It has been a Tory/Lib Dem marginal since the 70s. Ridiculous to interpret anything from this by-election.
The next Prime Minister is going to be Boris Johnson or Jeremy Corbyn. Melts who choose Lib Dem are voting for Boris and No Deal.
It's not ridiculous at all; if Labour is down over 12% in a region where they didn't stand a chance, that's one thing. If anything close to that dip is found in other, competitive seats, the party faces electoral annihilation. Even in a seat where Labour stands no chance, history would dictate that you'd expect them to see a subtle rise given the unpopularity of the current government. I live in such a seat - it's a CON vs LD gauntlet, but there was a significant swing in LAB's favor (that has now sapped away).
This isn't supposition either: you can look at any by election in recent memory where an incumbent government has survived with a reduced mandate for an example of where the Labour vote should be trending, and in this instance, it's
going the wrong way.
Indeed, Corbyn's Labour has suffered in by elections regardless of how safe the seat is for or against Labour. In 2015, they contested one seat and saw a 7% rise. In 2016 they fought 6 contested seats; four were negative, two were positive. In 2017, 2018 and 2019 they have contested six seats, and
every one has been negative. The four in 2018 and 2019 have been particularly brutal: three were down by over 17%, this one by 12.5%.
There is a pattern here, even if people really devoted to Corbyn don't want to see it.
Not saying you're wrong but to play devils advocate that could say more about the state of labour rather than Corbyn himself.
eg Callaghan could have gotten 20M votes up from 19,925k but Corbyn could have gotten 10M votes up from 6.5M, random figures obviously, but you get my point. In that scenario, Callaghan would be the best but on the figures you posted he's the worst.
Comparing votes and %'s to previous leaders/PM's is silly cause it's always in a different timeframe that can't really be compared or summarised down to a few numbers.
You're absolutely right, but politics is always top-down. If Corbyn can't figure out what needs to change policy and presentation wise to turn things around, the buck stops with the current leadership team and they have to make way for somebody who has an idea if the party is to really compete.
