It's very odd. You can argue that disruption is required to give people what they want (like a functioning NHS). But disruption itself isn't a goal that's going to enthuse anyone.
Feb 22, 2025 11:35I had a drink with my Reform voting neighbour recently. He complained that politicians just talk and what we need is a disrupter, like Trump, who he admires. I pointed out that part of Starmer’s appeal was relief from years of disruption. I think disruption means different things to different people
Some voters have an anti-incumbency bias or are biased about ´´change´´, but it also seems obvious that many are using terms like disruption just to mean that they want politicians who will do the things they want and attack their opponents, and not let themselves be stopped.
Yes, I think that is right in general and in this case in particular.
