Labour Target Seats

These are the hundred and twenty five seats with the lowest percentage majorities over the Labour party. This does not necessarily mean they would be the most winnable seats for the Labour in practice, or that they are the seats the Labour party will actually be targetting at the next general election. The Labour party won 232 seats at the last general election, so would need to win another ninety-four seats to secure an overall majority in the House of Commons.

1. Derby North Majority 41 (0.1%)
2. Gower Majority 27 (0.1%)
3. Croydon Central Majority 165 (0.3%)
4. Vale of Clwyd Majority 237 (0.6%)
5. Bury North Majority 378 (0.8%)
6. Morley & Outwood Majority 422 (0.9%)
7. Plymouth Sutton & Devonport Majority 523 (1.1%)
8. Thurrock Majority 536 (1.1%)
9. Brighton, Kemptown Majority 690 (1.5%)
10. Bolton West Majority 801 (1.6%)
11. Telford Majority 730 (1.8%)
12. Weaver Vale Majority 806 (1.8%)
13. Bedford Majority 1097 (2.4%)
14. Plymouth Moor View Majority 1026 (2.4%)
15. Lincoln Majority 1443 (3%)
16. Cardiff North Majority 2137 (4.1%)
17. Peterborough Majority 1925 (4.1%)
18. Sheffield, Hallam Majority 2353 (4.2%)
19. Corby Majority 2412 (4.3%)
20. Waveney Majority 2408 (4.6%)
21. Warrington South Majority 2750 (4.6%)
22. Southampton, Itchen Majority 2316 (5.2%)
23. Keighley Majority 3053 (6.2%)
24. North Warwickshire Majority 2973 (6.3%)
25. Carlisle Majority 2774 (6.5%)
26. East Renfrewshire Majority 3718 (6.6%)
27. Leeds North West Majority 2907 (6.7%)
28. Halesowen & Rowley Regis Majority 3082 (7%)
29. Crewe & Nantwich Majority 3620 (7.3%)
30. Erewash Majority 3584 (7.4%)
31. Hendon Majority 3724 (7.5%)
32. Ipswich Majority 3733 (7.7%)
33. Broxtowe Majority 4287 (8%)
34. Stroud Majority 4866 (8%)
35. Calder Valley Majority 4427 (8.2%)
36. Northampton North Majority 3245 (8.3%)
37. Blackpool North & Cleveleys Majority 3340 (8.4%)
38. Pudsey Majority 4501 (8.8%)
39. Sherwood Majority 4647 (9.1%)
40. Amber Valley Majority 4205 (9.2%)
41. Colne Valley Majority 5378 (9.4%)
42. Hastings & Rye Majority 4796 (9.4%)
43. Bristol North West Majority 4944 (9.5%)
44. Edinburgh North & Leith Majority 5597 (9.6%)
45. Harrow East Majority 4757 (9.7%)
46. High Peak Majority 4894 (9.7%)
47. Stockton South Majority 5046 (9.8%)
48. Northampton South Majority 3793 (9.8%)
49. Norwich North Majority 4463 (10.2%)
50. Stevenage Majority 4955 (10.3%)
51. Enfield, Southgate Majority 4753 (10.4%)
52. Cannock Chase Majority 4923 (10.5%)
53. Morecambe & Lunesdale Majority 4590 (10.6%)
54. Nuneaton Majority 4882 (10.6%)
55. Dudley South Majority 4270 (11.2%)
56. Finchley & Golders Green Majority 5662 (11.2%)
57. South Ribble Majority 5945 (11.3%)
58. Worcester Majority 5646 (11.3%)
59. Rossendale & Darwen Majority 5654 (11.5%)
60. East Lothian Majority 6803 (11.5%)
61. South Swindon Majority 5785 (11.7%)
62. Southport Majority 1322 (3%)*
63. Preseli Pembrokeshire Majority 4969 (12.3%)
64. Paisley & Renfrewshire South Majority 5684 (12.3%)
65. Pendle Majority 5453 (12.3%)
66. Dover Majority 6294 (12.6%)
67. Reading East Majority 6520 (12.9%)
68. Warwick & Leamington Majority 6606 (13%)
69. Scarborough & Whitby Majority 6200 (13%)
70. Aberconwy Majority 3999 (13.3%)
71. Crawley Majority 6526 (13.4%)
72. Vale of Glamorgan Majority 6880 (13.4%)
73. Arfon Majority 3668 (13.6%)
74. Gloucester Majority 7251 (13.7%)
75. Great Yarmouth Majority 6154 (13.8%)
76. Reading West Majority 6650 (13.8%)
77. Carmarthen East & Dinefwr Majority 5599 (14.2%)
78. South Thanet Majority 2812 (5.7%)*
79. Brighton, Pavilion Majority 7967 (14.5%)
80. Chipping Barnet Majority 7656 (14.5%)
81. Stourbridge Majority 6694 (14.5%)
82. Elmet & Rothwell Majority 8490 (14.7%)
83. Milton Keynes South Majority 8672 (14.7%)
84. Aberdeen South Majority 7230 (14.8%)
85. Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire Majority 6054 (15%)
86. Camborne & Redruth Majority 7004 (15.2%)
87. Portsmouth South Majority 5241 (12.5%)*
88. Battersea Majority 7938 (15.6%)
89. Edinburgh South West Majority 8135 (15.8%)
90. Redditch Majority 7054 (16%)
91. Gravesham Majority 8370 (16.7%)
92. Dumfries & Galloway Majority 6514 (11.5%)*
93. Milton Keynes North Majority 9753 (16.9%)
94. Rutherglen & Hamilton West Majority 9975 (17.4%)
95. Cleethorpes Majority 7893 (17.5%)
96. Watford Majority 9794 (17.5%)
97. Loughborough Majority 9183 (17.6%)
98. Ochil & South Perthshire Majority 10168 (17.6%)
99. Clwyd West Majority 6730 (17.7%)
100. Shrewsbury & Atcham Majority 9565 (17.7%)
101. Paisley & Renfrewshire North Majority 9076 (18%)
102. South Basildon & East Thurrock Majority 7691 (16.9%)*
103. Lanark & Hamilton East Majority 10100 (18.3%)
104. Canterbury Majority 9798 (18.4%)
105. Dunfermline & West Fife Majority 10352 (18.6%)
106. Kingswood Majority 9006 (18.7%)
107. Stafford Majority 9177 (18.8%)
108. Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath Majority 9974 (18.8%)
109. Harlow Majority 8350 (18.9%)
110. Shipley Majority 9624 (19%)
111. Chingford & Woodford Green Majority 8386 (19.1%)
112. Edinburgh East Majority 9106 (19.3%)
113. Glasgow Central Majority 7662 (19.4%)
114. Airdrie & Shotts Majority 8779 (19.8%)
115. Carshalton & Wallington Majority 1510 (3.2%)*
116. Filton & Bradley Stoke Majority 9838 (20.1%)
117. Stirling Majority 10480 (20.1%)
118. Midlothian Majority 9859 (20.4%)
119. Basingstoke Majority 11063 (20.9%)
120. Linlithgow & Falkirk East Majority 12934 (21%)
121. Bexleyheath & Crayford Majority 9192 (21.1%)
122. Kensington Majority 7361 (21.2%)
123. Rugby Majority 10345 (21.2%)
124. Ayr, Carrick & Cumnock Majority 11265 (21.5%)
125. Rochford & Southend East Majority 9476 (21.7%)
Comments - 3,595 Responses on “Labour Target seats”
  1. “Bad men and mad men: advertisment in politics, gives a good insight into the 87 election. Labour were doing well there ad campaign gave them a lot of momentum so much so Joe Biden stole the script for his presidential nominee bid. However, what killed it for Labour was the attacks on their policies like unilateral disarmament, ‘Labour’s policy for the armed forces’ with a soldier surrendering.”

    Were you even alive in 1987?

    I ask because at the time it never seemed like Labour had the remotest chance whatsoever of even running Thatcher close, let alone winning. The campaign was irrelevant. Labour had been a mess for 7 or 8 years, were nearly 200 seats behind, and you can’t fatten a pig on market day. Quite similar to today in some ways.

  2. Unilateral disarmament killed labour in 83 . They had ditched the policy by 87… As HH implies, we know you were not alive then, Matt. The 87 result was never in doubt. The scale of the Tory surprised many, but nobody thought labour had a chance. Tebbit did have a wobble though.

    I remember there was talk of thatcher stepping down after the election. At that time no prime minister had served more than 8 consecutive years as PM since Lord Liverpool stepped down in 1827! Asquith had served as PM from 1908 till 1916 and that was felt to be long enough.

    At the time the third election victory seemed to be a one off achievement. If anyone had suggested a labour leader would do the same within 20 years of 1987, they would have been denounced as insane. These cycles come and go.

  3. Sorry, it was Tony with horns in 2001, not ‘demon eyes’.

  4. Along with the rather funny looking ‘Maggie Hague’ pictures, which taken together were major contributors in knocking turnout down to 59% from 71% the previous election.

  5. I was born in 1993 not that I could tell you anymore aabout the 1997 election than I could about the 1987 election. Being alive ddoesn’t help me in that case. Early memories of being dragged round in a car with a speakerphone attached in 2001. Don’t get me wrong I don’t contest the idea the 87 election wasn’t already a foregone conclusion.

    On Miliband it is true that his polling ratings improved in the last month of the election but the parties polling ratings hadn’t dramatically changed in the last 6 months the Tories had closed the gap

  6. The Demon Eyes posters in 97 were widely ridiculed.

    Actually with hindsight they proved very prophetic.

  7. HH – why do you think the social scare policy will harm the Tories in Mansfield etc?

    I realise a £100k assets threshold per person doesn’t protect a home in London but it does up here.

    But notwithstanding that it’s an £80k move in the right direction – more so if it means it protects £200k for an elderly couple.

  8. “Were you even alive in 1987?
    I ask because at the time it never seemed like Labour had the remotest chance whatsoever of even running Thatcher close, let alone winning. The campaign was irrelevant. Labour had been a mess for 7 or 8 years, were nearly 200 seats behind, and you can’t fatten a pig on market day. Quite similar to today in some ways.”

    That certainly isn’t how I remember the 1987 election.

    Labour was certainly a mess from about 1980-85, but had managed to unite under Kinnock and Hattersley after that, and enjoyed a lead in the polls from March 1986 to Oct 1986. They fought a far more effective and better organised campaign than in 1983 or (in my opinion) 1992. In contrast – and I’ll admit this may not be others’ view – Thatcher seemed stilted and hesitant in much of the campaign.

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-1983-1987

    Even going up to election day in June ’87, the Tories lead was around 7-9 points in the polls, so it appeared most likely that their majority might be halved from the 144 it had been in 1983.

  9. In the wilderness years they explain that Mandelson leaving the communication director role for Hartlepool meant that Labours campaign in 92 wasn’t quite as successful

  10. To correct my post above:

    Labour led in the polls from March 1985 to Oct 1986.

  11. Westminster voting intention: 2 polls both either fully or partly post Manchester attack:

    22/ 23 may TNS KANTAR
    CON: 43% (-1)
    LAB: 38% (+3)
    LDEM: 10% (+1)
    UKIP: 4% (+1)

    (YouGov / 24 – 25 May)
    CON lead cut by 10% with TNS
    CON: 42% (-5)
    LAB: 34% (+5)
    LD9% (+1)
    UKIP: 4% (-2)
    GRN: 4% (-)

    The latest YouGov with CON lead down to just 5% was carried out yesterday and today and so fully takes into account reaction to Manchester.

  12. I have my doubts about tonight’s Yougov, and at this stage we shouldn’t get carried away as it is just one poll. But were that to be the result I think quite a few seats on this list could fall after all. UKIP’s share has not improved so it is likely the Cons are still getting winning swings in the likes of Wakefield. If that is so and the lead is only 5 pts there could be swings to Lab in seats with lower UKIP votes.

  13. “Don’t be too glum- the polls got it fairly accurate in 1997, 2001, 2010. ”

    No they weren’t – 1997 was nearly as out as 1992 – but who notices when it still delivers a historical landslide anyway in spite of the underlying numbers being less Labour-supporting than the polls suggested?

    2001 wasn’t too bad I don’t think, and 2005 was very good. 2010 was odd – the Tory number wasn’t too bad, but Lab and LD swapped places – though there is some evidence that this was genuine last-minute swing rather than necessarily polling slip-ups.

    I will grant you that the comparison with 1983 is salient though, regarding the enthusiasm of a segment of left-wing voters who decide to actually turn out in greater numbers than expected when the Labour leader is a true socialist.

    I’m also curious to know whether parents’ opinions (which are much more Tory-receptive than their offspring) have any late influence on children’s decision. So-called scaremongering about what might happen under a Miliband or Corbyn-led government would presumably be more likely to be trusted from a parent than from the government or media. Whether young voters take enough notice to either stay at home or vote differently in significant enough numbers I don’t know – or whether there enthusiasm levels are so high that their resolve only becomes stronger, I don’t know.

  14. I’m also curious whether the pro-Corbyn previous non-voters will come out in greater unexpected hordes than the pro-Brexit previous non-voters who are determined to see Brexit through [come out for May].

    If both occur, turnout could be high and swings exceptionally volatile depending on location.

    As a result, turnout for the two biggest parties combined could be even bigger than the polls currently suggest.

  15. Most polls are giving a 10/10 certainty to vote in the mid to high 60s, although a v recent yougov poll gave the 10/10 certainty as 70%. But you can usually take away 7-8% off this when guessing the final turnout figure (because although people say that they’ll definitely vote, a small amount actually don’t).

    So using this rule the turnout is at the moment looking like being 61% -62%.

  16. No, not that low. For one thing, you are completely overlooking those who are 1-9/10 likely to vote. A lot of 9s and some 6-8s also will vote.

    If you take the % of 10/10s as a reasonable guide of final turnout, perhaps a bit higher, I think that’s a better rule of thumb.

    About 70% turnout would be my guess.

  17. Well I agree turnout will be similar or higher than GE2015 but I am just using what I have noticed : you can take the 10 out of 10 certain to vote figures and deduct approx 7% / 8%.

    However as others have pointed out : GE2017 is a polarising one & so consequently they expect high t/out. If one treats GE2017 as a Ind or EU referendum then you can expect the 10/10 figures to rise & regularly hit mid 70s and also reduce the 7%/ 8%, I am using, to just 2% / 3%.

    My actual prediction atm is 67%.

  18. I think a lot of people will be motivated to turn out to ensure Corbyn does not win – just what I have heard on the stump in the past three weeks.

  19. Bob

    Are you campaigning in marginal Labour seats?

    (Not meaning to be patronising, just there aren’t any in Norfolk unless you count Norwich South as marginal)

    I’m curious, as to whether what you have heard on the stump is in the right places to make a difference, and whether it is enough to counter the very definite claims from Labour of what they are finding on the stump since the Tory manifesto.

  20. To be fair Labour activists on here were saying they were getting a good response on the doorstep when they were at 29% in the polls.

  21. Not really Lancs

    I’m observed a big difference in reports since the manifestos, beyond the usual claims all parties make.

    Unfortunately for Tories, the social care is an easy one to BS about on the doorstep as it’s so confusing and the Tories needlessly got the wind up people.

  22. Matt certainly was.

    I really am baffled why people are getting excited as to whether Labour are ‘only 5% behind’ or 15% behind. All of these polls are consistent with the polls prior to the 1987 GE ie Tory leads of 5% to 12%.

  23. @Plopwell.

    *Clouseau accent*

    Ah, yes, ze let’s p off all our voters ploy.

  24. “I think a lot of people will be motivated to turn out to ensure Corbyn does not win”

    I doubt it, the people who think JC is a threat to the nation are probably all highly likely to vote anyway or at the very least have been since the moment he was elected leader, I’ve personally not heard anybody credible mention some groundswell of normally unengaged people who have been motivated to vote by fear of Corbyn. What I am hearing is talk of a lot of swing or normally Lab leaning voters who say they wont vote cos they hate both options.

    “All of these polls are consistent with the polls prior to the 1987 GE ie Tory leads of 5% to 12%.”

    Well whether is 5% or 12% is very significant, the former results in the Tories possibly losing their majority and would be very embarrassing for May. the latter still results in a very comfortable Con majority.

  25. But they were the polling range – my very point – not the outcome. In fact it makes it even less likely that an outlier such as 5% or 22% will be correct.

  26. Rivers10 – “I personally have not heard…”

    – except the voters themselves!

  27. Lancs
    I’d ask you to provide one scrap of evidence (not anecdotal or a single BBC vox pop) of a significant number of normally non voters deciding they must vote this time to stop Corbyn.

  28. I was indeed sadly my mum lost by 71 votes so you can’t win them all

  29. Just my opinion (admittedtly, not based on any evidence), but I think that the kind of people who’d be motivted to stop Corbyn the most are generlaly consistent rather than non-voters.

  30. I’m also of the opinion that Corbynphobia will not drive turnout amongst previous non-voters. It might however depress turnout amongst usual Labour voters.

    Factors that might drive turnout amongst previous non-voters are Brexit (possible in both directions) and Corbynmania amongst the young / far left.

  31. I agree with the above. Americans didn’t turn out to stop Trump because they didn’t think he could win. And – despite the polls narrowing – the same is true here; I think most people (and not just on UKPR, but more generally) are still expecting a Conservative majority. In fact most people are not avid poll watchers like us and many, especially those who don’t like him, may still believe he really is going down to an utter hammering. Why turn out to stop someone who you think is going to lose anyway?

  32. Wellytab
    Agree totally, as I said I’ve had first hand experience of it driving normally Lab inclined people to not bother voting but have yet to see any evidence that Corbynphobia is going to boost turnout. What little evidence there is suggests the opposite that Corbynmania might actually boost turnout though I am very sceptical of this.

  33. Corbyn has run a similar campaign to that which won him Labour leader. He started speaking to loyal supporters at rallies. The aim is to get them to involve friends and colleagues. There have been big electoral registration drives in universities and inner cities.

    By keeping his campaign below the radar of the opponents, it saves them from getting too enthusiastic. Most Conservatives in the South of England consider him a no hoper and that it is impossible for him to win. There are probably lots of facebook and twitter messages of support, which build momentum, but don’t get seen by non-supporters and stir them up. Differential turnout will be important.

    He has kept arguments amongst your team to a minimum. The Labour campaign has been run by a small number of loyalists. He has been helped by the withdrawal of his many party opponents from doing anything outside their own constituencies.

    He is now using positive language to boost his message. “Fairness”, “equality” – but much less about taxes, cuts and austerity. He has picked headline issues in his manifesto which are superficially popular and targeted, even if they are unaffordable or unrealistic as a package.

    He has successfully suffocated the Greens and in many places the Lib Dems. This is now a two horse race. The Conservatives are at record levels for a post 1979 election. But because Labour has strengthened in the polls it is being seen as getting closer.

    Momentum is important. Labour on 27% and going nowhere would struggle to get the core vote out. Labour rising in the polls, means that amongst their supporters they sense a chance. People like to back a winner. Theresa May has lost this initiative.

    More than ever before we have electorates that live in bubbles and safe areas, and don’t know anyone who takes contrary views to themselves.

    The risk for Labour is that it piles up even bigger majorities in the inner cities and university areas, whilst still losing ground in old Labour areas.

    Corbyn has had a life time of campaigning in Labour heartlands, where Labour is completely dominant.

    Oh, and a haircut, a shave, a tie and doing up his top button won’t have harmed his image.

  34. He’s had a haircut and shave – did you not see the man throughout the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s?

    As for non-supporters bot being stirred up – I’d say the precise opposite is happening both on facebook and in the real world. People are already voting by post after all so the election is now upon us.

  35. Going back to the discussion about turnout above – Todays Survation poll shows a very high 10/10 certainty to vote figure – 81% (it was 76% a wk ago).

    Does anyone know why its so high when others are in mid 60%s..?

    Turnout betting
    over 63% 4/6
    under 63% 11/10

  36. Going back to the discussion about turnout above – Todays Survation poll shows a very high 10/10 certainty to vote figure – 81% (it was 76% a wk ago).

    Does anyone know why it’s so high when others are in mid 60%s..?

    Turnout betting
    over 63% 4/6
    under 63% 11/10

  37. According to Martin Boone, Survation asked ‘…would/already have voted’ which leads me to wonder if there has been a drive for students to postal vote.

  38. If students are voting by post, could we see a lot of them double voting in their home seat as well as their university’s?

  39. That would be unlawful.

  40. It would but the likelihood of being caught and prosecuted is approximately zero

  41. I suspect that the game of students double voting has been going on for a long time. It is time that it was taken seriously i.e. students got prosecuted. If the authorities cared, which they don’t, it would not be difficult at all to check the registers to identify people who have cast two ballots. Admittedly it would need a little clerical effort.

    The same should be said about the practice of community leaders filling in postal votes.

    And why on earth do we allow commonwealth citizens to vote when their own countries do not have any semblance of democracy?

    Ome implication of these comments is that the issue of postal votes should be much more restricted, basically to ill people whose applications have been countersigned by a GP.. Proxy votes are NEVER acceptable except in a very few cases where members of the armed services are overseas and demonstrably unable to cast a postal ballot.

    Whilst we are at it, people who have chosen to live overseas (other than diplomats) should not be allowed to vote. They have deserted the country so they should have no part in selecting our leaders. There is also the point that we cannot control the integrity of votes cast overseas.

    I am old-fashioned; but people used to care about the integrity of the secret ballot.

    Leaving politicis aside, I beleive that no British adult should be allowed to be a national both of the Uk and of any other country possibly with the exception of people who nave dual British and Irish nationality.

    I am not the slightest bit interested in who benefits from laxities in the electoral syste, but as a matter of fact it happens on balance to be the Tories.

  42. Frederic,

    I live overseas and somewhat agree with the sentiment of your comment on overseas voters.

    But as a temporary resident in NZ I do not have the vote here; I also have a stake in the future of the UK since I will presumably be returning once my visa here runs out. I think many people would agree that someone in my position is more deserving of a vote than someone with permanent residency status overseas, and no intention to return. But how do you separate those groups? I think I’m right in saying that currently expats lose the right to vote after 15 years abroad -perhaps that should be shorter, but I think it’s the right kind of solution.

  43. Totally agree with Wellytab. I’m also an overseas voter in Sweden. I’m out here studying and will plan to be back in the UK. 15 years is the current cut-off, I think that’s about right.

    Frederic, if you think overseas voters shouldn’t get a vote, does that mean that you think recent immigrants who aren’t Commonwealth or Irish should get a vote?

  44. Evening Standard:
    Jeremy Corbyn has been widely praised for his The One Show appearance as viewers lauded him over T May and her “robotic” interview earlier this month.

    The Labour leader mainly discussed his personality rather than politics on Monday night, and was commended for his “genuine” and “funny” approach.

    https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/warm-funny-jeremy-corbyn-praised-for-one-show-appearance-after-theresa-may-s-robotic-interview-a3552826.html%3Famp

  45. Frederic Stansfield, I have to note that what your post actually seems to say is that you care about the integrity of the secret ballot, except that you think students should be readily identified and that different local authorities should then cross-check to see if any students have voted twice.

    That immigrants should be denied the vote in the UK because the country they came from isn’t democratic.

    That most people who choose to exercise their secret ballot through a postal vote should be denied, unless very ill

    That nobody, ever, should have a proxy vote, except that despite that, the armed forces should have a proxy vote, unless they have a postal vote, which they’d have to be very ill to qualify for, under your proposals.

    That UK citizens overseas are somehow almost traitorous in “deserting” this country (a shame, if they were doing a long-term vital job abroad for their employer, to help UK interests), and should be denied the vote… but you don’t say what immigrants, “adopting” this country by living here, should do about votes…

    That people from, for example, Australia or NZ, with clear, close and recent family ties to the UK, should be denied dual nationality and the vote, but for some reason. Irish people should be entitled.

    It all seems a little odd, to be honest.

  46. Sky News is reporting there’s a poll today’s edition of The Times suggesting Labour could actually GAIN seats at this Election and the Tories could lose their majority!

    Which seats have been predicted to be gained by Labour? I honestly can’t think of any off the top of my head!

  47. Christian
    “Which seats have been predicted to be gained by Labour? I honestly can’t think of any off the top of my head!”

    I’m hearing very good things about Brighton Kemptown, other than that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    As is though regardless of the national picture I wouldn’t be surprised if Lab win Kemptown.

  48. Thanks Rivers10.

  49. I have just been looking, fairly randomly, at a couple of seats near the top of Labour’s target list. They seem to be a right mxture. Labour are just ahead in Lincoln and are estimated to take Halifax. But the Tories are taking Telford and also Morley and Outwood. All this is according to YouGov who are, I know less than perfect.

    This has all the feel of “No overall majority.”

  50. Given the patchy estimates curerntly being indicated for seats with small Coservative majorities, everything may depend not on the national campaign, on which the major parties seem to have been concentrating almost to the exclusion of all else, but on the grassroots campaigns in individual seats.

    Labour ought to have a big advantage here because of the large number of new members they have signed up over the past couple of years. Unfortunately, far left or Momentum supporters have for long been notoriously bad at doing the leg work. Labour organisers have a big and immediate task to motivate theit people to get round as many doorsteps as possible.between now and next Thursday. This may make all the difference between a small May mjority, or a workable minority for her, and a genuine “No overall majority” parliament.

Leave a Reply

NB: Before commenting please make sure you are familiar with the Comments Policy. UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls.

You are not currently logged into UKPollingReport. Registration is not compulsory, but is strongly encouraged. Either login here, or register here (commenters who have previously registered on the Constituency Guide section of the site *should* be able to use their existing login)