Credit: Frank Augstein - WPA Pool/Getty Images
Three words won this election for the Conservatives. Get Brexit Done. That is the main finding from research by J.L. Partners and UnHerd on how and why people voted yesterday.
We asked a representative sample of 2,000 voters on the day of the election how they had voted and why. Of those who said they voted Conservative, 85% put ‘to get Brexit done’ in their top three reasons. That was also the choice of almost nine in 10 of the people who voted Conservative for the first time yesterday.
How was this message so successful, when only two years ago, another three-word slogan, “strong and stable”, helped deprive Theresa May of her majority? The differentiating factor is that it was not a phrase cooked up by some grand strategist — but one that came straight from the public themselves. It was not an enthusiastic call to arms for Brexit, but instead a tired longing for closure. It was the refrain of people up and down the country, desperate for the EU infighting to stop and for proper issues to be given attention once more.
I have heard the phrase repeatedly in focus groups from as far back as January, when I was in Downing Street. But the unfortunate truth was that when Theresa May said “get Brexit done”, MPs thought she was trying to brush the detail under the carpet. An apparently true believer such as Boris Johnson could embrace the phrase with no problem at all.
More than a saying, though, it was also a quiet thought in the back of voters’ minds. The power of this latent thought is what most probably explains why the narrowing we saw in the polls in the final week did not come to fruition. People may have been talking about public services and the NHS in the last few days, but when it came to putting the cross in the box, they were thinking about putting an end to the Brexit process. And if public services were on their mind, it was in the context of the Conservative Party’s message: they can only be improved if you get Brexit out of the way first.
Of course, the election was not all about leaving the European Union. Focus groups throughout the campaign consistently showed Jeremy Corbyn to be toxic for the working-class voters who abandoned Labour in droves. He may have won them over in 2017, but he went into this contest as a much better known quantity. Crucially, anti-Semitism cut through in a way it hasn’t before: of direct switchers from Labour to the Conservatives in our poll, almost one in five cited Labour’s anti-Semitism problem as an important factor in deciding their vote.
Other past episodes hurt Corbyn. His obfuscation on Brexit is an obvious one, but when I ran the polling at No 10, we found his fudged response to the Salisbury attack fatally undermined him. Although little reported, his reversal on his pledge to abolish student debt in the summer of 2017 eroded his reputation for authenticity with many of his more enthusiastic supporters.
This time round, the Conservative strategy fit the leader. In 2017, pollsters on that campaign (read: not me) saw that Theresa May was popular and accordingly recommended her name went on the side of a bus and she run a presidential style campaign. This was an approach which did not suit her. It does suit Boris, and he has clearly had quite a fun time over the last few weeks.
The role of the economy was also more relevant in this campaign than in 2017. It was the third-most cited reason by those new Conservative voters. This is doubtless linked to concerns about Labour’s economic record and spending plans. Labour’s individual policies might be popular, but voters had very little faith they could ever be delivered — or, if they could, voters feared the economy and their own livelihoods would suffer. Eleven years on from the financial crisis, it is striking how often the phrase “it could be just like last time” comes up in focus groups. This is borne out by the data: if you stuck with Labour from 2017, then the manifesto was a big issue, but none of the other key groups cite the manifesto as a reason for their vote.
Finally, the electoral dynamics favoured the Conservatives more this time round. The Brexit Party was more popular than UKIP was in 2017, and though there were some seats where they did seem to curtail the Conservatives, they also seemed to take a significant number of votes from Labour — making the Tories even more competitive.
The Liberal Democrats had a truly woeful evening, with the British public delivering the ultimate punishment for chutzpah by depriving Jo Swinson of her seat. But their vote share was up on 2017, and the effect was to erode Labour’s support, and provide room for the Conservatives to not only hold seats such as Cities of London and Westminster, but also gain seats such as Kensington.
It all combined to create a big win for Boris. Big enough that he can define the Conservative Party — and the country — in his own image. A lot got him to this point. But those three words, Get Brexit Done, did more than anything else.
For full results of the UnHerd/J L Partners survey see HERE and for full tables see HERE
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“The loopholes are the system.”
We never seem to get it right. The stock market is seriously undervalued, apparently because of over-regulation. The water companies pollute at will. And the world’s crooks launder their ill-gotten gains in our property market.
Does _anyone_ around the world come close to getting the right balance?
Anil excels in historical distortions with his silence about the London based Tariq Rahman and Bangladesh Nationalist Party; and the antics of rabid Islamists of the Jaamat Islam.
That isn’t surprising considering his Woke Marxism which even in its old fashioned 1940s pre- Progressive avatar had deep links with extreme Islamists of the Muslim League like HS Suhrawardy.
Bangladesh has a tortured history in its being a part of Pakistan till 1971.
But I donot expect this writer to be factual about history, given his penchant for turgid and disingenuous renditions.
Regarding Tulip, I wonder if he shows the same zeal for unearthing the real facts of political dalliances with Islamic extremists aligned to ISIS and Al Qaeda, of Bangladesh as well as Pakistan, who have found safe havens in the U.K.
Do you happen to know why India is harbouring HASINA?
Is there any likelihood that she will ever face Justice?
India is “harbouring” Hasina for the same reason the Dalai Lama is being harboured.
She is pro India, she protected the Hindu minority from genocide (I know, that doesn’t matter so much because it’s the muslims doing the “cleansing”), and because while it’s likely she was corrupt, there is zero chance she will receive a fair trial.
As far as justice, none of the Pakistanis responsible for the gruesome 1971 genocide were handed over for punishment, the US did not hand over Kissinger to stand trial for his open support to Pakistan, and the West, so keen to sanction Russia, were happy with the islamic nations falling over each other to support Pakistan.
Incidentally, the reason the Bangladeshi muslims are so incensed with her has little to do with her corruption, real or not. Bdesh was in fact doing fairly well economically, and ousting her will actually end up costing them economically, it’s also a given that her replacement will be as corrupt.
It’s more so because she is a legacy of the more “Bengali” political faction that was getting in the way of “purifying ” Bdesh by getting rid of the Hindus. 6% of the population now, down from 13% in 1971, and soon to be 1% or lower.
But, thankfully, all those whining about Gaza will be sleeping easy while that happens.
I gave an unvarnished reply but UH wants to spare the real culprits- CIA, Soros, Clinton who sponsor Islamic extremists in Bdesh whose face is Yunus, it’s unelected tyrant.
“Hindu minority, too, bore the brunt, not least because Hasina had cultivated a reputation as an Indophilic anti-Islamist.”
I was wondering how it would be somehow justified for the muslims there to wrap up the genocide of the Hindus there, just like alnost every single muslim nation has managed to wipe out religious minorities.
The tragedy is the disinformation carried out on behalf of extremist Islamists by the Western legacy media who are up in arms about supposed Islamophobia but look the other way when Hindus, Buddhists etc are concerned.
The hypocrisy is staggering and explains why in India many of us have given up on the values of the West.
I posted a detailed comment exposing Anil’s distortions and silence on some crucial aspects.
As usual held back by UH as they expose the writer’s biases and prejudices.
I just did this as well and UnHerd suppressed it.
Why is India harbouring Hasina?
Because CIA idiots thought it wise to prop up Al Qaeda backed, Soros financed Clinton groupie Mohammad Yunus by ousting Hasina who was democratically elected.
Seems obvious that Democrats like Islamic jihadists more than an elected government.
You have possibly been fed fake narratives. Yunus who now rules is foisted by CIA and is an Islamist in cahoots with Al Qaeda backed Islamists. He is also the plant of Clinton. It is he who is an unelected tyrant.
There are 5 reasons. One is why, and the first four are em, oh, en, and ee.
UH has sent my several comments to the ” sin bin” you so love..
You can tell it’s a total and utter shitshow when the Beeb and Graun aren’t screaming she is the victim of racism and Islamophobia. Rather directly linked to and beneficiary of bent and crooked kleptocracy.
I did chuckle at her title Anti Corruption and City minister. I mean you have to butter up the City of London – with things like looser regulations/blind eyes/let that one go/enough gray areas/ambiguity etc.. whilst clamping down on all of those things and make things black and white.
Total farce.
Very good point about the lack of ranting from the BBC, etc.! Compare this to the shitstorm they (and Starmer) initiated when Boris Johnson told relatively minor fibs which ultimately led to his departure.
Twaddle – Johnson broke the law, lied about breaking the law and then lied about lying about breaking the law.
He oversaw a culture of parties at Downing Street whilst the then Monarch sat alone mourning the death of her husband of 70+ years, a decorated WWII naval veteran.
He then protected his mate – a demonstrable sex pest.
He was a lazy, irresponsible joker who oversaw policies which led the highest immigration volumes ever into this country.
Twaddle to you too! At least Johnson was inspirational – unlike the drab, procedural, greyness of Starmer – who’s proved himself to be a consummate liar.
I actually agree with you about Boris and what you’ve written here. But Starmer is a more sinister operator who uses the cloak of legal professionalism as a barrier against scrutiny – and relies on the naked Left-wing bias of the BBC and legacy media, and his huge parliamentary majority, to shield him from accountability for his lying and constant diversionary references to the ‘Far Right’.
I wonder why the press give Starmer a free ride on this. His links to Siddiq go back a long way. He went with her on a trip to Bangladesh and met Aunty. He, and other Labour MPs were happy to host Aunty in the HoC and share platforms with her. And this was after it was known that the press and judiciary were being suppressed. Oh, and let’s not talk about LGBT rights.
At the bottom of this article it says,..
’Pratinav Anil is the author of two bleak assessments of 20th-century Indian history. He teaches at St Edmund Hall, Oxford.’
I assume that ‘bleak’ is a weasel word for anti-British. Not only is UnHerd paying this man for his articles but he also gets to teach his attitudes to our student. Is there hope?
Hooe springs eternal…
Once again the U.K. manages to identify the worst possible candidate for a job, and create the worst possible system for her awful family to operate.
Bangladesh, despite being an utter shideshow as noted in other comments, was nevertheless, as acknowledged by the author, leagues ahead of Pakistan economically, despite sharing so much history. Unlike Pakistan, it also had a fertility rate trending down towards replacement only.
Now that, inevitably, after the fall of an unpopular regime, Islamists are taking over, we can expect to see many of those gains reversed. Sometimes “as bad as it is” is “as good as it gets” and now things in Bangladesh are set to take a turn for the worse.
Why is India harbouring HASINA?
That is a question that has often been asked on this thread….
Why the CENSORSHIP here? Particularly if you mention the name HASINA.
Are only four comments allowed on this essay?
Hi dus in Bangladesh have been subjected to horrendous violence since Hasina’s departure. Where’s the outrage?
The Labour Party is a happy home for non-white politicians, all of whom are assumed to be lovely people, very possibly oppressed and discriminated against, and of course virtuously working-class. Labour is certainly incapable of understanding that places like Bangladesh have voracious and corrupt class systems which benefit comrades like Tulip.
It is bad enough to have millions of these third world grafters infesting the country, but when they own vast tracts of real estate and leading Labour politicians, it is sickening.
”asseverated” – you what mate? you taking the piss?
The reply option has been disabled by UH. Sorry, CS – it appears that the motto is ” Let the sleeping d… lie” in this disingenuous article published.
Starmer’s first few months in government have been replete with serious lapses of judgement, commencing with the Sue Gray debacle (she now sits sidelined in the House of Lords with a whacking salary/pension) – followed alomost every week by yet a new revelation – not least his admission that all along he knew of the details relating tothe revolting Rubakubana’s awful background, and yet he lied to the British public at the time of the arrest that he did not. Now it emerges that the foreigner he appointed to tackle corruption and financial crime in the City of London is the niece of a former, massively corrupt Prime Minister of Bangladesh! British Labour and Tory governments have presided over enormous mass immigration from Third World countries where corruption and crime in public office is endemic. No wonder then that our own democratic system, once held up as the pinnacle of decency, fir play and incorruptibility, is now swilling around in the waters of corruption and plummeting standards!
This man needs to resign. He is a grey Purveyor of Gloom without any passion or positive vision, whose capacity for lying to his electorate on really important matters of state puts Boris Johnson in the shadows for his relatively minor fibs by comparison – and for which Starmer tore him to shreds in Opposition, leading to Johnson’s downfall.
How has it come to this?