even if you know they are talking directly to other people and saying the opposite. In fact you can find common purpose with those people because you are both voting for the same person and that identity transcends the fact you want opposite things politically. Like the identity, choosing a tribe matters more than the concrete policies. It's not the same as accepting a political party will be a broad church and means compromise. It's actually the opposite. And I do think people with our political views are as succeptible. I think writing people of into different tribes "Farage supporters think this" is wrong because the whole point is they think completely different things. Purity spiralling is quite a left wing problem but I think it's also part of the same dumbing down - just a different manifestation

Well they are trying to do the same things (communication wise) as Farage and failing horribly. It only works for Garage just as in America it only works for Trump.

It's interesting that if I criticise reform you assume that I must think Labour are great. There are other political parties in the UK and sometimes I just think labours policies are less harmful, as opposed to great.

However things I think they have done well include identifying steps to move the SEND Crisis forward (although they haven't put the money that needs to follow it through in place):
I thought they de-escalated the situation after the Southport murders as well as could be done. They are just two examples.

However in general I particularly dislike Starmer and will be interested to see what Jeremy Corbyn's new party will be like. But I do feel politically homeless. I don't think Starmer is incompetent, quite the opposite. I just don't like his politics overall.

Yes the tribalism is a huge problem. It doesn't allow for any nuance.

Well said!

I asked in response to your statement that people are choosing to support Reform based on soundbites as opposed to policies of substance. As Labour are currently in power I wondered what policies of substance they have in acted. What is the difference between Reform, Labour, Conservatives, Liberal Democrats? The track record of any of the long established parties is not great. I have some hope and faith in Wes Streeting improving the NHS but again will it be change or just a sticking plaster?

In the first week of 2025, Nigel Farage told me his ultimate goal was to become prime minister. It stuck in my mind that he chose to add: "I'm not joking." -

Laura* *Kuenssberg

This is long but here are some of the things they did I do/dont like

Things I like:

• The workers rights bill. I know that was controversial because of the extra burden on employers. But it is concrete.
• banning no fault evictions and better tenants rights. Long overdue.
• bringing sure start back
• free breakfast clubs
• pushing through the bill with increased protections for children (which included meeting some of the recommendations of the Jay report. Long overdue change)
• NHS - localised healthcare targeted towards deprived communities.
• Trade agreements with America, India, EU. We really needed them. And the terms actually are favourable to us. The India agreement owes more to Trumps tatrifs making them more desperate to do a deal with us. But it's still a positive.

Things I am meh about

• planning reform "to build the homes we need". Planning reform was probably needed but it only works if more homes actually get built.
• ‘Homes for Heroes’ - "a programme to ensure all UK Armed Forces Veterans as well as domestic abuse survivors and care leavers have a roof over their head." Apparently. Really good idea in theory. But again they have to do it. At least it's there.
• bringing down NHS waiting liars - they have managed to bring them down but only by spending money on private healthcare. Which feels less sustainable long term than bringing more nurses etc back within the NHS which would be cheaper. As an interim measure at least it's change people can see
• smash the gangs. Good if it works

Things I don't like:

• the Island of strangers speech. More rhetoric than concrete action. But pointless.
• the benefits bill. I am glad it was defeated but the whole thing was a mess.
• their slowness in instituting a report into child grooming s. I am glad they did in the end. But it felt like it was done in the messiest way possible.

Some of the things they wanted to do were blocked. Some of the things we're done in messy way. But that's an inherent problem in politics.

People aren’t that stupid, at the end of the day.

But Switzerland does have immigrants, more than us as a % of population (40% of population from a migrant background. Over 30% born elsewhere). Switzerland does have immigrants from outside the EU (lots and lots from Eritrea. Also lots of Kosovans for some reason). And they do take asylum seekers. I know someone who taught German to recent arrivals.

What Switzerland does have is a returns agreement with the EU. Where they can return migrants to the country whence they came. Why can't Britain have that! We did have that- but we lost that agreement when we left the EU. Hence there are no small boats before Brexit but there are lots now.

Which post are you replying to?

There's basically zero chance this could happen. You just don't go from a few MPs to a government in one election under the FPTP system. No matter what polls say now.

Sure, the most obvious one is attitude to movement of labour.

Euro-skepticism.

Generally more socially conservative, lots of emphasis on families and localism, but also fairly patriotic.

Suspicious of free trade.

They have talked about nationalisation of some industry, whether or not that would be likely to actually happen, it's certainly a talking point that resonates with the traditional old Labour voter.

It's not some weird random chance that the same people who used to be moved by the traditional labour movement are finding that Reform resonates, any more than it's weird and rando that the same kinds of workers in the US are finding some of Trumps projects seem to resonate. The left abandoned those projects to work for the middle class interests that increasingly make up their voter base, and now elements of those policies have been picked up by conservative parties.

But some other posters on here think Labour are too left wing and want to punish the middle classes. So the people who think Reform will listen to the people at the bottom and help struggling families (and protect working class wages) need to talk to the people who think Reform will reduce the tax on high earners/net contributers**.(And undo the terrible damage Labours reforms have done to employers). Seriously, discuss it before you all vote reform to avoid disappointment and confusion later.

**Being a Net contributer in income tax alone.requires a high salary. You would be very middle class/(latte drinking?) to be in this group.

Yes, they certainly have several disparate groups or ways of thinking within the Reform group.

Though that is not unusual in political parties. They are often fairly big tent and have factions with opposed interests and beliefs.

Its not the same as big tent. Big tent is like a centre left voter sharing a party with a further left voter. The far left voter is angry that Labour aren't going far enough on welfare spending but agrees to compromise with the centre left faction. A voter might think they need to actually reduce the benefits bill.but like their other policies
Or a fiscal conservative Tory in the same party as someone who has no strong views on their economy but is socially conservative. It's the reality of needing to compromise.

This is like someone explicitly saying they are voting for reform because the other parties don't do enough for low wage workers. And someone else saying they will.votr.for reform because only they can stop Labour prioritising low wages at the expense of everyone else. But they see commonality in each other because they both feel let down but for opposite reasons. This is a weird comparison but it feels more like extreme identity politics. Same sense of being marginalised. Same groupings that make no sense from the outside and are hard for people to."listen to" because unless you are in it it feels incoherent even if you really try.

Absolutely this!

My friend runs a museum in central London to celebrate and remember the (mostly white) working class that used to live there before the area was hugely gentrified.

Her efforts are usually ignored by the mainstream media until she has an ethnic slant on it, then they are all desperate for interviews etc.

Even she, who is so left-leaning, said she can see how the white working class have been left behind, and how this leaves the door wide open for Reform.

Yeh. But they don't have refugees in high numbers .