I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
So if someone is deliberately obstructing you going about the necessities of your day, you are not allowing to forcefully move them?
The UK legal system has absolutely no sense sometimes. The protesters were breaking the law. Moving them out the way with a level of force that doesn't injure them is entirely reasonable.
She deliberately drove into her with her SUV, albeit slowly, and pushed her along the road.
Very understandable, but difficult to argue with the prosecution.
I think if she had dragged her off the road by hand, it would not be prosecuted.
It's also a charge of Dangerous Driving.
Bit of six and two threes there, IMHO.
And Good Morning to one and all.
That Case had to step down rather does suggest that our PM doesn't know what's going on under his nose.
Agree with that.
The IB goon blocking the road breaching an Injunction was not charged.
The prosecution is right, although the drivers frustration with these morons is understandable she cannot do that. It’s not right and it is dangerous.
It is understandable people take the law into their own hands When the Police treat these people protesting illegally with kid gloves. The policing of these protests was so light handed it merely encouraged more and the legal system didn’t enforce the law or the injunctions against these protesters.
If I was on any jury that was considering the case against this driver, if it went to jury trial, I’d find her not guilty.
She should definitely demand a jury trial, I'd vote to acquit.
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
His wealth makes an impossible conflict of interest with being CoE. Whatever he does, and (I stress) whatever his motivations, it will be impossible to demonstrate that he is independent of such considerations. Repeated attack lines for the opposition parties.
Johnson effectively took over the Conservative Party with a UKIP style insurgency and imposed his brand over that of the Party. This was a strength as he was able to pretend his party was new and had nothing to do with the Conservatives who had been ruling the place since forever. It's turning into a weakness as the forever party gets saddled with a despised brand.
Without Covid-19 Johnson may have been able to stay in Downing Street for 10 years. But a crisis like this doesn't suit his style of leadership. Blair probably would have been the best PM to have in this situation.
I really don't think so. The Brexit effect was always going to subside over time, and Johnson's flaws and lack of management/leadership skills were always going to bite. C19 has probably accelerated matters, though.
I and others have been saying that since the Tories chose him, but there was always quite a queue to disagree.
I've been saying it all along as well - and using the Garden Bridge as an exemplar.
However, many of his shrillest opponents utterly missed what made him popular - and IMV were attacking in the wrong ways.
Even now, the attacks are not fully on him, but on the party and government that he 'leads'. That's where he's weakest, and no amount of his personal clowning can help that.
But now they are. What changed? Year old Christmas parties on the face of it seem a minor transgression against the others.
It's the context.
We sacrificed so much this past two years. It has been bloody tough. In that first lockdown, before Barnard Castle, the country was almost totally united, standing as one outside our homes applauding our NHS staff. Then came the second lockdown and we were prevented again from seeing loved ones, especially over Christmas.
It really really rankles that we went through all of that whilst Johnson and his mob were breaking all of his own rules by partying.
To those who didn't feel the pinch through lockdown it won't mean much. To the rest of us, it really does.
It isn't a minor transgression though.
It's BJ setting out to give a moral need to 'save the nation', then smearing his shit all over his own appeals.
Will correctly not be forgiven by those who did not get to see their parents / partners / children / friends for the final time. And there are many, many of them.
Even though the party stories are seriously overexaggerated in many respects, that won't help.
and it is particularly toxic because it plays directly back into a lifetime of behaving as if the rules and standards everyone else has to observe don't apply to him - even that report when his school teacher said just that, when he was a kid. So his transgression has turned what some have seen as a strength into a humungous negative.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
Yes, she is a weak candidate, but in my opinion she would grow in the job. The sad thing is that she’s the best the Tories have left. They’ve scared off most of the sane, diligent, competent ones.
Quite an interesting thread from Jon Worth, who (imo ) represents the (relatively) sane end of EU-mania, on this:
Wrong about Mordaunt though. She is not a backbencher. She is minister for trade policy.
Correct.
I'm surprised that Morduant is in any list. And that Sajid is thought to be a runner. I had not thought of Mark Harper.
I'm also interested in the kneejerk assumptions about Tories (eg won't vote for Sunak because he is brown) in the replies. Says more about the assumers.
Does a 32% return sound attractive? You can get that by backing Australia to win the test match in Adelaide. (A bit unpatriotic though if you're English).
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
I've met him, and have closely studied his efforts in red wall seats - he can. He's got that unexpected charm that was so significant for John Major. And he is (supposedly) committed to hosing towns fund monies at these places, and makes sure the local MP is there with him to tell everyone how much money he's given them.
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
Yes, but will Rishi be able to talk for the red wall, the way Boris did? I am doubtful.
An acquaintance of mine is in her late fifties, and had been eligible for a booster for weeks. However, she is only getting it today.
Her reasons are interesting, and show the issues some people face:
*) She needs to get transport to a vaccination centre. Because of where she lives, this is non-trivial by public transport, and she has to rely on her husband to drive her. Because of her work, that means the weekend. *) She works, and her employer is not keen to allow people time off midweek - and she'd need most of the day if she went by public transport. *) She feels she can't afford to lose a day off ill to the vax's side-effects. *) When she tried booking for a weekend a few weeks ago, this was the first available one.
She is in no way an anti-vaxxer, but her situation has meant she gets the booster later than she wanted.
Interesting thought from the Sky Paper Review: Is Omicron hitting London harder because of lower vaccine rates in London?
Its because it is an international travel hub. Omninomnom got there first. The rest of the country is a few days toa week behind at most given the crazy reproduction rate.
I do wonder if the Scottish outbreak is from COP 26. People came from all over the world...
+1
Didn't Sturgeon get a selfie with everybody there?
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
Sunak has by far the highest net favourables of any potential Tory leadership contender and crucially is also the only Tory leadership contender with a higher net favourable rating than Starmer
That's because all most people know of him is that he's a doe eyed twink who gives them money.
It'll be a different story when he's PM. He'll be surveying (from on top of a wheelie bin) the radioactive, plague stricken wreckage of The Johnson Project and have to put it all right with hard choices.
Agree. Sunak is the person I fear most as a Tory leader, but actually doing the job may end up as a different kettle of fish.
You could be right but Rishi does have favourable ratings and of course would be the first Asian PM of the UK
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
Even if ministers will not countenance a full-scale overhaul of the devolution settlement, they should consider one minor but worthwhile reform. Currently, the Scottish Government can instruct civil servants to prepare for a future referendum on independence or engage in any other work related to Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. This is despite the constitution being reserved. To close this loophole, ministers should put forward an amendment to the Scotland Act specifying that civil servants may only perform duties related to Scottish independence once the UK Parliament has legislated to permit another referendum on the matter.
Needless to say, the SNP-Green administration and its amen corners in Civic Scotland would wail and gnash their teeth about a 'power grab' but all such an amendment would do is prevent the misuse of the UK Civil Service to advance the break-up of the UK. It is the sort of measure that would be entirely uncontroversial in most countries because, in most countries, the state is not so wracked by existential self-doubt that it believes it must facilitate the whims and desires of those who seek its abolition. It's the sort of measure, in short, that requires nothing more of the UK Government than that it shows a bit of guts.
An acquaintance of mine is in her late fifties, and had been eligible for a booster for weeks. However, she is only getting it today.
Her reasons are interesting, and show the issues some people face:
*) She needs to get transport to a vaccination centre. Because of where she lives, this is non-trivial by public transport, and she has to rely on her husband to drive her. Because of her work, that means the weekend. *) She works, and her employer is not keen to allow people time off midweek - and she'd need most of the day if she went by public transport. *) She feels she can't afford to lose a day off ill to the vax's side-effects. *) When she tried booking for a weekend a few weeks ago, this was the first available one.
She is in no way an anti-vaxxer, but her situation has meant she gets the booster later than she wanted.
(I'd also say her employers are sh*ts...)
Gov should mandate that all employers must give time off for the booster. Seems pretty basic to me.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
I've met him, and have closely studied his efforts in red wall seats - he can. He's got that unexpected charm that was so significant for John Major. And he is (supposedly) committed to hosing towns fund monies at these places, and makes sure the local MP is there with him to tell everyone how much money he's given them.
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
Well Sunak's grubby hands will be all over the galling cuts we have ahead of us.
The lesson from South Africa seems fairly clear to me by now. Which is that Sweden had the right idea in the long run, though with hindsight wrong idea in the short term because vaccines arrived so quickly.
Simply, anyone triple vaxxed should be living as normally as possibly in the next 90 days, while their T-Cell response from the vaccines is as its strongest, in the hope they get a mild impact natural top to immunity. Double dosers over 50 it’s on them if they’re not boosted by now. Double dosers under 50 will still on aggregate be fine. No dosers; well there’s no reason we should indulge you any longer.
That is exactly my plan. In fact I have a pub crawl around plaguey Kingston today. I am hoping my colleagues refuse to work with someone who has been to London recently so I get to work from home next week. Have enough books and videos in the house to keep me amused if I am taken out of action.
And if you've unknowingly got Covid, what about the people you risk infecting?
(One of the interesting questions about Omicron is the time lags between infection - infectiousness - symptoms. There are glimmers that it is perhaps 'better', in the fact you have less time between infectiousness and symptoms)
The only way of avoiding infection with omicron in the Uk is to die of something else in the next month or two.
Perhaps. but we have the potential delay that, to get more people vaccinated and boosted. People are voting with their feet anyway...
(Again, I stress I'm not in favour of a lockdown at the moment. But I want the option to remain in our armoury.)
You don’t need to worry about it not being “in the armoury”. This bazooka against free peoples wont be going back in the box in our lifetimes. It’s now permanently primed and pointed right at us. Ready to be used by the next embarrassed libertarian PM at the snap of a failed academic’s fingers.
Contrarian was wrong to adopt his anti vax stance but he was right that it would never be enough to satisfy the busy bodying rule followers, who upon the adult realisation of parental fallibility turned to the nanny state to help them sleep soundly.
With hindsight I think it’s proved incredibly dangerous to have ever turned on state mandated social restrictions, and in the round the benefit to long term health outcomes seems questionable, certainly from an overall cost benefit perspective.
That intelligent people on here still them as a useful option (after we’ve rolled out three vaccines to vulnerable groups!) is depressing and shows just how deep seated the nudge / fear campaign has been. Even when the data that continues to emerge from SA indicates we are facing a winter that will not be end of days.
Even if ministers will not countenance a full-scale overhaul of the devolution settlement, they should consider one minor but worthwhile reform. Currently, the Scottish Government can instruct civil servants to prepare for a future referendum on independence or engage in any other work related to Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. This is despite the constitution being reserved. To close this loophole, ministers should put forward an amendment to the Scotland Act specifying that civil servants may only perform duties related to Scottish independence once the UK Parliament has legislated to permit another referendum on the matter.
Needless to say, the SNP-Green administration and its amen corners in Civic Scotland would wail and gnash their teeth about a 'power grab' but all such an amendment would do is prevent the misuse of the UK Civil Service to advance the break-up of the UK. It is the sort of measure that would be entirely uncontroversial in most countries because, in most countries, the state is not so wracked by existential self-doubt that it believes it must facilitate the whims and desires of those who seek its abolition. It's the sort of measure, in short, that requires nothing more of the UK Government than that it shows a bit of guts.
That's nonsense. It would prevent even the possibility of a referendum being discussed, which is completely contrary to the repeated electoral mandates.
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
I'm not sure what point you're making. He's a conservative chancellor who's raising taxes on those who work for a living and cutting investment in the North. Further, he's also a staunch brexiteer. It would be noticeable if he wasn't coming "under fire" from "the left".
An acquaintance of mine is in her late fifties, and had been eligible for a booster for weeks. However, she is only getting it today.
Her reasons are interesting, and show the issues some people face:
*) She needs to get transport to a vaccination centre. Because of where she lives, this is non-trivial by public transport, and she has to rely on her husband to drive her. Because of her work, that means the weekend. *) She works, and her employer is not keen to allow people time off midweek - and she'd need most of the day if she went by public transport. *) She feels she can't afford to lose a day off ill to the vax's side-effects. *) When she tried booking for a weekend a few weeks ago, this was the first available one.
She is in no way an anti-vaxxer, but her situation has meant she gets the booster later than she wanted.
(I'd also say her employers are sh*ts...)
And also really stupid. If she gets Covid, she's likely to be off for considerably longer than an afternoon.
A big problem the Tories have no matter who takes over, inflation. Its not something you can turn around quickly by putting a new minister in charge etc. And it is a killer for any government, as unlike some cut or cock up in a public service, everybody sees on a daily basis.
PMQs on Wednesday might have been the last straw for some Conservative backbenchers, when Boris denied that Plan B got through on Labour votes. It was like President Trump boasting about the crowds at his inauguration. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sah4SBuo-dE
Technically he's correct.
If Labour had abstained like the SNP did then the vote would have still passed. There were more Conservative Ayes than all Nays combined.
Labour could have voted Nay and rejected it, but they didn't bother, so Conservative votes alone were enough to defeat the Nays.
I don't usually respond to you because I'm afraid I feel you invariably lower the tone of this forum. However, two points.
The measure needed to be passed so Johnson is not technically correct and you really don't want to be getting into his obfuscation of truth like that. If Labour hadn't voted for the measures in the YES lobby, it wouldn't have passed.
The other one is your criticism of Labour and the casual throwaway remark that 'they couldn't be bothered' so they voted for it. Actually the Labour Party cares very deeply about people's lives and they are deeply concerned about this pandemic and its effects. They believed that it was right to bring in these measures to protect the NHS and to save lives.
"If Labour hadn't voted for the measures in the YES lobby, it wouldn't have passed."
You're wrong. If they hadn't voted for the measures in the AYE lobby (its not called YES), had they all just stayed at home and not turned up for instance, it would have passed. Labour votes were superfluous to defeating the Nays.
Had Labour been in the Nay lobby the result would be different, but they weren't. Labour couldn't be bothered to demand any concessions for instance support for hospitality in exchange for voting Aye or not voting Nay.
It's the No lobby (its not called NAY. "The Nays have it, the Nays have it", would sound ridiculous)
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
Sunak has by far the highest net favourables of any potential Tory leadership contender and crucially is also the only Tory leadership contender with a higher net favourable rating than Starmer
That's because all most people know of him is that he's a doe eyed twink who gives them money.
It'll be a different story when he's PM. He'll be surveying (from on top of a wheelie bin) the radioactive, plague stricken wreckage of The Johnson Project and have to put it all right with hard choices.
Agree. Sunak is the person I fear most as a Tory leader, but actually doing the job may end up as a different kettle of fish.
The photographs of Boris slumped in a chair looking lost and blaming the media and others for his problems really does make him look like he is sulking and that he is in denial of the personal disaster that is engulfing his premiership
There is no way he will change and if his mps value their seats they need to act swiftly and remove him
Thinking some more about this, given covid, nobody wants to take over in the middle of the current wave and it will look terribly like internal political games while 1000s are dying every week if there is a challenge.
He staggers on until the local elections, gets battered and then he is toppled.
Yep. I v much doubt there is a move before the locals. Summer leadership contest.
By then, he might have steered the ship into calmer waters and we'll be reading pieces about the second coming of Johnson. Never underestimate him.
Johnson effectively took over the Conservative Party with a UKIP style insurgency and imposed his brand over that of the Party. This was a strength as he was able to pretend his party was new and had nothing to do with the Conservatives who had been ruling the place since forever. It's turning into a weakness as the forever party gets saddled with a despised brand.
Without Covid-19 Johnson may have been able to stay in Downing Street for 10 years. But a crisis like this doesn't suit his style of leadership. Blair probably would have been the best PM to have in this situation.
I really don't think so. The Brexit effect was always going to subside over time, and Johnson's flaws and lack of management/leadership skills were always going to bite. C19 has probably accelerated matters, though.
I and others have been saying that since the Tories chose him, but there was always quite a queue to disagree.
I've been saying it all along as well - and using the Garden Bridge as an exemplar.
However, many of his shrillest opponents utterly missed what made him popular - and IMV were attacking in the wrong ways.
Even now, the attacks are not fully on him, but on the party and government that he 'leads'. That's where he's weakest, and no amount of his personal clowning can help that.
We were having this discussion previously. The point I was making was that Johnson's dishonesty and incompetence were in plain sight. The reason why parts of the public continued to support him was because his dishonesty and incompetence weren't important to them.
But now they are. What changed? Year old Christmas parties on the face of it seem a minor transgression against the others.
Reports from the by-election suggest the Peppa Pig episode cut through as much as the party stuff that followed. Seeing the PM make such a tit of himself when he was supposed to be addressing business leaders on our economic strategy seems to have helped a lot of people see that he's a child in an adult's job.
If you recall I pulled out both Kermit the Frog and Peppa Pig World as pivotal events in his decline. Global embarrassment and business community dismay are both bad, but when you've made so much of a wazzock of yourself that non-political people are sharing memes and laughing at you its become really bad.
What really cut through with the CBI "speech" was that he clearly had no idea what he was doing. Before he had gone on stage he'd had to be corrected that gains coming out at Teesport were not them, that Teesport is 40 miles away and a rival. That no of course NE business leaders haven't been to some shite kids park 300 miles away. And muttering afterwards that we don't even own Peppa Pig so what's he on about.
The photographs of Boris slumped in a chair looking lost and blaming the media and others for his problems really does make him look like he is sulking and that he is in denial of the personal disaster that is engulfing his premiership
There is no way he will change and if his mps value their seats they need to act swiftly and remove him
Thinking some more about this, given covid, nobody wants to take over in the middle of the current wave and it will look terribly like internal political games while 1000s are dying every week if there is a challenge.
He staggers on until the local elections, gets battered and then he is toppled.
That's what most Tories will want - a potential fresh start in the summer when, with any luck, covid will be behind us.
The challenge is that the clown may not be able to keep all the balls up in the air for that long, as per Oborne.
Not entirely surprising that Frost was arguing, only five years ago, that access to the single market was worth 5% of GPD to us. Interesting that it’s just now been noticed.
The photographs of Boris slumped in a chair looking lost and blaming the media and others for his problems really does make him look like he is sulking and that he is in denial of the personal disaster that is engulfing his premiership
There is no way he will change and if his mps value their seats they need to act swiftly and remove him
Thinking some more about this, given covid, nobody wants to take over in the middle of the current wave and it will look terribly like internal political games while 1000s are dying every week if there is a challenge.
He staggers on until the local elections, gets battered and then he is toppled.
So if someone is deliberately obstructing you going about the necessities of your day, you are not allowing to forcefully move them?
The UK legal system has absolutely no sense sometimes. The protesters were breaking the law. Moving them out the way with a level of force that doesn't injure them is entirely reasonable.
She deliberately drove into her with her SUV, albeit slowly, and pushed her along the road.
Very understandable, but difficult to argue with the prosecution.
I think if she had dragged her off the road by hand, it would not be prosecuted.
It's also a charge of Dangerous Driving.
Bit of six and two threes there, IMHO.
And Good Morning to one and all.
That Case had to step down rather does suggest that our PM doesn't know what's going on under his nose.
Agree with that.
The IB goon blocking the road breaching an Injunction was not charged.
The prosecution is right, although the drivers frustration with these morons is understandable she cannot do that. It’s not right and it is dangerous.
It is understandable people take the law into their own hands When the Police treat these people protesting illegally with kid gloves. The policing of these protests was so light handed it merely encouraged more and the legal system didn’t enforce the law or the injunctions against these protesters.
If I was on any jury that was considering the case against this driver, if it went to jury trial, I’d find her not guilty.
The problem here is the the IB lot are middle class and it's clear to the police that they know what they are doing.
So while I'm sure the general public don't mind force being used your typical policeman is probably thinking how do I do this in the glare of the media in a way that doesn't come back and bite me. Hence the kid glove approach.
Anyone who has been on an organised protest has training on how to create maximum effect while remaining in the protest. Alternatively (as with the IB protestors) to take as many police away from the protest as possible with overwhelming numbers of deliberate arrests as to continue the protest unpoliced, for example having to be carried away and controlled elsewhere.
The protests were illegal under existing laws that the police were unable to enforce. The new laws are going to be no easier to enforce, and indeed there will soon be public outrage when even peaceful formerly legal protests appear in court.
An acquaintance of mine is in her late fifties, and had been eligible for a booster for weeks. However, she is only getting it today.
Her reasons are interesting, and show the issues some people face:
*) She needs to get transport to a vaccination centre. Because of where she lives, this is non-trivial by public transport, and she has to rely on her husband to drive her. Because of her work, that means the weekend. *) She works, and her employer is not keen to allow people time off midweek - and she'd need most of the day if she went by public transport. *) She feels she can't afford to lose a day off ill to the vax's side-effects. *) When she tried booking for a weekend a few weeks ago, this was the first available one.
She is in no way an anti-vaxxer, but her situation has meant she gets the booster later than she wanted.
(I'd also say her employers are sh*ts...)
And also really stupid. If she gets Covid, she's likely to be off for considerably longer than an afternoon.
Why do you still think a typical low level manager will be bright enough to see the consequences of his actions and so get things sorted quickly.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
Sunak has by far the highest net favourables of any potential Tory leadership contender and crucially is also the only Tory leadership contender with a higher net favourable rating than Starmer
That's because all most people know of him is that he's a doe eyed twink who gives them money.
It'll be a different story when he's PM. He'll be surveying (from on top of a wheelie bin) the radioactive, plague stricken wreckage of The Johnson Project and have to put it all right with hard choices.
Agree. Sunak is the person I fear most as a Tory leader, but actually doing the job may end up as a different kettle of fish.
There’s also the small matter of the £8bn he seems to have lost to fraud in the bounce back loan scheme.
Mr. Jessop, I think a lasting impact of the pandemic will be to reaffirm the desire of many for private cars over public transport.
On delaying: I deliberately didn't bring forward my second jab as I thought the six month gap was better. It's partly for similar reasons I haven't rushed to get a booster (I'm relatively young, my second jab was not ages ago, and a longer gap seems more effective). Plus a huge crowd of people seems a fantastic way to transmit the disease, ironically.
So if someone is deliberately obstructing you going about the necessities of your day, you are not allowing to forcefully move them?
The UK legal system has absolutely no sense sometimes. The protesters were breaking the law. Moving them out the way with a level of force that doesn't injure them is entirely reasonable.
She deliberately drove into her with her SUV, albeit slowly, and pushed her along the road.
Very understandable, but difficult to argue with the prosecution.
I think if she had dragged her off the road by hand, it would not be prosecuted.
It's also a charge of Dangerous Driving.
Bit of six and two threes there, IMHO.
And Good Morning to one and all.
That Case had to step down rather does suggest that our PM doesn't know what's going on under his nose.
Agree with that.
The IB goon blocking the road breaching an Injunction was not charged.
The prosecution is right, although the drivers frustration with these morons is understandable she cannot do that. It’s not right and it is dangerous.
It is understandable people take the law into their own hands When the Police treat these people protesting illegally with kid gloves. The policing of these protests was so light handed it merely encouraged more and the legal system didn’t enforce the law or the injunctions against these protesters.
If I was on any jury that was considering the case against this driver, if it went to jury trial, I’d find her not guilty.
She should definitely demand a jury trial, I'd vote to acquit.
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
I'm not sure what point you're making. He's a conservative chancellor who's raising taxes on those who work for a living and cutting investment in the North. Further, he's also a staunch brexiteer. It would be noticeable if he wasn't coming "under fire" from "the left".
My point is he would be a threat to labour and as has been said will invest in the north
So if someone is deliberately obstructing you going about the necessities of your day, you are not allowing to forcefully move them?
The UK legal system has absolutely no sense sometimes. The protesters were breaking the law. Moving them out the way with a level of force that doesn't injure them is entirely reasonable.
She deliberately drove into her with her SUV, albeit slowly, and pushed her along the road.
Very understandable, but difficult to argue with the prosecution.
I think if she had dragged her off the road by hand, it would not be prosecuted.
It's also a charge of Dangerous Driving.
Bit of six and two threes there, IMHO.
And Good Morning to one and all.
That Case had to step down rather does suggest that our PM doesn't know what's going on under his nose.
Agree with that.
The IB goon blocking the road breaching an Injunction was not charged.
The prosecution is right, although the drivers frustration with these morons is understandable she cannot do that. It’s not right and it is dangerous.
It is understandable people take the law into their own hands When the Police treat these people protesting illegally with kid gloves. The policing of these protests was so light handed it merely encouraged more and the legal system didn’t enforce the law or the injunctions against these protesters.
If I was on any jury that was considering the case against this driver, if it went to jury trial, I’d find her not guilty.
The problem here is the the IB lot are middle class and it's clear to the police that they know what they are doing.
So while I'm sure the general public don't mind force being used your typical policeman is probably thinking how do I do this in the glare of the media in a way that doesn't come back and bite me. Hence the kid glove approach.
Anyone who has been on an organised protest has training on how to create maximum effect while remaining in the protest. Alternatively (as with the IB protestors) to take as many police away from the protest as possible with overwhelming numbers of deliberate arrests as to continue the protest unpoliced, for example having to be carried away and controlled elsewhere.
The protests were illegal under existing laws that the police were unable to enforce. The new laws are going to be no easier to enforce, and indeed there will soon be public outrage when even peaceful formerly legal protests appear in court.
You are not increasing my sympathy for the protestors ...
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
I've met him, and have closely studied his efforts in red wall seats - he can. He's got that unexpected charm that was so significant for John Major. And he is (supposedly) committed to hosing towns fund monies at these places, and makes sure the local MP is there with him to tell everyone how much money he's given them.
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
Well Sunak's grubby hands will be all over the galling cuts we have ahead of us.
He will be blame the previous leader. Currently we have this war of words / ideas between the two of them. Easy for Sunak to say that Johnson didn't have a ckue what he was doing, set conflicting priorities and gave orders which are responsible for the stupid you are upset about. Anyway, fixed now, here's a shiny ha'penny for your troubles.
Not entirely surprising that Frost was arguing, only five years ago, that access to the single market was worth 5% of GPD to us. Interesting that it’s just now been noticed.
It was noticed at the time, and dismissed as Project Fear...
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
I'm not sure what point you're making. He's a conservative chancellor who's raising taxes on those who work for a living and cutting investment in the North. Further, he's also a staunch brexiteer. It would be noticeable if he wasn't coming "under fire" from "the left".
My point is he would be a threat to labour and as has been said will invest in the north
Well the proof is in the pudding: HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail.
So if someone is deliberately obstructing you going about the necessities of your day, you are not allowing to forcefully move them?
The UK legal system has absolutely no sense sometimes. The protesters were breaking the law. Moving them out the way with a level of force that doesn't injure them is entirely reasonable.
She deliberately drove into her with her SUV, albeit slowly, and pushed her along the road.
Very understandable, but difficult to argue with the prosecution.
I think if she had dragged her off the road by hand, it would not be prosecuted.
It's also a charge of Dangerous Driving.
Bit of six and two threes there, IMHO.
And Good Morning to one and all.
That Case had to step down rather does suggest that our PM doesn't know what's going on under his nose.
Agree with that.
The IB goon blocking the road breaching an Injunction was not charged.
The prosecution is right, although the drivers frustration with these morons is understandable she cannot do that. It’s not right and it is dangerous.
It is understandable people take the law into their own hands When the Police treat these people protesting illegally with kid gloves. The policing of these protests was so light handed it merely encouraged more and the legal system didn’t enforce the law or the injunctions against these protesters.
If I was on any jury that was considering the case against this driver, if it went to jury trial, I’d find her not guilty.
The problem here is the the IB lot are middle class and it's clear to the police that they know what they are doing.
So while I'm sure the general public don't mind force being used your typical policeman is probably thinking how do I do this in the glare of the media in a way that doesn't come back and bite me. Hence the kid glove approach.
Anyone who has been on an organised protest has training on how to create maximum effect while remaining in the protest. Alternatively (as with the IB protestors) to take as many police away from the protest as possible with overwhelming numbers of deliberate arrests as to continue the protest unpoliced, for example having to be carried away and controlled elsewhere.
The protests were illegal under existing laws that the police were unable to enforce. The new laws are going to be no easier to enforce, and indeed there will soon be public outrage when even peaceful formerly legal protests appear in court.
Get the police to photograph to caution the protesters that if they do not move on, they will be photographed, pursued and prosecuted.
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
I'm not sure what point you're making. He's a conservative chancellor who's raising taxes on those who work for a living and cutting investment in the North. Further, he's also a staunch brexiteer. It would be noticeable if he wasn't coming "under fire" from "the left".
My point is he would be a threat to labour and as has been said will invest in the north
Well the proof is in the pudding: HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail.
+1
And note neither @Gallowgate or myself really benefit from either project as we live too far north but we both know how essential they are to levelling up.
A big problem the Tories have no matter who takes over, inflation. Its not something you can turn around quickly by putting a new minister in charge etc. And it is a killer for any government, as unlike some cut or cock up in a public service, everybody sees on a daily basis.
There is going to be a major cost of living crisis next year as taxes and interest rises hit, and wages fail to keep pace with inflation for the vast majority.
Inflation is not something that the under fifties have ever experienced in a big way.
Interesting thought from the Sky Paper Review: Is Omicron hitting London harder because of lower vaccine rates in London?
Its because it is an international travel hub. Omninomnom got there first. The rest of the country is a few days toa week behind at most given the crazy reproduction rate.
I do wonder if the Scottish outbreak is from COP 26. People came from all over the world...
They told the rest of us to use Zoom, while insisting on meeting up in person themselves.
Talking of Pepa Pig, do you remember on here and elsewhere that people were seriously claiming that Keir Starmer had made a huge mistake in saying he hated Pepa Pig World?
The lesson from South Africa seems fairly clear to me by now. Which is that Sweden had the right idea in the long run, though with hindsight wrong idea in the short term because vaccines arrived so quickly.
Simply, anyone triple vaxxed should be living as normally as possibly in the next 90 days, while their T-Cell response from the vaccines is as its strongest, in the hope they get a mild impact natural top to immunity. Double dosers over 50 it’s on them if they’re not boosted by now. Double dosers under 50 will still on aggregate be fine. No dosers; well there’s no reason we should indulge you any longer.
That is exactly my plan. In fact I have a pub crawl around plaguey Kingston today. I am hoping my colleagues refuse to work with someone who has been to London recently so I get to work from home next week. Have enough books and videos in the house to keep me amused if I am taken out of action.
And if you've unknowingly got Covid, what about the people you risk infecting?
(One of the interesting questions about Omicron is the time lags between infection - infectiousness - symptoms. There are glimmers that it is perhaps 'better', in the fact you have less time between infectiousness and symptoms)
The only way of avoiding infection with omicron in the Uk is to die of something else in the next month or two.
Perhaps. but we have the potential delay that, to get more people vaccinated and boosted. People are voting with their feet anyway...
(Again, I stress I'm not in favour of a lockdown at the moment. But I want the option to remain in our armoury.)
You don’t need to worry about it not being “in the armoury”. This bazooka against free peoples wont be going back in the box in our lifetimes. It’s now permanently primed and pointed right at us. Ready to be used by the next embarrassed libertarian PM at the snap of a failed academic’s fingers.
Contrarian was wrong to adopt his anti vax stance but he was right that it would never be enough to satisfy the busy bodying rule followers, who upon the adult realisation of parental fallibility turned to the nanny state to help them sleep soundly.
With hindsight I think it’s proved incredibly dangerous to have ever turned on state mandated social restrictions, and in the round the benefit to long term health outcomes seems questionable, certainly from an overall cost benefit perspective.
That intelligent people on here still them as a useful option (after we’ve rolled out three vaccines to vulnerable groups!) is depressing and shows just how deep seated the nudge / fear campaign has been. Even when the data that continues to emerge from SA indicates we are facing a winter that will not be end of days.
Intelligent people deal with the world as they find it, not as they want it to be.
"This bazooka against free peoples wont be going back in the box in our lifetimes"
During WW2 we had massive restrictions on our civil liberties - in fact, ISTR parliament actually rejected some proposed by the government during the war. Many of those restrictions disappeared very quickly after 1945; the one that had perhaps the most effect, rationing, was removed over time, finally disappearing in the mid-50s.
I see no reason to believe that the same won't happen in this very different conflict.
So if someone is deliberately obstructing you going about the necessities of your day, you are not allowing to forcefully move them?
The UK legal system has absolutely no sense sometimes. The protesters were breaking the law. Moving them out the way with a level of force that doesn't injure them is entirely reasonable.
She deliberately drove into her with her SUV, albeit slowly, and pushed her along the road.
Very understandable, but difficult to argue with the prosecution.
I think if she had dragged her off the road by hand, it would not be prosecuted.
It's also a charge of Dangerous Driving.
Bit of six and two threes there, IMHO.
And Good Morning to one and all.
That Case had to step down rather does suggest that our PM doesn't know what's going on under his nose.
Agree with that.
The IB goon blocking the road breaching an Injunction was not charged.
The prosecution is right, although the drivers frustration with these morons is understandable she cannot do that. It’s not right and it is dangerous.
It is understandable people take the law into their own hands When the Police treat these people protesting illegally with kid gloves. The policing of these protests was so light handed it merely encouraged more and the legal system didn’t enforce the law or the injunctions against these protesters.
If I was on any jury that was considering the case against this driver, if it went to jury trial, I’d find her not guilty.
The problem here is the the IB lot are middle class and it's clear to the police that they know what they are doing.
So while I'm sure the general public don't mind force being used your typical policeman is probably thinking how do I do this in the glare of the media in a way that doesn't come back and bite me. Hence the kid glove approach.
Anyone who has been on an organised protest has training on how to create maximum effect while remaining in the protest. Alternatively (as with the IB protestors) to take as many police away from the protest as possible with overwhelming numbers of deliberate arrests as to continue the protest unpoliced, for example having to be carried away and controlled elsewhere.
The protests were illegal under existing laws that the police were unable to enforce. The new laws are going to be no easier to enforce, and indeed there will soon be public outrage when even peaceful formerly legal protests appear in court.
You are not increasing my sympathy for the protestors ...
My experience is not from environmental activism, but from arms trade protests. Training is very useful. Know exactly when the police are at the point of arrest, then move on, only to pop up elsewhere, while someone else takes your place.
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
I'm not sure what point you're making. He's a conservative chancellor who's raising taxes on those who work for a living and cutting investment in the North. Further, he's also a staunch brexiteer. It would be noticeable if he wasn't coming "under fire" from "the left".
My point is he would be a threat to labour and as has been said will invest in the north
The next leader is fighting a two-fronted war. The southern England trad Tories unhappy with the way the government is taxing and spending and is corrupt and stupid, and the red wallers who want money quickly.
I struggle to see how Hunt and Truss can connect with both groups. The trad Tories perhaps, but what do the offer to people north of the Watford Gap?
The reason why I have been backing Sunak is that he is a rare kind of modern Tory - an actual human person. The economic outlook is grim whoever takes over so can't blame him for the costs of Covid. But can praise him for the herculean effort in rescuing so many businesses and people with Furlough etc. And he gets that Capitalism = make and investment and gain a return on that investment.
Labour would struggle more against him that they would against Jeremy Goebbels and Liz "In't Brexit Shit" Truss.
The lesson from South Africa seems fairly clear to me by now. Which is that Sweden had the right idea in the long run, though with hindsight wrong idea in the short term because vaccines arrived so quickly.
Simply, anyone triple vaxxed should be living as normally as possibly in the next 90 days, while their T-Cell response from the vaccines is as its strongest, in the hope they get a mild impact natural top to immunity. Double dosers over 50 it’s on them if they’re not boosted by now. Double dosers under 50 will still on aggregate be fine. No dosers; well there’s no reason we should indulge you any longer.
That is exactly my plan. In fact I have a pub crawl around plaguey Kingston today. I am hoping my colleagues refuse to work with someone who has been to London recently so I get to work from home next week. Have enough books and videos in the house to keep me amused if I am taken out of action.
And if you've unknowingly got Covid, what about the people you risk infecting?
(One of the interesting questions about Omicron is the time lags between infection - infectiousness - symptoms. There are glimmers that it is perhaps 'better', in the fact you have less time between infectiousness and symptoms)
The only way of avoiding infection with omicron in the Uk is to die of something else in the next month or two.
Perhaps. but we have the potential delay that, to get more people vaccinated and boosted. People are voting with their feet anyway...
(Again, I stress I'm not in favour of a lockdown at the moment. But I want the option to remain in our armoury.)
You don’t need to worry about it not being “in the armoury”. This bazooka against free peoples wont be going back in the box in our lifetimes. It’s now permanently primed and pointed right at us. Ready to be used by the next embarrassed libertarian PM at the snap of a failed academic’s fingers.
Contrarian was wrong to adopt his anti vax stance but he was right that it would never be enough to satisfy the busy bodying rule followers, who upon the adult realisation of parental fallibility turned to the nanny state to help them sleep soundly.
With hindsight I think it’s proved incredibly dangerous to have ever turned on state mandated social restrictions, and in the round the benefit to long term health outcomes seems questionable, certainly from an overall cost benefit perspective.
That intelligent people on here still them as a useful option (after we’ve rolled out three vaccines to vulnerable groups!) is depressing and shows just how deep seated the nudge / fear campaign has been. Even when the data that continues to emerge from SA indicates we are facing a winter that will not be end of days.
Interesting points. I wonder if the anti-lockdown argument wasn’t helped by its most vocal proponents tending to be ant-vaxx, a logically contradictory position.
🚨 | BREAKING: Plans are being drawn up for a two week circuit breaker after Christmas, which would ban indoor mixing and have the rule of six outdoors. Pubs and restaurants outdoors only
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
I've met him, and have closely studied his efforts in red wall seats - he can. He's got that unexpected charm that was so significant for John Major. And he is (supposedly) committed to hosing towns fund monies at these places, and makes sure the local MP is there with him to tell everyone how much money he's given them.
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
Well Sunak's grubby hands will be all over the galling cuts we have ahead of us.
He will be blame the previous leader. Currently we have this war of words / ideas between the two of them. Easy for Sunak to say that Johnson didn't have a ckue what he was doing, set conflicting priorities and gave orders which are responsible for the stupid you are upset about. Anyway, fixed now, here's a shiny ha'penny for your troubles.
Trouble is that the economy won't be fixed, and if anything the government will be taking a lot more shiny ha'pennies off us for a few years yet.
Talking of Pepa Pig, do you remember on here and elsewhere that people were seriously claiming that Keir Starmer had made a huge mistake in saying he hated Pepa Pig World?
I don't think he said that, he said he'd never been but his daughter loved the books, and it came across as, theme parks = great unwashed, books = North London. It was a minor misstep, not a big deal, though.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
Sunak has by far the highest net favourables of any potential Tory leadership contender and crucially is also the only Tory leadership contender with a higher net favourable rating than Starmer
That's because all most people know of him is that he's a doe eyed twink who gives them money.
It'll be a different story when he's PM. He'll be surveying (from on top of a wheelie bin) the radioactive, plague stricken wreckage of The Johnson Project and have to put it all right with hard choices.
Agree. Sunak is the person I fear most as a Tory leader, but actually doing the job may end up as a different kettle of fish.
There’s also the small matter of the £8bn he seems to have lost to fraud in the bounce back loan scheme.
Also Sunak was responsible for the social care policy that bombed. I think his reputation for competence is only in comparison with the dismal alternatives in the Johnson cabinet.
On the other hand he is very different from Johnson in character and also good at politics. This could be a factor if the Conservative Party want a change.
If they don't, they have Truss, which would be one charlatan replacing another. If their motivation for choosing Johnson hasn't changed, they will go for the candidate that tells them what they like to hear.
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
Talking of Pepa Pig, do you remember on here and elsewhere that people were seriously claiming that Keir Starmer had made a huge mistake in saying he hated Pepa Pig World?
It's because the polls aren't picking up the views of the crucial 2-8 year old demographic on the matter.
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
Can we rebase millionaire to mean 100 million or something meaningful? When the word was coined it was certainly closer to bn than mn in modern money.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
I've met him, and have closely studied his efforts in red wall seats - he can. He's got that unexpected charm that was so significant for John Major. And he is (supposedly) committed to hosing towns fund monies at these places, and makes sure the local MP is there with him to tell everyone how much money he's given them.
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
Well Sunak's grubby hands will be all over the galling cuts we have ahead of us.
He will be blame the previous leader. Currently we have this war of words / ideas between the two of them. Easy for Sunak to say that Johnson didn't have a ckue what he was doing, set conflicting priorities and gave orders which are responsible for the stupid you are upset about. Anyway, fixed now, here's a shiny ha'penny for your troubles.
Trouble is that the economy won't be fixed, and if anything the government will be taking a lot more shiny ha'pennies off us for a few years yet.
Yep. Dire Straights ahead. But Sunak is better placed to have a shot at winning the next election than Hunt or Truss would be.
🚨 | BREAKING: Plans are being drawn up for a two week circuit breaker after Christmas, which would ban indoor mixing and have the rule of six outdoors. Pubs and restaurants outdoors only
Oh goodie we are going for the half lockdown, which is neither here nor there.
"Weddings would be limited to 15 people and funerals 30 during the potential circuit breaker"
Unacceptable, a VONC inevitable if Boris agreed that
He's safe for now surely. Changing leader with the pandemic raging would be a dreadful look.
If there's a contest later in 2022 who do you think has a serious chance other than Sunak and Truss?
Does anyone seriously believe that if the backbenchers let Johnson do a two week circuit breaker it wont become two months shortly afterwards?
I could live with a two week one. I am not prepared to deal with a two month one or live in a country suffering the economic consequences of another long lockdown.
Even if ministers will not countenance a full-scale overhaul of the devolution settlement, they should consider one minor but worthwhile reform. Currently, the Scottish Government can instruct civil servants to prepare for a future referendum on independence or engage in any other work related to Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. This is despite the constitution being reserved. To close this loophole, ministers should put forward an amendment to the Scotland Act specifying that civil servants may only perform duties related to Scottish independence once the UK Parliament has legislated to permit another referendum on the matter.
Needless to say, the SNP-Green administration and its amen corners in Civic Scotland would wail and gnash their teeth about a 'power grab' but all such an amendment would do is prevent the misuse of the UK Civil Service to advance the break-up of the UK. It is the sort of measure that would be entirely uncontroversial in most countries because, in most countries, the state is not so wracked by existential self-doubt that it believes it must facilitate the whims and desires of those who seek its abolition. It's the sort of measure, in short, that requires nothing more of the UK Government than that it shows a bit of guts.
That's nonsense. It would prevent even the possibility of a referendum being discussed, which is completely contrary to the repeated electoral mandates.
Why? If the Constitution is reserved to Westminster why should Holyrood civil servants spend time working on it? If Westminster agrees a referendum, then work could start - but in the absence of agreement, why should they?
Scott Gottlieb, MD @ScottGottliebMD Epidemic curve in Johannesburg/Pretoria that was straight up and continues straight down suggests we’re missing something fundamental about variant. Either attack rate is narrowed to sub segment of population, we’re undercounting mild or asymptomatic infections, or something else
OMICRON THE GREAT FLUFFY KITTEN.
It is so hard to reconcile the two strands of evidence. On the one hand some of the data out of SA - like this - is seriously encouraging. A collapse in infections. On the other hand you have news that the data seen by HMG is "frankly pretty terrifying"
It's not that both cannot be true, it's more like they come from parallel universes
WTF?
I rarely agree with you Leon about frankly very much. But you have been spot on correct about this. The simple answer is it is still too early to tell. There is too much conflicting data. So much so that each poster is able to cherry pick it to fit their own pre-conceived ideas. One thing is for sure. It could turn out to be anything. But it ain't a fluffy kitten. It is an unpleasant, debilitating, draining illness for me. Not anywhere near hospital. But not anything at all pleasant in the slightest. It's 10 days now. I doubt I'll be fit for Monday.
DD, what were your symptoms?
I wonder if I had it, despite a total of 5 negative tests with no positive ones. I have had a 'head cold' for 2 weeks now and it refuses to go away. Seriously bunged up nose, mild headache, and a scratchy throat at the start that migrated down to the throat and an occasional cough (not dry). I am tired now, not so much as a flu-type fatigue but rather from shortage of sleep as I keep on waking up unable to breath through my bunged up nose.
I'm not a doctor but it sounds more like a cold. Get a decongestant from your pharmacy (or even supermarket or sweetshop) and book an appointment with your GP if that does not help.
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
I'm not sure what point you're making. He's a conservative chancellor who's raising taxes on those who work for a living and cutting investment in the North. Further, he's also a staunch brexiteer. It would be noticeable if he wasn't coming "under fire" from "the left".
My point is he would be a threat to labour and as has been said will invest in the north
The next leader is fighting a two-fronted war. The southern England trad Tories unhappy with the way the government is taxing and spending and is corrupt and stupid, and the red wallers who want money quickly.
I struggle to see how Hunt and Truss can connect with both groups. The trad Tories perhaps, but what do the offer to people north of the Watford Gap?
The reason why I have been backing Sunak is that he is a rare kind of modern Tory - an actual human person. The economic outlook is grim whoever takes over so can't blame him for the costs of Covid. But can praise him for the herculean effort in rescuing so many businesses and people with Furlough etc. And he gets that Capitalism = make and investment and gain a return on that investment.
Labour would struggle more against him that they would against Jeremy Goebbels and Liz "In't Brexit Shit" Truss.
I think that Sunak too would struggle with the new Tories, but probably do better with the older Tory voters. Nothing to do with his wealth or ethnicity, but he is a low tax, pro financial services Atlantacist by instinct, who is concerned, albeit heavily implicated, by financial profligacy.
His policy would be retrenchment to the point of austerity at a time of a cost of living crisis. More popular in the SE than the NE.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
Sunak has by far the highest net favourables of any potential Tory leadership contender and crucially is also the only Tory leadership contender with a higher net favourable rating than Starmer
That's because all most people know of him is that he's a doe eyed twink who gives them money.
It'll be a different story when he's PM. He'll be surveying (from on top of a wheelie bin) the radioactive, plague stricken wreckage of The Johnson Project and have to put it all right with hard choices.
Agree. Sunak is the person I fear most as a Tory leader, but actually doing the job may end up as a different kettle of fish.
There’s also the small matter of the £8bn he seems to have lost to fraud in the bounce back loan scheme.
Also Sunak was responsible for the social care policy that bombed. I think his reputation for competence is only in comparison with the dismal alternatives in the Johnson cabinet.
On the other hand he is very different from Johnson in character and also good at politics. This could be a factor if the Conservative Party want a change.
If they don't, they have Truss, which would be one charlatan replacing another. If their motivation for choosing Johnson hasn't changed, they will go for the candidate that tells them what they like to hear.
It’s probably Sunak’s to lose - and he is probably their best option in both electoral and competence terms. But he has significant flaws. Will be interesting to see if Hunt’s time away from the cabinet has given him an advantage or not.
Even if ministers will not countenance a full-scale overhaul of the devolution settlement, they should consider one minor but worthwhile reform. Currently, the Scottish Government can instruct civil servants to prepare for a future referendum on independence or engage in any other work related to Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. This is despite the constitution being reserved. To close this loophole, ministers should put forward an amendment to the Scotland Act specifying that civil servants may only perform duties related to Scottish independence once the UK Parliament has legislated to permit another referendum on the matter.
Needless to say, the SNP-Green administration and its amen corners in Civic Scotland would wail and gnash their teeth about a 'power grab' but all such an amendment would do is prevent the misuse of the UK Civil Service to advance the break-up of the UK. It is the sort of measure that would be entirely uncontroversial in most countries because, in most countries, the state is not so wracked by existential self-doubt that it believes it must facilitate the whims and desires of those who seek its abolition. It's the sort of measure, in short, that requires nothing more of the UK Government than that it shows a bit of guts.
That's nonsense. It would prevent even the possibility of a referendum being discussed, which is completely contrary to the repeated electoral mandates.
And it's what messed up the Remain case in the Referendum snd allowed Leave to get away with their lies.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
I've met him, and have closely studied his efforts in red wall seats - he can. He's got that unexpected charm that was so significant for John Major. And he is (supposedly) committed to hosing towns fund monies at these places, and makes sure the local MP is there with him to tell everyone how much money he's given them.
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
Well Sunak's grubby hands will be all over the galling cuts we have ahead of us.
He will be blame the previous leader. Currently we have this war of words / ideas between the two of them. Easy for Sunak to say that Johnson didn't have a ckue what he was doing, set conflicting priorities and gave orders which are responsible for the stupid you are upset about. Anyway, fixed now, here's a shiny ha'penny for your troubles.
Trouble is that the economy won't be fixed, and if anything the government will be taking a lot more shiny ha'pennies off us for a few years yet.
That's a big issue right now - for the public, having a sinking leader is a problem that needs dealing with - for his colleague politicians, it is an opportunity to see what other bad news he can take on board before he goes down.
🚨 | BREAKING: Plans are being drawn up for a two week circuit breaker after Christmas, which would ban indoor mixing and have the rule of six outdoors. Pubs and restaurants outdoors only
Oh goodie we are going for the half lockdown, which is neither here nor there.
"Weddings would be limited to 15 people and funerals 30 during the potential circuit breaker"
Unacceptable, a VONC inevitable if Boris agreed that
He's safe for now surely. Changing leader with the pandemic raging would be a dreadful look.
If there's a contest later in 2022 who do you think has a serious chance other than Sunak and Truss?
Does anyone seriously believe that if the backbenchers let Johnson do a two week circuit breaker it wont become two months shortly afterwards?
I could live with a two week one. I am not prepared to deal with a two month one or live in a country suffering the economic consequences of another long lockdown.
Here is the issue. Parliament in recess, pandemic. The PM will simply rule by decree again, so the backbenchers won't get to have a say. And with respect to some of them they really shouldn't be allowed to have a say.
Whitty gets some stick on here from people in fear of what he is saying and I understand that. But watch Whitty doing takedown of that Tory MP at the select committee - people aren't going to trust know nothing gobshite MPs and their shills over the combined medical authorities led by a polymath.
So the backbenchers won't get chance to vent until parliament resumes (virtually?) in January. And then most of them will be made to look like clueless gobshites playing politics with the pandemic. Doesn't mean they won't get Really Angry and trigger that leadership challenge. But I don't think they will naturally carry public support for their efforts.
Why is Dominic Raab as short as 40/1? He is not going to be an MP after the next GE.
Hunt a tasty 16/1 (Vbet)
Raab will probably find a safer seat. Boundary changes offer a reason to move.
Indeed? Who’s seat is he going to nick?
So far only one Con MP has announced not standing for re-election, Douglas Ross. Is Raab going to be the SCon candidate in Highland East & Elgin?
Probably at least 50 Tory MPs will announce their retirement by the time of the election. There's Chris Grayling's seat in Epsom and Ewell for example.
Ta. I knew someone around here would have an idea.
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
I'm not sure what point you're making. He's a conservative chancellor who's raising taxes on those who work for a living and cutting investment in the North. Further, he's also a staunch brexiteer. It would be noticeable if he wasn't coming "under fire" from "the left".
My point is he would be a threat to labour and as has been said will invest in the north
The next leader is fighting a two-fronted war. The southern England trad Tories unhappy with the way the government is taxing and spending and is corrupt and stupid, and the red wallers who want money quickly.
I struggle to see how Hunt and Truss can connect with both groups. The trad Tories perhaps, but what do the offer to people north of the Watford Gap?
The reason why I have been backing Sunak is that he is a rare kind of modern Tory - an actual human person. The economic outlook is grim whoever takes over so can't blame him for the costs of Covid. But can praise him for the herculean effort in rescuing so many businesses and people with Furlough etc. And he gets that Capitalism = make and investment and gain a return on that investment.
Labour would struggle more against him that they would against Jeremy Goebbels and Liz "In't Brexit Shit" Truss.
I think that Sunak too would struggle with the new Tories, but probably do better with the older Tory voters. Nothing to do with his wealth or ethnicity, but he is a low tax, pro financial services Atlantacist by instinct, who is concerned, albeit heavily implicated, by financial profligacy.
His policy would be retrenchment to the point of austerity at a time of a cost of living crisis. More popular in the SE than the NE.
Sure - its an almost impossible brief. But would Trade Deals Truss or Jeremy Goebbels do any better? Sunak for me stands the greatest chance of providing a robust defence of Tory seats.
Peter Oborne is a Jeremy Hunt backer and predicts VONC in New Year:
“… likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, is favourite among Tory voters to win the leadership contest that will take place when Johnson goes. She is out of her depth, and I expect her to be found out. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the Exchequer, is inexperienced and yet to acquire a robust public voice.
The right-wing newspapers – which without exception support Boris Johnson to be prime minister in 2019– will present the succession as a contest between Truss and Sunak. Yet both are deeply implicated in the moral squalor and falsehoods of Johnson’s shortly-to-be defunct administration.
Jeremy Hunt, a former foreign secretary who came second to Johnson in the 2019 Tory leadership election, is not contaminated in the same way. He is a traditional Tory statesman who would offer a fresh start and return to decency and common sense. But that may count against Hunt, given the state of the British Conservative Party as it is today.
Meanwhile Johnson's reputation is shattered: he is held widely in contempt not just by most voters but also by Tory colleagues. If he does not go of his own accord – he has a potential alibi in two small children and could plausibly claim family commitments – Tory MPs will strike with a vote of no-confidence in the New Year.”
'likely successors… are low calibre. Liz Truss ...' Beautifully understated!
I can't believe they are going to go for Sunak.
An Action Man sized Fulbright Scholar Hedge Fund Parasite Wanna Be Tech Bro just isn't going to connect with the shitmunchers in Hartlepool like Johnson can.
I've met him, and have closely studied his efforts in red wall seats - he can. He's got that unexpected charm that was so significant for John Major. And he is (supposedly) committed to hosing towns fund monies at these places, and makes sure the local MP is there with him to tell everyone how much money he's given them.
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
Well Sunak's grubby hands will be all over the galling cuts we have ahead of us.
He will be blame the previous leader. Currently we have this war of words / ideas between the two of them. Easy for Sunak to say that Johnson didn't have a ckue what he was doing, set conflicting priorities and gave orders which are responsible for the stupid you are upset about. Anyway, fixed now, here's a shiny ha'penny for your troubles.
Trouble is that the economy won't be fixed, and if anything the government will be taking a lot more shiny ha'pennies off us for a few years yet.
That's a big issue right now - for the public, having a sinking leader is a problem that needs dealing with - for his colleague politicians, it is an opportunity to see what other bad news he can take on board before he goes down.
They can’t prop him up for too long lest they be seem as complicit. It’s obvious he has to go, and has no chance of surviving a challenge.
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
He is paying out a lot in alimony and child support though.
I remain surprised at how quiet his exes and their children are. Especially as some of the latter are now adults and earning their own livings. Is he still contributing?
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
Can we rebase millionaire to mean 100 million or something meaningful? When the word was coined it was certainly closer to bn than mn in modern money.
I have cleverly arranged my affairs such that I do not need to count up to a million. The point is that rich Prime Ministers are nothing new so Rishi's bank balance is an unlikely barrier.
On scales of wealth, dunno. Having a private chef or a private jet? Having two kitchens like Ed Milliband? Three homes (most MPs have two as a requirement of the job)?
Interesting thought from the Sky Paper Review: Is Omicron hitting London harder because of lower vaccine rates in London?
Its because it is an international travel hub. Omninomnom got there first. The rest of the country is a few days toa week behind at most given the crazy reproduction rate.
I do wonder if the Scottish outbreak is from COP 26. People came from all over the world...
+1
Didn't Sturgeon get a selfie with everybody there?
According to old farts unaware of what a selfie actually is..
Talking of Pepa Pig, do you remember on here and elsewhere that people were seriously claiming that Keir Starmer had made a huge mistake in saying he hated Pepa Pig World?
I don't think he said that, he said he'd never been but his daughter loved the books, and it came across as, theme parks = great unwashed, books = North London. It was a minor misstep, not a big deal, though.
Even if ministers will not countenance a full-scale overhaul of the devolution settlement, they should consider one minor but worthwhile reform. Currently, the Scottish Government can instruct civil servants to prepare for a future referendum on independence or engage in any other work related to Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. This is despite the constitution being reserved. To close this loophole, ministers should put forward an amendment to the Scotland Act specifying that civil servants may only perform duties related to Scottish independence once the UK Parliament has legislated to permit another referendum on the matter.
Needless to say, the SNP-Green administration and its amen corners in Civic Scotland would wail and gnash their teeth about a 'power grab' but all such an amendment would do is prevent the misuse of the UK Civil Service to advance the break-up of the UK. It is the sort of measure that would be entirely uncontroversial in most countries because, in most countries, the state is not so wracked by existential self-doubt that it believes it must facilitate the whims and desires of those who seek its abolition. It's the sort of measure, in short, that requires nothing more of the UK Government than that it shows a bit of guts.
That's nonsense. It would prevent even the possibility of a referendum being discussed, which is completely contrary to the repeated electoral mandates.
Let them get on with it. Never disturb your enemies when they’re in the middle of making a mistake.
So if someone is deliberately obstructing you going about the necessities of your day, you are not allowing to forcefully move them?
The UK legal system has absolutely no sense sometimes. The protesters were breaking the law. Moving them out the way with a level of force that doesn't injure them is entirely reasonable.
She deliberately drove into her with her SUV, albeit slowly, and pushed her along the road.
Very understandable, but difficult to argue with the prosecution.
I think if she had dragged her off the road by hand, it would not be prosecuted.
It's also a charge of Dangerous Driving.
Bit of six and two threes there, IMHO.
And Good Morning to one and all.
That Case had to step down rather does suggest that our PM doesn't know what's going on under his nose.
Agree with that.
The IB goon blocking the road breaching an Injunction was not charged.
The prosecution is right, although the drivers frustration with these morons is understandable she cannot do that. It’s not right and it is dangerous.
It is understandable people take the law into their own hands When the Police treat these people protesting illegally with kid gloves. The policing of these protests was so light handed it merely encouraged more and the legal system didn’t enforce the law or the injunctions against these protesters.
If I was on any jury that was considering the case against this driver, if it went to jury trial, I’d find her not guilty.
The problem here is the the IB lot are middle class and it's clear to the police that they know what they are doing.
So while I'm sure the general public don't mind force being used your typical policeman is probably thinking how do I do this in the glare of the media in a way that doesn't come back and bite me. Hence the kid glove approach.
Anyone who has been on an organised protest has training on how to create maximum effect while remaining in the protest. Alternatively (as with the IB protestors) to take as many police away from the protest as possible with overwhelming numbers of deliberate arrests as to continue the protest unpoliced, for example having to be carried away and controlled elsewhere.
The protests were illegal under existing laws that the police were unable to enforce. The new laws are going to be no easier to enforce, and indeed there will soon be public outrage when even peaceful formerly legal protests appear in court.
You are not increasing my sympathy for the protestors ...
My experience is not from environmental activism, but from arms trade protests. Training is very useful. Know exactly when the police are at the point of arrest, then move on, only to pop up elsewhere, while someone else takes your place.
Yet again, you are not increasing my sympathy for the protestors ...
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
Can we rebase millionaire to mean 100 million or something meaningful? When the word was coined it was certainly closer to bn than mn in modern money.
I have cleverly arranged my affairs such that I do not need to count up to a million. The point is that rich Prime Ministers are nothing new so Rishi's bank balance is an unlikely barrier.
On scales of wealth, dunno. Having a private chef or a private jet? Having two kitchens like Ed Milliband? Three homes (most MPs have two as a requirement of the job)?
Sunak would be the first Goldman Sachs alumnus and son in law of a billionaire PM however. As an Oxford first too he probably has the best CV of any potential PM we have had since the War on paper, including Starmer, however that does not automatically he can win a general election or do the job well, even if the polls look good for him now
Even if ministers will not countenance a full-scale overhaul of the devolution settlement, they should consider one minor but worthwhile reform. Currently, the Scottish Government can instruct civil servants to prepare for a future referendum on independence or engage in any other work related to Scotland leaving the United Kingdom. This is despite the constitution being reserved. To close this loophole, ministers should put forward an amendment to the Scotland Act specifying that civil servants may only perform duties related to Scottish independence once the UK Parliament has legislated to permit another referendum on the matter.
Needless to say, the SNP-Green administration and its amen corners in Civic Scotland would wail and gnash their teeth about a 'power grab' but all such an amendment would do is prevent the misuse of the UK Civil Service to advance the break-up of the UK. It is the sort of measure that would be entirely uncontroversial in most countries because, in most countries, the state is not so wracked by existential self-doubt that it believes it must facilitate the whims and desires of those who seek its abolition. It's the sort of measure, in short, that requires nothing more of the UK Government than that it shows a bit of guts.
That's nonsense. It would prevent even the possibility of a referendum being discussed, which is completely contrary to the repeated electoral mandates.
Why? If the Constitution is reserved to Westminster why should Holyrood civil servants spend time working on it? If Westminster agrees a referendum, then work could start - but in the absence of agreement, why should they?
Couldn't even discuss it, could they? So total (but concocted) excuse for London not to even consider an agreement.
At the moment, in any case, UKG is increasingly acting technically ultra vires in Scotland in dictating how money is spent, too, so it's certainly not fussy about that particular issue. (In terms of imposing things like rebuiulding that roundabout near Falkirk on which they can paint a big Union Flag).
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
Can we rebase millionaire to mean 100 million or something meaningful? When the word was coined it was certainly closer to bn than mn in modern money.
I have cleverly arranged my affairs such that I do not need to count up to a million. The point is that rich Prime Ministers are nothing new so Rishi's bank balance is an unlikely barrier.
On scales of wealth, dunno. Having a private chef or a private jet? Having two kitchens like Ed Milliband? Three homes (most MPs have two as a requirement of the job)?
Sunak will be the first Goldman Sachs alumnus PM and son in law of a billionaire however. As an Oxford first too he probably has the best CV of any potential PM we have had since the War on paper, including Starmer, however that does not automatically he can win a general election or do the job well, even if the polls look good for him now
A spectacularly ungracious tweet from North Shropshire CLP illustrates the cultural mountain that much of grassroots Labour still needs to climb, if the party wants to be in power.
It’s the kind of tweet you would never see from a Lib Dem constituency association (the worst they manage are cocky yah-boo gloats), nor indeed even the most knuckle-dragging Tory one. It contains within it several of the features that characterise the toxic far left:
1. Entitlement: Labour owns all anti Tory votes so how dare another party pick them up 2. Distaste for actual voters, especially floating ones: never mind that 60% of people on NS previously voted Tory. We don’t want them. Just our own core vote. 3. Tribalism above electoral strategy: I think they would honestly have preferred a Tory hold if it meant Labour coming second 4. Sanctimony and exclusivity: only we are pure, the rest are just Tory scum 5. Petulance and bad grace: the default emotion seems for these people seems to be anger.
The comments below the tweet are universally scathing, many from Labour supporters, but I expect the author considers that he or she did nothing wrong. This is what Starmer still evidently has to deal with in some CLPs.
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
Can we rebase millionaire to mean 100 million or something meaningful? When the word was coined it was certainly closer to bn than mn in modern money.
A good proportion of London property owners are millionaires - my wife and I included (jointly if not individually). Sunak's wealth is certainly on a different scale to that. He does come across as fairly out of touch. Johnson does too, of course, but his confected "personality" kind of obscures that, as well as other deficiencies (there's an interesting dissertation to be written about people who create ludicrous public personas to obscure and confuse, with Johnson and Saville as prime examples).
I like Rishi but I think its fairly reasonable to argue that he wont be able to do the “man of the people” thing that Boris can. He’s basically a billionaire Ed Miliband.
Funny you should say that. My closest friend is a passionate tory, has never voted anything other than Conservative all her life. But she was contemptuous of Rishi Sunak and really dislikes him on exactly your grounds. 'He and his wife are multi-millionaires' she virtually spat down the phone to me. She said he has nothing in common with any of the rest of us. Mind you, she (still) adores Boris.
In the US a leader can probably get away with it but I'm not too sure it will work over here. There have been well-off and gentrified PMs but comparing like for like and adjusting for the years, would Sunak be the richest PM in our history?
It is his wife's money. While rich in his own right, he comes from a fairly modest middle class Hampshire background.
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
David Cameron was said to be worth £30 million; Mrs Thatcher was married to a millionaire. Boris is probably a millionaire, even if he doesn't like spending his own money.
He is paying out a lot in alimony and child support though.
I remain surprised at how quiet his exes and their children are. Especially as some of the latter are now adults and earning their own livings. Is he still contributing?
Aren't all of Boris's non-Carrie offspring now adults? It has been suggested Boris might be paying their student loans but surely that can be offset against his saving private school fees. It is probably the Telegraph's chicken feed that he misses, that he could spend without denting his underlying wealth. Luckily the job comes with limos and posh houses, and his mates pay for exotic holidays and exotic wallpaper, which might yet be his undoing.
A spectacularly ungracious tweet from North Shropshire CLP illustrates the cultural mountain that much of grassroots Labour still needs to climb, if the party wants to be in power.
It’s the kind of tweet you would never see from a Lib Dem constituency association (the worst they manage are cocky yah-boo gloats), nor indeed even the most knuckle-dragging Tory one. It contains within it several of the features that characterise the toxic far left:
1. Entitlement: Labour owns all anti Tory votes so how dare another party pick them up 2. Distaste for actual voters, especially floating ones: never mind that 60% of people on NS previously voted Tory. We don’t want them. Just our own core vote. 3. Tribalism above electoral strategy: I think they would honestly have preferred a Tory hold if it meant Labour coming second 4. Sanctimony and exclusivity: only we are pure, the rest are just Tory scum 5. Petulance and bad grace: the default emotion seems for these people seems to be anger.
The comments below the tweet are universally scathing, many from Labour supporters, but I expect the author considers that he or she did nothing wrong. This is what Starmer still evidently has to deal with in some CLPs.
It's mirror image HY. With added American spelling.
Regarding the honesty of the local Labour campaign - I quote - "The latest internal polling from the Labour campaign in North Shropshire indicates that the Conservative lead in the by-election has been narrowed to seven points. Conservative candidate Neil Shastri-Hurst’s lead over Labour’s Ben Wood is now in single digits, according to the opposition party’s campaign in the seat. 33% of residents are reportedly backing Wood while 40% support Shastri-Hurst."
And note neither @Gallowgate or myself really benefit from either project as we live too far north but we both know how essential they are to levelling up.
Even if they aren't essential, there's a certain symbolism in cancelling big headline northern projects that I (from my uninformed southern viewpoint) suspect people will have taken on board...
Ball spinning like crazy....good job England picked a specialist spinner...oh wait.
202/7 having been 150/2.
You wonder a bit if they might raid the Lions squad for extra batsmen for the next Test. Bohannon, Bracey, Foakes all made decent runs against a strong Australia A attack. And Foakes is a far better keeper than Buttler anyway.
A spectacularly ungracious tweet from North Shropshire CLP illustrates the cultural mountain that much of grassroots Labour still needs to climb, if the party wants to be in power.
It’s the kind of tweet you would never see from a Lib Dem constituency association (the worst they manage are cocky yah-boo gloats), nor indeed even the most knuckle-dragging Tory one. It contains within it several of the features that characterise the toxic far left:
1. Entitlement: Labour owns all anti Tory votes so how dare another party pick them up 2. Distaste for actual voters, especially floating ones: never mind that 60% of people on NS previously voted Tory. We don’t want them. Just our own core vote. 3. Tribalism above electoral strategy: I think they would honestly have preferred a Tory hold if it meant Labour coming second 4. Sanctimony and exclusivity: only we are pure, the rest are just Tory scum 5. Petulance and bad grace: the default emotion seems for these people seems to be anger.
The comments below the tweet are universally scathing, many from Labour supporters, but I expect the author considers that he or she did nothing wrong. This is what Starmer still evidently has to deal with in some CLPs.
It's mirror image HY. With added American spelling.
It’s exactly that, only more angry, and the difference is most Tory ideologues keep it to themselves when it comes to elections because they have a greater hunger for power. They are better practised at hiding their real views.
Ball spinning like crazy....good job England picked a specialist spinner...oh wait.
202/7 having been 150/2.
You wonder a bit if they might raid the Lions squad for extra batsmen for the next Test. Bohannon, Bracey, Foakes all made decent runs against a strong Australia A attack. And Foakes is a far better keeper than Buttler anyway.
Why is Dominic Raab as short as 40/1? He is not going to be an MP after the next GE.
Hunt a tasty 16/1 (Vbet)
Raab will probably find a safer seat. Boundary changes offer a reason to move.
Indeed? Who’s seat is he going to nick?
So far only one Con MP has announced not standing for re-election, Douglas Ross. Is Raab going to be the SCon candidate in Highland East & Elgin?
Probably at least 50 Tory MPs will announce their retirement by the time of the election. There's Chris Grayling's seat in Epsom and Ewell for example.
Ta. I knew someone around here would have an idea.
Chris Grayling is so incompetent he would probably stand up to announce his retirement and somehow end up announcing he was contesting the next election for the Liberal Democrats.
Good morning pb. Just been boostered and passing my 15 minutes sitting time looking in on my favourite imaginary friends. Whole family LTD this morning in preparation for seeing the extended in-laws. Mostly I'd be inclined to consider this, er, not what normal life should be - but sister-in-law and her partner are off to Australia tomorrow: partner will be seeing her parents for the first time in two years and for the first time since they've had a baby. And I very much do not want to jeopardise that. It's not the virus we fear, it's the restrictions placed upon us as its consequence...
The last three days have been a social whirl, by comparison with the previous two years. Which if generalised across the country is to a large extent is probably what's driving the increase in cases.
*Betting Post *🐎 Paging as usual @Malky@Stodge (both of whom tipped winners last week) and @anyone who wants to join in PBs Morning Line and share love of the sport or add racing tips.
I do appreciate not every gambler loves sharing, or sharing publicly. But I suspect some people reading PB may be putting on bets or accumulators regular on a Saturday, as I will be placing bets today, that means doing a degree of “due diligence” on my choices, I don’t mind sharing what led to my decision if you like to use it with your own workings to complete your slip 🙂
I tend to go for hurdles, as there is I think less risk. Similarly I prefer front runners who like to take it on and make honest race.
Latest look at Going stick. Ascot good to soft, Haydock soft.
15:35 Ascot. Samarrive (NAP) why? Won for me in style two weeks ago. This is a difference race, he is surrounded by class and cruelly weighted in the handicap, and there is not place for sentiment backing winners. But I already feel 💘 with my special 4yr old.
14:25 Ascot. Champ (nb) why? Proven winner at 3 miles, as classy as anyone in this field, jumping bigger fences has been a problem, hence back to hurdles
14:05 Haydock. Little Awkward (my long shot this week) Why? Always competitive so far with 2 wins from 4. Likes distance and going.
I am NOT drinking today so my feedback should make sense. 😌We are getting ready to pack up the car, and are driving up the M1 to Yorkshire tonight! Straight to the Barn conversion that will be base camp and wake up to lots of woodpigeon ooooing tomorrow and straight into holiday mode.
Ball spinning like crazy....good job England picked a specialist spinner...oh wait.
202/7 having been 150/2.
You wonder a bit if they might raid the Lions squad for extra batsmen for the next Test. Bohannon, Bracey, Foakes all made decent runs against a strong Australia A attack. And Foakes is a far better keeper than Buttler anyway.
Pope looked utterly clueless against spin.
Bracey for Burns, Bohannon for Pope and Foakes for Buttler.
What's the worst that could happen?
At least the fielding would improve substantially with those three round the bat.
Good morning pb. Just been boostered and passing my 15 minutes sitting time looking in on my favourite imaginary friends. Whole family LTD this morning in preparation for seeing the extended in-laws. Mostly I'd be inclined to consider this, er, not what normal life should be - but sister-in-law and her partner are off to Australia tomorrow: partner will be seeing her parents for the first time in two years and for the first time since they've had a baby. And I very much do not want to jeopardise that. It's not the virus we fear, it's the restrictions placed upon us as its consequence...
The last three days have been a social whirl, by comparison with the previous two years. Which if generalised across the country is to a large extent is probably what's driving the increase in cases.
Good morning pb. Just been boostered and passing my 15 minutes sitting time looking in on my favourite imaginary friends. Whole family LTD this morning in preparation for seeing the extended in-laws. Mostly I'd be inclined to consider this, er, not what normal life should be - but sister-in-law and her partner are off to Australia tomorrow: partner will be seeing her parents for the first time in two years and for the first time since they've had a baby. And I very much do not want to jeopardise that. It's not the virus we fear, it's the restrictions placed upon us as its consequence...
The last three days have been a social whirl, by comparison with the previous two years. Which if generalised across the country is to a large extent is probably what's driving the increase in cases.
Odd - they gave up making people wait, here, some time last week. You'd expect a consistent approach.
Good morning pb. Just been boostered and passing my 15 minutes sitting time looking in on my favourite imaginary friends. Whole family LTD this morning in preparation for seeing the extended in-laws. Mostly I'd be inclined to consider this, er, not what normal life should be - but sister-in-law and her partner are off to Australia tomorrow: partner will be seeing her parents for the first time in two years and for the first time since they've had a baby. And I very much do not want to jeopardise that. It's not the virus we fear, it's the restrictions placed upon us as its consequence...
The last three days have been a social whirl, by comparison with the previous two years. Which if generalised across the country is to a large extent is probably what's driving the increase in cases.
Good morning pb. Just been boostered and passing my 15 minutes sitting time looking in on my favourite imaginary friends. Whole family LTD this morning in preparation for seeing the extended in-laws. Mostly I'd be inclined to consider this, er, not what normal life should be - but sister-in-law and her partner are off to Australia tomorrow: partner will be seeing her parents for the first time in two years and for the first time since they've had a baby. And I very much do not want to jeopardise that. It's not the virus we fear, it's the restrictions placed upon us as its consequence...
The last three days have been a social whirl, by comparison with the previous two years. Which if generalised across the country is to a large extent is probably what's driving the increase in cases.
Odd - they gave up making people wait, here, some time last week. You'd expect a consistent approach.
Wait, but wait in your car, somewhere else. Or just go away if you're not driving. Seems reasonable.
A spectacularly ungracious tweet from North Shropshire CLP illustrates the cultural mountain that much of grassroots Labour still needs to climb, if the party wants to be in power.
It’s the kind of tweet you would never see from a Lib Dem constituency association (the worst they manage are cocky yah-boo gloats), nor indeed even the most knuckle-dragging Tory one. It contains within it several of the features that characterise the toxic far left:
1. Entitlement: Labour owns all anti Tory votes so how dare another party pick them up 2. Distaste for actual voters, especially floating ones: never mind that 60% of people on NS previously voted Tory. We don’t want them. Just our own core vote. 3. Tribalism above electoral strategy: I think they would honestly have preferred a Tory hold if it meant Labour coming second 4. Sanctimony and exclusivity: only we are pure, the rest are just Tory scum 5. Petulance and bad grace: the default emotion seems for these people seems to be anger.
The comments below the tweet are universally scathing, many from Labour supporters, but I expect the author considers that he or she did nothing wrong. This is what Starmer still evidently has to deal with in some CLPs.
I was sad to read sane centrists like Luke Akehurst falling into the same Labour Uber Alles mindset. There is a MAJOR problem with some of them for all the reasons above but also one more.
When the world is Labour or Tory, all others must also be allocated to Labour or Tory. They assumed the LDs were Labour, then we had the coalition. Hence the "yellow Tories" dig.
We will only have a Labour led or Tory led government, but that doesn't mean the other parties are one or the other. Centre ground parties are free to align where they like, that's reality and Labour need to get that into their heads quickly.
A spectacularly ungracious tweet from North Shropshire CLP illustrates the cultural mountain that much of grassroots Labour still needs to climb, if the party wants to be in power.
It’s the kind of tweet you would never see from a Lib Dem constituency association (the worst they manage are cocky yah-boo gloats), nor indeed even the most knuckle-dragging Tory one. It contains within it several of the features that characterise the toxic far left:
1. Entitlement: Labour owns all anti Tory votes so how dare another party pick them up 2. Distaste for actual voters, especially floating ones: never mind that 60% of people on NS previously voted Tory. We don’t want them. Just our own core vote. 3. Tribalism above electoral strategy: I think they would honestly have preferred a Tory hold if it meant Labour coming second 4. Sanctimony and exclusivity: only we are pure, the rest are just Tory scum 5. Petulance and bad grace: the default emotion seems for these people seems to be anger.
The comments below the tweet are universally scathing, many from Labour supporters, but I expect the author considers that he or she did nothing wrong. This is what Starmer still evidently has to deal with in some CLPs.
Corbynites and some Labour supporters will never forgive the LDs for their 2010 to 2015 coalition government with the Conservatives
Are Oz going to enforce the follow-on? I know the default nowadays is not to - but I can see they might do it as a way of signalling their contempt for English batting.
Comments
In America being rich is seen as a sign of being successful, hence Trumps hypersensitivity to people pointing out that a lot of his wealth is fictitious.
In Britain we see it more as a political handicap, but not an insurmountable one.
I'm surprised that Morduant is in any list. And that Sajid is thought to be a runner. I had not thought of Mark Harper.
I'm also interested in the kneejerk assumptions about Tories (eg won't vote for Sunak because he is brown) in the replies. Says more about the assumers.
Does a 32% return sound attractive? You can get that by backing Australia to win the test match in Adelaide. (A bit unpatriotic though if you're English).
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/cricket/market/1.192252996
Most red wallers didn't vote for sovereignty - you can't feed their kids with it. They voted for prosperity, and as long as Sunak sends money in their direction they'll take it.
Her reasons are interesting, and show the issues some people face:
*) She needs to get transport to a vaccination centre. Because of where she lives, this is non-trivial by public transport, and she has to rely on her husband to drive her. Because of her work, that means the weekend.
*) She works, and her employer is not keen to allow people time off midweek - and she'd need most of the day if she went by public transport.
*) She feels she can't afford to lose a day off ill to the vax's side-effects.
*) When she tried booking for a weekend a few weeks ago, this was the first available one.
She is in no way an anti-vaxxer, but her situation has meant she gets the booster later than she wanted.
(I'd also say her employers are sh*ts...)
It is noticeably how he is coming under fire from the left who must realise he would take on Starmer with a passion
Needless to say, the SNP-Green administration and its amen corners in Civic Scotland would wail and gnash their teeth about a 'power grab' but all such an amendment would do is prevent the misuse of the UK Civil Service to advance the break-up of the UK. It is the sort of measure that would be entirely uncontroversial in most countries because, in most countries, the state is not so wracked by existential self-doubt that it believes it must facilitate the whims and desires of those who seek its abolition. It's the sort of measure, in short, that requires nothing more of the UK Government than that it shows a bit of guts.
https://stephendaisley.substack.com/p/houdini-of-the-highlands
Contrarian was wrong to adopt his anti vax stance but he was right that it would never be enough to satisfy the busy bodying rule followers, who upon the adult realisation of parental fallibility turned to the nanny state to help them sleep soundly.
With hindsight I think it’s proved incredibly dangerous to have ever turned on state mandated social restrictions, and in the round the benefit to long term health outcomes seems questionable, certainly from an overall cost benefit perspective.
That intelligent people on here still them as a useful option (after we’ve rolled out three vaccines to vulnerable groups!) is depressing and shows just how deep seated the nudge / fear campaign has been. Even when the data that continues to emerge from SA indicates we are facing a winter that will not be end of days.
Fear him as in you think he'll be bad in the job?
Or fear him as in you think he'll be good at it?
By then, he might have steered the ship into calmer waters and we'll be reading pieces about the second coming of Johnson. Never underestimate him.
What really cut through with the CBI "speech" was that he clearly had no idea what he was doing. Before he had gone on stage he'd had to be corrected that gains coming out at Teesport were not them, that Teesport is 40 miles away and a rival. That no of course NE business leaders haven't been to some shite kids park 300 miles away. And muttering afterwards that we don't even own Peppa Pig so what's he on about.
The challenge is that the clown may not be able to keep all the balls up in the air for that long, as per Oborne.
The protests were illegal under existing laws that the police were unable to enforce. The new laws are going to be no easier to enforce, and indeed there will soon be public outrage when even peaceful formerly legal protests appear in court.
Mr. Jessop, I think a lasting impact of the pandemic will be to reaffirm the desire of many for private cars over public transport.
On delaying: I deliberately didn't bring forward my second jab as I thought the six month gap was better. It's partly for similar reasons I haven't rushed to get a booster (I'm relatively young, my second jab was not ages ago, and a longer gap seems more effective). Plus a huge crowd of people seems a fantastic way to transmit the disease, ironically.
And note neither @Gallowgate or myself really benefit from either project as we live too far north but we both know how essential they are to levelling up.
Inflation is not something that the under fifties have ever experienced in a big way.
"This bazooka against free peoples wont be going back in the box in our lifetimes"
During WW2 we had massive restrictions on our civil liberties - in fact, ISTR parliament actually rejected some proposed by the government during the war. Many of those restrictions disappeared very quickly after 1945; the one that had perhaps the most effect, rationing, was removed over time, finally disappearing in the mid-50s.
I see no reason to believe that the same won't happen in this very different conflict.
I struggle to see how Hunt and Truss can connect with both groups. The trad Tories perhaps, but what do the offer to people north of the Watford Gap?
The reason why I have been backing Sunak is that he is a rare kind of modern Tory - an actual human person. The economic outlook is grim whoever takes over so can't blame him for the costs of Covid. But can praise him for the herculean effort in rescuing so many businesses and people with Furlough etc. And he gets that Capitalism = make and investment and gain a return on that investment.
Labour would struggle more against him that they would against Jeremy Goebbels and Liz "In't Brexit Shit" Truss.
I wonder if the anti-lockdown argument wasn’t helped by its most vocal proponents tending to be ant-vaxx, a logically contradictory position.
If there's a contest later in 2022 who do you think has a serious chance other than Sunak and Truss?
On the other hand he is very different from Johnson in character and also good at politics. This could be a factor if the Conservative Party want a change.
If they don't, they have Truss, which would be one charlatan replacing another. If their motivation for choosing Johnson hasn't changed, they will go for the candidate that tells them what they like to hear.
I could live with a two week one. I am not prepared to deal with a two month one or live in a country suffering the economic consequences of another long lockdown.
His policy would be retrenchment to the point of austerity at a time of a cost of living crisis. More popular in the SE than the NE.
Will be interesting to see if Hunt’s time away from the cabinet has given him an advantage or not.
No, I'm not bitter. Just factual
Whitty gets some stick on here from people in fear of what he is saying and I understand that. But watch Whitty doing takedown of that Tory MP at the select committee - people aren't going to trust know nothing gobshite MPs and their shills over the combined medical authorities led by a polymath.
So the backbenchers won't get chance to vent until parliament resumes (virtually?) in January. And then most of them will be made to look like clueless gobshites playing politics with the pandemic. Doesn't mean they won't get Really Angry and trigger that leadership challenge. But I don't think they will naturally carry public support for their efforts.
It’s obvious he has to go, and has no chance of surviving a challenge.
I remain surprised at how quiet his exes and their children are. Especially as some of the latter are now adults and earning their own livings. Is he still contributing?
On scales of wealth, dunno. Having a private chef or a private jet? Having two kitchens like Ed Milliband? Three homes (most MPs have two as a requirement of the job)?
At the moment, in any case, UKG is increasingly acting technically ultra vires in Scotland in dictating how money is spent, too, so it's certainly not fussy about that particular issue. (In terms of imposing things like rebuiulding that roundabout near Falkirk on which they can paint a big Union Flag).
https://twitter.com/nshropshire_clp/status/1471856620800032775?s=21
It’s the kind of tweet you would never see from a Lib Dem constituency association (the worst they manage are cocky yah-boo gloats), nor indeed even the most knuckle-dragging Tory one. It contains within it several of the features that characterise the toxic far left:
1. Entitlement: Labour owns all anti Tory votes so how dare another party pick them up
2. Distaste for actual voters, especially floating ones: never mind that 60% of people on NS previously voted Tory. We don’t want them. Just our own core vote.
3. Tribalism above electoral strategy: I think they would honestly have preferred a Tory hold if it meant Labour coming second
4. Sanctimony and exclusivity: only we are pure, the rest are just Tory scum
5. Petulance and bad grace: the default emotion seems for these people seems to be anger.
The comments below the tweet are universally scathing, many from Labour supporters, but I expect the author considers that he or she did nothing wrong. This is what Starmer still evidently has to deal with in some CLPs.
Johnson does too, of course, but his confected "personality" kind of obscures that, as well as other deficiencies (there's an interesting dissertation to be written about people who create ludicrous public personas to obscure and confuse, with Johnson and Saville as prime examples).
Regarding the honesty of the local Labour campaign - I quote - "The latest internal polling from the Labour campaign in North Shropshire indicates that the Conservative lead in the by-election has been narrowed to seven points. Conservative candidate Neil Shastri-Hurst’s lead over Labour’s Ben Wood is now in single digits, according to the opposition party’s campaign in the seat. 33% of residents are reportedly backing Wood while 40% support Shastri-Hurst."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/18/scientists-watch-giant-doomsday-glacier-in-antarctica-with-concern
It's not the virus we fear, it's the restrictions placed upon us as its consequence...
The last three days have been a social whirl, by comparison with the previous two years. Which if generalised across the country is to a large extent is probably what's driving the increase in cases.
Paging as usual @Malky @Stodge (both of whom tipped winners last week) and @anyone who wants to join in PBs Morning Line and share love of the sport or add racing tips.
I do appreciate not every gambler loves sharing, or sharing publicly. But I suspect some people reading PB may be putting on bets or accumulators regular on a Saturday, as I will be placing bets today, that means doing a degree of “due diligence” on my choices, I don’t mind sharing what led to my decision if you like to use it with your own workings to complete your slip 🙂
I tend to go for hurdles, as there is I think less risk. Similarly I prefer front runners who like to take it on and make honest race.
Latest look at Going stick. Ascot good to soft, Haydock soft.
15:35 Ascot. Samarrive (NAP)
why? Won for me in style two weeks ago. This is a difference race, he is surrounded by class and cruelly weighted in the handicap, and there is not place for sentiment backing winners. But I already feel 💘 with my special 4yr old.
14:25 Ascot. Champ (nb)
why? Proven winner at 3 miles, as classy as anyone in this field, jumping bigger fences has been a problem, hence back to hurdles
14:05 Haydock. Little Awkward (my long shot this week)
Why? Always competitive so far with 2 wins from 4. Likes distance and going.
I am NOT drinking today so my feedback should make sense. 😌We are getting ready to pack up the car, and are driving up the M1 to Yorkshire tonight! Straight to the Barn conversion that will be base camp and wake up to lots of woodpigeon ooooing tomorrow and straight into holiday mode.
What's the worst that could happen?
At least the fielding would improve substantially with those three round the bat.
When the world is Labour or Tory, all others must also be allocated to Labour or Tory. They assumed the LDs were Labour, then we had the coalition. Hence the "yellow Tories" dig.
We will only have a Labour led or Tory led government, but that doesn't mean the other parties are one or the other. Centre ground parties are free to align where they like, that's reality and Labour need to get that into their heads quickly.