Of course, the asterisk here is that I feel a similar "what you think the Tories should be" vibe is what enabled May's early popularity as PM. But things move on.

Not just is Burnham particularly popular among Labour voters, but in the North West as a whole his favourability ratings are 51% to 29%. Not just net positive, but clearly so. Very rare.

Some real make-or-break qualities here If Labour's most popular figure can't win a by-election on his home turf (where's he extra popular) on an anti-Starmer platform, where can they win? If Reform can be squashed out in very favourable territory, really questions their electoral credibility.

Latest party leader net favourability ratings, May 2026 Ed Davey: -9 Kemi Badenoch: -17 Zack Polanski: -27 Nigel Farage: -37 Keir Starmer: -46 yougov.com/en-gb/articl...

Beginning to think they keep doing this chart just to inflict psychological damage on me at this point. Stacked bars, not even ordered correctly, for a head-to-head? Sickos.

The local elections in one chart. Labour has been squeezed between the Greens in young wards and Reform in older working-class wards www.economist.com/britain/2026...

There's many things you can criticise this leadership challenge for, but you can't say it's not a fitting tribute to Starmer's premiership, from the complete absence of a plan for something that was obviously going to happen, to policy as an afterthought, to banal talk of undefined "Labour values".

NHS staff increasingly believe Wes Streeting is doing a bad job as health secretary and that the Labour government is handling the NHS badly Streeting as health secretary Good job: 22% (-3 from 19-28 Feb 2025) Bad job: 53% (+13) Labour handling of NHS Well: 24% (-6) Badly: 66% (+13)

Tbh, think the most insane political story of the last week remains a major party just deciding a fiction was reality and not really receiving any pushback. Like, this time next year, it is highly likely Reform will have more councillors - and thus elected representatives - than the Tories.

🧵/ While the Tory leadership has decided the results were a success, how did the party actually perform? They lost 41% of the seats they were defending, meaning Badenoch has now overseen the two worst results for a primary opposition party in living memory, by a clear margin (next worst is 25%).

🧵/ Let's put Labour's local election results into perspective... They lost 58% of the seats they were defending, the 10th worst performance for any party in the last sixty years and the 5th worst for a govt. This compares to the Tories losing 48-53% in the locals prior to their landslide defeats.

One area where this collapse is particularly historic is in the inner London boroughs, where their vote fell to its lowest level (31%) since 1912. This is worse even than in the 1931 elections (33%), held a week after the party fell to just 52 MPs in the general election.

🧵/ Let's put Labour's local election results into perspective... They lost 58% of the seats they were defending, the 10th worst performance for any party in the last sixty years and the 5th worst for a govt. This compares to the Tories losing 48-53% in the locals prior to their landslide defeats.

I do think this comes down to Starmer basically having none of the qualities that the public say they want in a politician, which is quite rare. So there's nothing for them to latch onto and a lot for them to dislike without any saving graces.

Prior to the local elections, I outlined the best metrics to use in assessing the results, as well as produced some benchmarks for the parties. So, how did it all pan out? Here's my hopefully firm and fair assessment, with some extra analysis and lots of charts thrown in.

Need something to read for the morning commute? Want to dig down into the local election results? Like nice charts? Bored? Well, I have just the thing for you - my assessment of what the local election results show:

Prior to the local elections, I outlined the best metrics to use in assessing the results, as well as produced some benchmarks for the parties. So, how did it all pan out? Here's my hopefully firm and fair assessment, with some extra analysis and lots of charts thrown in.

The thing is, comparing areas that had county elections last year and district elections this year, I have found several authority areas across the country that have seen drops in the Tory share by as much as 6-7pts, but none with similar increases. The most common story, though, stagnancy.

To be fair, should also state this is by a clear margin the Conservatives worst-ever council result in the inner London boroughs in elections dating back to 1900, as well as the Lib Dems lowest share there since 1978.

Also, I believe I'm correct in saying the 1931 elections would have been start of November, so literally a week after Labour's horrific result in the 1931 general election.

Getting a bit into the historical weeds now, but - with enormous credit to @electionmaps.uk - unless the nine inner London wards without data are enormously Labour, the party has fallen to its lowest vote share in the 12 inner boroughs since 1912.

With the last councils declared, the final seat change chart. In the end, slightly worse for Labour, now third worst post-war performance by any party on this metric, while Greens finish with sixth best seat change for a non-Con/Lab party (four of top ten in last two years).

Rational choice theorists having an absolute mare trying to comprehend the collapse of the traditional British party system. Turns out, sometimes the bus passengers cheer being driven into the ravine.

On this metric, the rate of gains for the Greens should end up as 7-8% of all seats up for election, higher than UKIP's best year in 2013 and placing in the top-ten non-Con/Lab performances in the post-war period on this metric.

Reform UK should end up with around 1600 gains. Relative to total number of seats up for election, this is the third-best result for any party in the post-war period, behind only themselves last year and Labour in 1971.

It is important to note how staggeringly bad it is for a first-term opposition to not even be making miniscule gains. Until now, there's basically always been the rebound effect, because the previous opposition overshoots right before a change in govt, leaving easy gains. Not anymore, apparently.

With 86% of seats declared, looks like Labour's final rate should settle at around -1500, not as bad as last year's rate of loss, but the fifth worst result for a government in the post-war period. These -1500 losses will represent 30% of all seats contested, Labour's worst figure on that metric.

I believe we term this artwork "where the 2024 Labour vote is now".

Net partisan churn at these local elections is set to be about 40% of seats. While down from the 54% net churn last year, the average over the 60 years prior to last May was just 13%.

Labour defy expectations in Barking and Dagenham (another Reform majority marker), meaning it continues its uninterrupted run of returning Labour majorities, the only London council to do so in all 16 elections.

Not just a seismic result for Plaid and Reform, but our final MRP model's central estimate had Plaid 43, Reform 34, with all parties well within range, so a fantastic result for @bkmann1.bsky.social and @patrick-pme.bsky.social too.

In terms of overall councillor counts, the Tories are set to fall to their second lowest level in modern local election history (only after LE1996 was worse), while Labour are on trend to fall to a level only previously held between 2008-11.

Most governments do make a net loss of seats, but the extent this year (current 57% of defences) is at the bad end, fifth-worst in the past 60 years. Does it rule Labour out winning the next GE? No, but at present, 40% is the worst govt defence rate to be re-elected (Con, 1981).

Not really sure about this. While Reform are making significant gains, they are roughly confined to the most Brexity third of the country. They are only getting as far as areas that would translate to MPs in the low 200s and falling short in their majority markers.

With the proviso that many seats are still left to declare, I'm going to begin bringing the charts out, to put these results into some broader perspective. In terms of seats defended, absolutely dire results for Labour and Tories. Not as bad as last year, but high on the board for worst-ever.

Hampshire, of course, an area where at least elements of the local party were running an anti-Reform campaign. Heard some suggestions this was the case in Bexley too, anyone kept tabs on which local Tory groups were going in on this message?

The Conservatives holding up a bit better in London is not hugely surprising, it was apparent at the last GE and has been clear in polls since. Basically reflects the fact there are some niches that other parties simply can't reach.

The Conservatives have retained majority control of Kensington and Chelsea, the only borough they've won outright at every London borough election. If Labour don't retain control of Barking and Dagenham (as expected), it makes it the sole borough to have always produced the same result.

Seeing a few conclusions being drawn, including extrapolating out things like gain/loss rates, when we've not even had a quarter of seat declarations yet. Much too early to get beyond the broadest of strokes, especially as early declarations are by no means representative of all contests.

We know what the vote flows are from extensive survey data. We *dont* know the turnout story. It’s mad to draw vote flow inferences from seat changes.

As the polls close, a quick round-up of the key questions I'll want answered by the results, and what to look out for as they come in. Overall, a full assessment shouldn't - and from me, won't - be made until all the results and metrics are available.

Ahead of the local elections tomorrow, a reminder of my cut-out-and-keep guide to how best to assess the results as they come in. Of course, from Friday, I'll be sharing updated versions of the charts - and more - to help put the results into perspective.

Ahead of the local elections tomorrow, a reminder of my cut-out-and-keep guide to how best to assess the results as they come in. Of course, from Friday, I'll be sharing updated versions of the charts - and more - to help put the results into perspective.

Wales is set for a significant recolouring of the political map in tomorrow's election, with Labour on course to lose a major election in Wales for the first time in more than a century PC: 43 seats (+19 from 2021 notional results) Ref: 34 (+34) Lab: 12 (-32) Con: 4 (-22) Grn: 2 (+2) LD: 1 (-1)

Is Charles Sigsworth the youngest person to ever cast a vote in a democratic election?

An actual case of family voting in the 1927 local elections, from The Times.

How London's political map will be recoloured is one of this week's biggest questions. Labour will be hoping to avoid a fate as bad as the 1968 elections, when they fell to outright control of just 3 boroughs, with Barking, the only "always Labour" borough, one of many races to watch.

Ahead of the local elections, here's an easy guide of how best to assess the results as they come in, including the best metrics to use and some historical benchmarks. It's on the longer side, but is split into sections and filled with lots of (hopefully) useful data, and completely free-to-read.

"I love Hulme. When I wake up in the morning the first thing I think about is Hulme."

The story of the Welsh political fundamentals: all signs point to Plaid Cymru. > Both Labour govts very unpopular > ap Iorwerth most positively viewed leader > PC only party more would like to see in govt than would not want to > PC most trusted party in most key areas > Anti-Reform polarisation