First, a word on the ultimate 'parachute' candidate. When Churchill lost his seat in Manchester in 1908, he was immediately invited to stand in Dundee.
His welcome was mixed: suffragette Mary Maloney followed him round the city with a giant bell, drowning out his speeches...
Churchill represented five different constituencies, none very close to his Oxfordshire birthplace
His kind are rare now: research by @philipjcowley et al shows that more than half of all MPs were born in the region they now represent
Why? When party ties were stronger, you could get away with parachuting anyone, anywhere. You could pin a red rosette on a dog, the old saying goes, and working-class people would vote for it
Yet thanks to Brexit and Scotland, voters have become much more volatile (@BESResearch)
And if polls are to believed, voters will change their minds again in 2024. Now that party ties are looser, how do people choose their politicians?
Surprisingly, it turns out being from the same area is almost as important as having the same political viewpoint!
After Brexit and partygate, trust in politicians is not exactly sky-high. But you're still much more likely to trust your local MP than MPs in general or the government, data from @IpsosUK suggests
The rise of local candidates is impacting our political debate. Mentions of the phrase "my constituents" in the House of Commons are at their *highest ever level*, data from Hansard shows
This is great for representation. But the downside is that MPs have less time for national issues
And at a time when Rishi Sunak has tough decisions to make on topics like housing and public services, it strengthens nimbyism...
The "born locally" trend is set to continue
According to @MichaelLCrick@tomorrowsmps, of Labour's 38 candidates announced for 2024, just two have no local ties whatsoever. About 30 are councillors.
Are we artificially slimming the talent pool of available MPs?
For more on what this means for our politics, here's the full article in today's @thetimes
The polls – and circumstance – do look promising for Labour. "History suggests that any government presiding over a financial crisis doesn’t survive at the ballot box,” Professor John Curtice tells me.
Yet unlike Major after 92, and Brown after 08, the Tories have a new leader
In short, Labour cannot rely on the Tories doing all the work for them. Who will they need to win over?
The pollster @jamesjohnson252 has split the British electorate into six key groups. Some, like Labour's left and the urban middle classes, are already in the bag for 2024...
It's the myth that won't die. When C4's Benefits Street first aired in 2014, many Tories were enraged that people on benefits were able to afford luxuries like "widescreen TVs"
Last week Suella Braverman said Benefits Street culture was still a "feature" of modern Britain
2/12
It is true that welfare is expensive. Welfare costs hover around 10% of GDP, ~44% of which – £87bn – is spent on people of working age
Bar Covid and the financial crisis, that spend has stayed relatively stable since the 1990s
Generally, we are a pretty trusting nation: 75% of us trust “most people”, according to the @OECD
But there is something about politicians that makes us roll our eyes. Prof John Curtice speaks of a baseline distrust of government – which may not be a bad thing
Yet as anger over sewage spilled over this week, some of the MPs I spoke to said it had reached the point where anything they said was assumed to be a lie
Others reported a “vicious circle” where MPs are afraid to speak out for fear of judgement
Doctors have traditionally been on the side of the patients.
When the NHS was being built in the 1940s, Nye Bevan wanted to make all GPs state employees: they hated the idea. Eventually he gave in, and they were allowed to keep their independence.
The current problems with general practice can be boiled down to a simple supply and demand issue. Demand is soaring.
The population is much sicker than it used to be: there are 6.6m people on NHS waiting lists who are in the care of family doctors until hospitals can see them
NEW: If the Tories lose Wakefield on Thursday, one reason will be that women are set to vote 2 to 1 against them. Why are women in Britain becoming more left wing – and why didn't it happen sooner?
It wasn't always that way: for most of the 20th century, women were more likely to vote Tory.
In fact, in the 1910s some liberals were wary of giving women the vote, fearing it would give the Tories a clear advantage. It was only in 2017 and 2019 that the pattern reversed
2/8
Experts like @RosieShorrocks and @ProfRosieCamp say the trade union movement binded men to Labour, and that women were more likely to be religious
Since the 70s, though, female employment has risen. Women moving from the "private to public realm" has shifted them leftwards