The welcome news from the USA overnight was that it had turned its back on Donald Trump.
Closer to home, there is further welcome news, this time from the latest FT poll tracker, which indicates that the current support for parties in the UK might be as follows:
The Burnham bounce is continuing. This is coming at the expense of the Greens. What is more interesting, however, is that for the first time in nearly two years the Conservatives are ahead of Reform.
Let me be clear: I have no love for either of these parties, both of which I consider to be racist and profoundly prejudiced against the interests of the majority of the people of the UK. However, the fact that the neofascism of Reform is being rejected by almost all groups within UK society, except for those above 50, and men in particular, is very welcome news. Long made the trend continue.
As I noted in this morning's video, Gen Z are leading a political transformation in many countries around the world. I look forward to that happening here, and to their parents listening. The time for change has arrived. Neither the Tories nor reform do in any way offer anything to that generation, but if young people can lead the swing in opinion against fascism, they will be doing a fantastic job.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
During a rather bleak autumn, this, alongside the election victories in Serbia and Brazil, gives a slight glimmer of much needed hope, and also hopefully (though I suspect this may be hoping for too much), that today’s ruling classes cannot and are not going to always have their own way and treat ordinary people with such disdain as they have been doing of late.
Richard, the real story of this poll is not a Gen Z revolution but the return of two-party politics. Together Labour and the Conservatives now take half the vote. Earlier this year Labour was languishing at an average of 18%, while the Tories had polled below 22% for 18 months straight.
Labour has already shown how this works. Voters who drifted away came back once it looked like a serious contender again, and it has polled 24–27% for four weeks. The Conservatives are now following the same path. They have led Reform in each of YouGov’s last four polls, and at 24% the Tories have their highest share since the tracker restarted in January 2025. The gap with Labour is just two points, so a Conservative lead is not an unrealistic prospect.
Kemi Badenoch is the reason. Her net favourability has risen 20 points in a year, and her job-performance score has jumped 39 points to +1. Crucially, her standing among 2024 Reform voters swung from -1 to +18. Meanwhile Farage has sunk to -42. As moderate Reform voters see the party sliding, they will return to the Conservatives, leaving Reform as a hard-right rump.
The Greens face the mirror image on the left. The generational vanguard you hope for has had a dismal autumn. Polanski’s rating is now -37, his lowest ever, and a quarter of 2024 Green voters now view him negatively. That is a party drifting to the far-left fringe, not leading a national transformation.
The centre is reasserting itself. The extremes, on both sides, are being left behind.
You seem to think that describing something as the political centre makes it moderate, sensible or desirable. It does not.
The so-called centre has dominated British politics for decades. It has embraced neoliberalism, austerity, privatisation, growing inequality and the systematic undermining of public services. It has normalised policies that would once have been considered extreme.
That is the extremism you are overlooking. The political centre is not some benign alternative to the extremes. It is the very thing that has failed.
You can quote as many short-term opinion polls and personal approval ratings as you like. They tell us nothing about whether the economic and political model offered by Labour and the Conservatives can meet the needs of society.
Nor does calling those who challenge that failed model extremists constitute an argument.
Your analysis assumes that a return to the politics that created our present problems would somehow solve them. I find that an extraordinary proposition.
The issue is not whether the centre can recover its electoral support. It is whether it has anything worthwhile to offer. You have provided no evidence that it does.
You’ve misread my point. I wasn’t arguing that the centre is desirable, or that returning to it would solve our problems. My aim was an objective description of how the political landscape is changing, not a wish list.
Whether the centre has failed, and there’s a fair case that it has on many fronts, is a separate question from where voters are moving and who is positioned to govern. Objective analysis has to start with the electorate as it is, not as either of us would like it to be.
Nor was I using “extremist” as a substitute for argument. Fragmentation, the rise of insurgent parties and the erosion of the two-party system are trends to be examined on their merits.
If you believe a different model can meet society’s needs, the real test is whether it can build a coalition large enough to win. That’s the question I’m addressing and i’m quite certain that will not come via the involvement of the Greens.
Ok, I thought you were commenting in general. Now it seems you are Labour trolling. And I note you ignored all the issues I raised.
Not trolling for Labour or anyone. I don’t dispute your critique of austerity and inequality. But the evidence points one way: Labour and the Conservatives are recovering and insurgents are fading. A return to two-party politics is the most probable outcome. Whether that’s desirable is a separate question.
Politely, when the two parties once got well over 90% of the vote struggling to 50% proves none of your claims.
Ignoring everything else, your claim does no stack.
Mr Gavin: “The centre is reasserting itself.” OK.
Water, how are things going? Rivers, turds, failure of supply, leaks? (LINO policies? Tory polices?)
Energy. Cost? looking good? LINO (or tories) with any policies that address costs?
NHS? Education? Transport (HS2 – costs lokking good?), HMRC (fit for purpose?)
Perhaps you would like to outline how the “centre” is “reasserting” itself. Just asking.
Devil in the detail old chap. Just cos the UK meeja is doing a nice massage effort does not mean the above big problems have gone away.
Try looking at what water was like in the 80’s, the tyne where I live was biologically dead, now its got salmon back in it. Water is in a far better state now,
This is what might best be called an ultra small world view of the Tyne near its mouth alone. Get out of your silly silo I suggest.
“The centre is reasserting itself. The extremes, on both sides, are being left behind.”
People like Johnson, Truss, Starmer and – probably, but we’ll see, Burnham – *are* extremists. If you really aren’t trolling then why don’t you admit that? Look at the state of the country – do you think it was “delivered” to us by anyone other than the “centrists” you mention? Try again, fail again.
Badenoch’s Tories have numerous extreme policy positions, so describing them as of the centre is risible.
And Patrick Gavin (comment above) asserts ‘If you believe a different model meet society’s needs,…[he is] quite certain that will not come via the involvement of the Greens’.
So that invalidates Green Party members like me (with no reason offered.) Ice is melting (Arctic, Antarctic, Himalayas and more), the climate has changed and will continue to threaten humanity’s future and people like this think their opinions should be considered.
What motivates trolls (if that is what he is)?
Greens far left? Since when was clean water, an unpolluted environment and renewable energy a fringe concern? Mr Galvin needs a kick up the Khyber.
?? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/nov/03/the-guardian-view-on-labours-growth-obsession-a-different-economics-is-possible ??
This article raises some valid points but ignores the elephant in the room – it doesn’t even ASK the “how do we pay for it?” question, let alone answer it.
The resurgence of the extremist centre (Lab/Con/USDemocrat) is the resurgence of a calmer, more predictable, but still destructive neoliberal status quo – the quiet and lethal acceptance of the household analogy. A Labour government less troubled by Farage biting at its heels, is not going to radically reform its economic fundamentals, unless voters hammer their MPs hard on OUR agenda, and tell them what they have to do to earn our votes.
With Fa***e apparently sliding out of favour, we have to drive home the message that it will be even HARDER for Labour MPs to rely on a “stop the fascists” vote, and that to get us onside, they have to dump neoliberalism, the household analogy, fossil fuels, austerity, big money in politics and resist lobbying and threats from war criminals. They need to become the courageous state, and adopt a politics of care, not to beat Reform, or the Tory far right – but because, out of conviction, they believe in it.
Prepare for a long hard uphill climb.
I have been praying 3xday for the last year, for, amongst other things, the “overthrow of tyrants”. So I am moderately encouraged this morning, as the election of Vance in 2028 seems less likely, and his takeover before 2028, without Congressional support, less worrying.
But the battle for radical change in UK Labour has hardly started, and most of those who want it, have already been expelled, deselected or neutralised by the Labour machine. A miracle, backed by hard work is required. KUTGW!
Next tyrant on the list – Bibi.
Much to agree with.
… and after Bibi, Macron!
Macron is going anyway
In a FPTP system, “game theory” suggests a two-party system is inevitable. (When push comes to shove, will you vote Green if the likely result is to split the progressive vote and let Reform in? No. Whilst nationally the two-party system does deliver some smaller parties, at a local level it is nearly always a two party race – incumbent versus closest challenger.
Right now the battle is on to see who will carry the banner for the “right” (and, to a lesser extent, the left) – it is akin to a (informal) US-style primary. On the right Reform/Tories outdo each other to attract right leaning voters…. but if Reform is on the decline and the Tories resume their position as “Party of the Right” they will then tack back to the centre as the only way to get elected.
Imagine a 100m long beach with two ice cream vans. If positioned at 25m and 75m nobody has to walk further than 25m – optimum for the consumer. But to maximise sales it makes sense to move your van closer to the other which, currently, while Reform/Tories slug it out by moving right, means Labour moves to the right (to sell more ice creams).
This was Labour strategy at the last election – move to the right with the slogan “we are not Tory”. If the Reform/Tory battle is unresolved going into the next election, Labour will not tack left. Only Reform implosion will help. The Tory ice cream van will move back along the beach – as will Labour. In the end, it leads to two vans right next to each other in the centre of the beach – hence Labour/Tory policies looking so similar in many respects.
We need PR.
I agree with the conclusion.
What I do not agree with is that the left has a standard-bearer in Labour.
Does it have a standard-bearer at all?
And are people rational?
Left and Right are relative.
Labour is to the Right of it where it was until 1997…. but still Left of Reform and the Tories, today. Voting is a choice between those standing today.
If we accept that we are in a two party system (and FPTP almost guarantees that is where we end up) then what is most likely? The Greens supplant Labour as the potential Progressive Government or those in the Labour Party unhappy with the current direction force a change of direction?
My bet is on the latter… and the replacement of Starmer is a “baby-step” in the right direction. Now, “events” might precipitate wholesale change (even revolution?)… but in the meantime, the most likely route to better policy is lobbying your Labour MP.
We sweep the whole rotten lot away, as you said earlier.
Farage and Trump, the current set of neoliberal killer clowns are declining, no doubt will jump on the speech circuit gravy train, and join Blair and Johnson.
Plenty more aspiring killer clowns there to replace them, after a bit of centrist status quo.
But impossible when the invisible neoliberal doctrine is sufficiently exposed, which is what FtF does so well.
Thank you
“The UK is turning its back on Farage”
About time!!!!!
Here in the US, we the people did this without bloodshed. The 220th Congress will have more than 100 women seated.
I have not felt this good about we, the people since August 28, 1963 – the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham said that with Trump accepting the midterms results, the focus can turn to ending wars and bringing down prices.
“The world has an opportunity now to unite around the issue that is affecting us all, and that’s the cost of living,” Burnham told reporters Wednesday. “I can’t get people’s cost of living pressures down until the conflict in the Middle East is resolved, the conflict in Ukraine started by Russia, these are the things we have to focus on now.”
I understand the euphoria.
I wish I did not think the pain is not over yet. I fear it is not.
Richard Murphy, the work is only beginning. The 220th Congress will not be seated until January 3, 2027. Please know that we are not foolish, nor pollyanish; we had a tall stack of probability that this election would involve blood in the streets. The fact that we did this peacefully is just astounding, given how many guns, cranks, and shootings there are here every day and night.
For this, I am grateful, and to use the scientific term, gobsmacked.
I read as much as many in the US, I suspect, on expectations of this election, and you of the risks which have, I think, being diminished by the scale of the blue wave. For that, I think there is a good reason for relief.
I get why this, in itself, released a wave of euphoria.
I get, too, that people are excited by the rejection of Trump.
But, as usual, my point is that this simple reaction is not enough, and it clearly is not. The problem still remains of how the Democrats can constrain Trump, and even more significantly, what do they actually want? When the corporate Democrats are still so influential, the problems in US politics are a long way from being solved.
”If young people can lead the swing in opinion against fascism they’ll be doing a great job” I have great faith in young people. I was once young myself and I recall it fondly, but of one thing I’m certain. They aren’t going to do what we want or expect them to do. Not ever! What they will do is piss off all us old fogies by doing something new and unexpected, something we couldn’t have anticipated that doesn’t suit us at all. But that works for them. They are much more likely to ignore, bypass and reject fascism socialism and capitalism. Than “lead the swing in opinion against” any of it.
The time is ripe for it and I’m looking forward with glee to being outraged by their actions. Come on kids do your thing.