Politics: the eternal soap opera
By Richard North - June 18, 2026
Well, today’s the long-awaited day when the people (some of them) in the Makerfield constituency decide on whether Andy Burnham gets a shot at the Labour leadership. The result is expected in the small hours of tomorrow morning, at any time between 2 and 5am.
Unusually for a by-election, there are multiple polls from which to chose – mostly published on X but the variation is so great, you can more or less pick your own preferred winner.
One has Reform beating Labour by 44.5 points to 44.1, with Restore taking 5.3 percent. The Greens may have helped, taking 3.1 percent, doubtless some from Labour.
Opinium gives a different result, awarding Labour the win on 45.8 points against the 41.4 for Reform. Restore comes in at 6.6 percent – Farage’s nightmare scenario that robs his man of victory.
The data for that poll were collected between 3-11 June and, given the apparent volatility of the contest, could already be out of date, compared to the other one (source not disclosed), where the fieldwork cut-off was yesterday.
Perhaps that poll is invalid – perhaps they all are, but all the previous constituency polls have put Burnham in the lead so this one would seem to be an outlier.
One thing favouring the challengers, though, is a YouGov poll on the favourability of political figures in the contest. This finds that Burnham has become less popular as time marches on, dropping from +9 at its peak in the middle of May to a low of -11.
It seems that the more people know of Mr Burnham, the less they like him, and that includes Labour voters where the number with a negative rating has risen by eight points to 22 percent.
Perhaps in an attempt to regain lost ground, the Manchester mayor held an eve-of-poll rally in a local social club, supported by actor Hugh Grant.
Telling his supporters that he believed the by-election was about to “change British politics”, he went on to assert that: “this by-election is going to put power where it should be. In the hands of people here”,
“A vote for me is a vote to end 40 years of trickle-down economics”, he continued as he said he wanted to make “life more affordable again” for British people and to give them “breathing space in their daily lives”.
Careful to avoid the triumphalism of Neil Kinnock in the Sheffield Arena on 1 April 1992, that doomed his electoral ambitions, Burnham described the situation as “close” and said: “we do need people to get out and vote tomorrow”.
This is the perennial call of poll leaders in closely fought elections, where the promise of a certain victory has potential supporters staying at home, believing their vote is not necessary.
If sentiment really is close, then the result may be determined by the turnout with, perversely, a low vote probably favouring Labour rather than Reform or Restore – as long as it isn’t Labour voters who keep the numbers down.
As for the challenger – Reform – the Independent has been crowing that even the party’s own data suggest it will lose the by-election. This is based on the views of an anonymous “insider” who is said to have conceded that the Andy Burnham effect coupled with an inability to deal with Rupert Lowe’s Restore Britain means the party faces defeat.
The paper then turns to Restore Britain’s candidate, Rebecca Shepherd, and asks whether this woman could determine who will be Britain’s next prime minister, capturing enough votes from potential Reform supporters to allow Burnham to romp home.
That, of course, is the million-dollar question on which there is no need to speculate as we will know the answer in less than 24 hours. One expects that the prospect of Starmer remaining in office will concentrate the minds of voters, especially the contingent who believe that Burnham will be far worse than the incumbent.
However, given that – according to Metro – residents of Makerfield quizzed about the Restore candidate were unable to name her, brand recognition might not be as high as the party would like and, when actually in the polling station, voters might opt for the more familiar Reform UK party, especially as Kenyon’s name appears first on the ballot.
Although Lowe is very bullish about the amount of support his party is getting, I am deeply cynical about the idea that a brand-new party can come out of nowhere and attract large numbers of voters in a highly contested by-election. I am prepared to be wrong, but I would not be surprised if the polls were over-egging Restore’s support.
Interestingly, after the hatchet jobs perpetrated by the Mail group and others, the Telegraph has joined in the fray with an article headed: “White supremacists fund Restore Britain”, the sub-head reading: “Donors to Rupert Lowe’s party include campaigner who founded group calling for expulsion of every non-white and Jewish person from Britain”.
As an opener, the paper claims that some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Tommy Robinson has questioned whether the party is too extremist, having challenged Lowe to say whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out.
The paper then moves on to Steve Laws, who campaigns for “total remigration” of all non-white people. We are told that he has posted on social media that he had donated to Restore, Mr Laws, who has said he has “signed up and donated” to Restore Britain, but as founder of “Remigration Now”, calls for the expulsion of every non-white and Jewish person from Britain.
We are also told that Jared Taylor, an American “banned from the UK because of his extreme racist views”, has become a paid-up member, while other “neo-fascists” who have paid to join Restore include Sam Melia, who was jailed in 2024 for stirring up racial hatred, Sam Wilkes, a Nazi apologist, and Simon Birkett, who is buying up land for the benefit of “the British people”.
Whether this will impact on Restore’s vote remains to be seen. For the die-hard supporters, such detail has probably already been priced in, but it may deter wavering voters.
Lowe, though, is unapologetic, When asked by the paper whether any of the named men had been expelled from the party, he responded by saying: “The Telegraph has failed to cover the findings of our rape gang inquiry report, which details the mass rape of young vulnerable English girls by gangs of Pakistani Muslims, yet finds the time to publish such pointless smear pieces. Absolutely pathetic”.
That in turn raises the issue as to whether the publication of Lowe’s rape gang inquiry report will raise his party’s profile in the Makerfield constituency. Low claims the report has had a “million views”, and there may be enough in the constituency to make the difference.
All this and more underlines how unusual is this by-election – with so many eddies and currents as to defy analysis. But that doesn’t stop Alister Heath in the Telegraph predicting (or fearing) that Burnham might win.
In so doing, Heath adds another dimension to an already volatile mix, warning us that, “if Andy Burnham wins the jackpot in Makerfield, expect him to double down, to take even greater risks, culminating in the ousting of Sir Keir Starmer and, even more explosively, the calling of a snap general election”.
If a general election is seen as a likely outcome of a Burnham win, that too could affect voting behaviour, as even Reform supporters might see an advantage in this, sufficient for them to vote tactically in support of the Mayor.
When we also see reports of non-Labour supporters intending to vote for Burnham just to keep Reform out, it seems possible that, with so many mixed motives, we end up with an outcome that actually no-one wanted.
Strangely, the one absolutely predicable outcome is that the Conservatives will be slaughtered – an outcome with which most people will be happy, apart from the Conservatives. There may be some consolation for them if they take Aberdeen from the SNP – that seat also being up for grabs.
In a sense, though, it will be a relief when this is all over and we can get back to some semblance of normality – unless Burnham wins and we’re thrown into the turmoil of a leadership campaign. By then, the soap opera will seem as if it’s rivalling Coronation Street for longevity.
