The other candidates need to declare today and get their supporters and statements into the Sundays if they're going to have any chance at all.
Rishi is building up a serious head of steam.
How so? According to con home, he still doesn’t have enough declared backers to enter the contest.
He's got the big mo. Other candidates don't want columnists and opinion-formers starting to talk about him behind the one-to-beat or the inevitability of his victory, as is starting to happen today.
Many MPs won't declare until Monday/Tuesday next week, but they'll make their minds up over the weekend.
He’s used wealth and media connections to generate the appearance of the big mo. I would have been more impressed if he has stood outside the commons with a bunch of MPs behind him, Any fool can knock up a glossy website if they have the time and the cash.
Does have the feel of an AstroTurf candidate. I think he would be terrible, but for one thing... He would probably lead his party to anhiliation. His enemies on the party will find plenty of ammo in his CIF career and family tax arrangements.
Like David Cameron? But he was elected leader and subsequently Prime Minister. I doubt any of this matters in the real world even if his rivals would like it to.
I'm going to gamble and lay Rishi. I'm gambling that this is like 2019 when Boris was out of the blocks first and took a huge betting lead only to fall back when other riders declared - I did the same lay-then-back approach then.
The other candidates need to declare today and get their supporters and statements into the Sundays if they're going to have any chance at all.
Rishi is building up a serious head of steam.
How so? According to con home, he still doesn’t have enough declared backers to enter the contest.
He's got the big mo. Other candidates don't want columnists and opinion-formers starting to talk about him behind the one-to-beat or the inevitability of his victory, as is starting to happen today.
Many MPs won't declare until Monday/Tuesday next week, but they'll make their minds up over the weekend.
He’s used wealth and media connections to generate the appearance of the big mo. I would have been more impressed if he has stood outside the commons with a bunch of MPs behind him, Any fool can knock up a glossy website if they have the time and the cash.
Does have the feel of an AstroTurf candidate. I think he would be terrible, but for one thing... He would probably lead his party to anhiliation. His enemies on the party will find plenty of ammo in his CIF career and family tax arrangements.
Agree. It will be a question of whether the MPs and membership fall for slick presentation and the aura of wealth over longer term issues.
The sense that all those in senior places who stayed with Boris after January this year are complicit may well, correctly, grow.
But Rishi is much the most affected, though it goes down the ranks as well. Added to the question marks - non dom, Green card etc, this makes Rishi a high risk appointment.
Thing about Sunak is, he's rubbish, we can all see that. Not a good Chancellor, appointed in an act of personal spite by a pair of self-confessed criminals and liars, couldn't deal with the economic fallout, resigned far too late to be credible.
But:
With the possible (doubtful) exception of Javid, he is considerably less rubbish than any other plausible candidate.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality, and it's not their issue if they are either bald or short, but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
(As a matter of interest, I generally don't like very tall men. They intimidate me and I find they are often bullies.)
This game of the ideal background for a political career is getting me confused. It used to be a private school, Oxford and a degree in PPE.
Then everything slowly changed. It became a disadantaged start, and preferably a darker skin colour. Because you're always punching upwards. Unless of course you start off rich and are a Tory. That's why Michael Foot was OK in the Labour Party, despite having major disadvantages.
Am I right in believing that Sunak has no chance in the Tory party now too because a rich start trumps skin colour?
What’s happened to Ben Wallace? He’s lengthened significantly over 24 hours. Now out to 5/1 and no longer FAV. What have I missed?
Ben Wallace has not launched yet and Rishi has, and now heads the market at 7/2 but that is only just ahead of Wallace at 4/1 (5.2 on Betfair; 5/1 Corals).
But the main thing is the markets are still very thin. I'd not take them too seriously at this stage.
BETTING POINT: remember Betfair and some bookmakers have two markets: next prime minister and next Conservative leader, so there might be arbs now and again.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
The figures are 1951, 76 and yes he was definitely bald. See this link:
As ever looking at the lowest backed price for people on the "Next Con Leader" market on betfair is hilarious.
Someone in the last two and a bit years back Ruth Davidson @ 26 Leadsom @ 30 Aaron Bell @ 400 Rory Stewart @ 7 !
Davidson and Stewart would probably make better PMs than any of the Top 20 names in the betting. But they each made significant slips on the greasy pole.
The other candidates need to declare today and get their supporters and statements into the Sundays if they're going to have any chance at all.
Rishi is building up a serious head of steam.
Up to a point; remember there are several rounds of MPs voting, with the losers (well, technically everyone) redistributing their votes each time. Bill Wiggin could reach the final two if he is enough people's fourth choice.
And if Rishi clocks up north of 100 in the first round he is almost certain to do so.
180 would guarantee you going to the members but in practice it's less than that because the 3rd placed candidate will have "some" and then drop out.
I have just seen Rishi's video. Extraordinary! The video it'self is just a reasonably well put together promotional video but what's remarkable is when he must have done it.
I don't think you could have put it together in less than three or four days possibly longer not to mention the material supplied by him.
If you subtract four days from today he was making it while still Boris Johnson's Chancellor! Isn't promoting yourself for your bosses job in your bosses time a little disloyal?
I know Johnson's a rat and he'd have done the same but in this election which is going to be about honesty and integrity this doesn't look like a smart decision!
...it has emerged that one of Mr Sunak’s official websites was registered on Dec 23 last year – suggesting that while the video may not have predated this week, campaign preparations did....
if the ball was to come out of the back of the scrum, always good to have a website ready to go.
I've just checked and he resigned three days ago which means his promotional video was in hand before he had resigned. A real snake in the grass. I'm pretty sure one or other of his opponents will have taken note. I think the oven ready website is less damning.
The rats in a sack spectacle that has been the Conservative Party this week and going forward next has cheered me immensely. Ambitious self- servers jockeying for position is a sight to behold, first Johnson explaining his win in 2019 was akin to divine-right kingship, then Sunak's Blue Peter video (one he made earlier) and the icing on the cake, Truss's touchdown and return to and from the G20 at vast taxpayer expense.
I forgot to mention the baldies, No chance. And don't downplay the superficial. Truss isn't pretty enough for many, although the possession of a vagina is becoming a factor.
This game of the ideal background for a political career is getting me confused. It used to be a private school, Oxford and a degree in PPE.
Then everything slowly changed. It became a disadantaged start, and preferably a darker skin colour. Because you're always punching upwards. Unless of course you start off rich and are a Tory. That's why Michael Foot was OK in the Labour Party, despite having major disadvantages.
Am I right in believing that Sunak has no chance in the Tory party now too because a rich start trumps skin colour?
I'm beginning to feel my age.
Eh? Boris was Eton and Oxford; Cameron was Eton and Oxford; why do you think anything has changed and this is suddenly a disadvantage? Pb's last thread was on the Oxford factor.
ETA are you still living in the 20th Century? Heath, Thatcher and Major were from less advantaged backgrounds.
The other candidates need to declare today and get their supporters and statements into the Sundays if they're going to have any chance at all.
Rishi is building up a serious head of steam.
How so? According to con home, he still doesn’t have enough declared backers to enter the contest.
He's got the big mo. Other candidates don't want columnists and opinion-formers starting to talk about him behind the one-to-beat or the inevitability of his victory, as is starting to happen today.
Many MPs won't declare until Monday/Tuesday next week, but they'll make their minds up over the weekend.
He’s used wealth and media connections to generate the appearance of the big mo. I would have been more impressed if he has stood outside the commons with a bunch of MPs behind him, Any fool can knock up a glossy website if they have the time and the cash.
Does have the feel of an AstroTurf candidate. I think he would be terrible, but for one thing... He would probably lead his party to anhiliation. His enemies on the party will find plenty of ammo in his CIF career and family tax arrangements.
I concur. Sunak would be electoral poison for the Tories. Wallace is your man guys!
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality, and it's not their issue if they are either bald or short, but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
(As a matter of interest, I generally don't like very tall men. They intimidate me and I find they are often bullies.)
I am 6'2 but I have always respected ladies and indeed many years ago used to lecture on their personal security and safety
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak says is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
Naturally no individual is ever found acting on baldism, heightism, racism or any other ism. However though no individual so acts, other individuals do, as we all know.
This is the same phenomenon as 'the wrong crowd', which as every mother knows threatens all teenage boys, but can never be identified as the son of any particular mother.
(For various reasons I have had the 'wrong crowd' conversation loads of times, and have never met a single person who thinks their son might constitute and instantiate 'the wrong crowd'.)
Bet accordingly WRT: Wallace, Rishi.
The fact that Tories seem fairly free of racism in this sense (look at the list) is one of the major miracles of modern times. Labour needs to look out.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
The figures are 1951, 76 and yes he was definitely bald. See this link:
Yes thanks for the date correction. However your long shot grainy picture is not very demonstrative. Here he is in 1952. I would not entirely describe this as 'definitely bald'. Not in the way that Clement Attlee was, for instance. More like 'thin' or 'thinning'. Not bad for a then 77 year old.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak says is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
Naturally no individual is ever found acting on baldism, heightism, racism or any other ism. However though no individual so acts, other individuals do, as we all know.
This is the same phenomenon as 'the wrong crowd', which as every mother knows threatens all teenage boys, but can never be identified as the son of any particular mother.
(For various reasons I have had the 'wrong crowd' conversation loads of times, and have never met a single person who thinks their son might constitute and instantiate 'the wrong crowd'.)
Bet accordingly WRT: Wallace, Rishi.
The fact that Tories seem fairly free of racism in this sense (look at the list) is one of the major miracles of modern times. Labour needs to look out.
Good post!!
Re. your last paragraph I totally agree. Labour needs to be very careful on this score, on both race and gender. A major Achilles heel.
If the Tories go for Sunak, it would make Britain the first significant western country to have an Asian as leader
That’s not a small thing. It is also a good thing. It shows that Britain really is inclusive, and you can go places, whoever you are. That’s a great signal to send out
Also, it shoots a load of Labour foxes. It will be much harder for Starmer, facing Sunak
I am tending Sunak’s way, I just wish he was 5 inches taller
Who would be the first European leader of an Asian nation? Does it really matter.
Obama was the first non white leader of the USA but then the USA is a nation mainly composed of immigrants unlike Europe
Got news for you. Europeans are *all* immigrants.
Unless you mean born there. But that doesn't make sense against your US stat.
No they aren't, most Europeans have had European ancestry for at least 1,000 years. As most Asians have had Asian ancestry for at least 1000 years.
Most US citizens however have European or African or Latin American or Asian ancestry within the last 200 years. The only non immigrant Americans are the native American Indians
Oh? So most US citizens's lines suddenly pop iunto existence 200 years ago? Huge if true.
Plus you didn't say anything about timing.
I've got even more news for ytou. This chap Mr Darwin wrote some interesting books a centiry or two ago. His successors have shown that all non-African humans are immigrants from Africa.
I know where you are coming from, but actually the last “fact” is now vigorously disputed. By the multiple origins theory
There are just too many confounding and inexplicable hominid remains from too many weird places. Especially China
Fair enough, but it also depends on how one defines humans, and on interbreeding between major lineages (e.g. Denisovans, Neandertalers, etc.).
Regardless of the details, I am an immigrant to Europe despite, in my case, the distinct possibviluty of a fair dose of Neandertaler genes in this corner (at least on one theory for pale skin and freckles: have not been keeping up admittedly).
Good morning fellow Pbers! I suggest Rishi might well have peaked too early! Suspect Wallace is the one to watch; if of course he actually stands!
Wallace is viewed as a popular option amongst the membership - so may well fail to make the run-off even if he decides to stand. The system used to elect the leader is vulnerable to supporters of rival candidates trying to game it at the MP stage, by lending votes to a numpty in an attempt to eliminate the front runner before he or she can be put forward to the activists.
This game of the ideal background for a political career is getting me confused. It used to be a private school, Oxford and a degree in PPE.
Then everything slowly changed. It became a disadantaged start, and preferably a darker skin colour. Because you're always punching upwards. Unless of course you start off rich and are a Tory. That's why Michael Foot was OK in the Labour Party, despite having major disadvantages.
Am I right in believing that Sunak has no chance in the Tory party now too because a rich start trumps skin colour?
I'm beginning to feel my age.
I think women politicians are the future. (If we must deal in grossly generalising terms.)
That private school/Oxbridge thing has surely just received a significant blow. And I don’t mean from C….
I have just seen Rishi's video. Extraordinary! The video it'self is just a reasonably well put together promotional video but what's remarkable is when he must have done it.
I don't think you could have put it together in less than three or four days possibly longer not to mention the material supplied by him.
If you subtract four days from today he was making it while still Boris Johnson's Chancellor! Isn't promoting yourself for your bosses job in your bosses time a little disloyal?
I know Johnson's a rat and he'd have done the same but in this election which is going to be about honesty and integrity this doesn't look like a smart decision!
...it has emerged that one of Mr Sunak’s official websites was registered on Dec 23 last year – suggesting that while the video may not have predated this week, campaign preparations did....
if the ball was to come out of the back of the scrum, always good to have a website ready to go.
I've just checked and he resigned three days ago which means his promotional video was in hand before he had resigned. A real snake in the grass. I'm pretty sure one or other of his opponents will have taken note. I think the oven ready website is less damning.
The rats in a sack spectacle that has been the Conservative Party this week and going forward next has cheered me immensely. Ambitious self- servers jockeying for position is a sight to behold, first Johnson explaining his win in 2019 was akin to divine-right kingship, then Sunak's Blue Peter video (one he made earlier) and the icing on the cake, Truss's touchdown and return to and from the G20 at vast taxpayer expense.
"Close allies of Johnson said there was “huge anger” in Downing Street over Sunak’s resignation. One senior Number 10 official called Sunak “a treacherous bastard”. Sunak launched his candidacy to become Tory leader on Friday, with a video in which he pledged to end “comforting fairy tales” — a coded attack on Johnson’s time as prime minister. One government official close to Johnson said Sunak did not inform the prime minister of his intention to quit, although another Whitehall insider said Sunak “tried to call the prime minister but he didn’t answer”.
I’m not sure Boris matters that much, right now. He does not have an ideology, and he therefore does not have a tribe that follows the ideology (unlike Thatcher)
And for his people to accuse others of disloyalty when he demanded, for years, that ministers lie painfully on his behalf with scant return from him, is quite rich
I like Boris. But he needs to butt out of this campaign
Of course, he might get that, and this is just his aides venting their angst
Boris will now use Machiavelli style tactics in the MPs ballots I believe via his supporters to knock Sunak out before the members stage in revenge for his treachery
His credibility with most of his colleagues is already shit. I was going to write shot, but the iPad knows best.
On Sunak’s height I have just seen on BBC1 a shot of the four declared candidates, and they have Sunak appearing taller by inches than the other three... Talk about misleading.
Rishi Sunak launches bid to be conservative leader' says BBC headline.
Five paras in, three other candidates who have launched bids get a mention.
I know he is the most high profile and also likely frontrunner, but if I were them I'd be a little annoyed that it could not have been presented more as 'Leadership bids announced'.
Braverman's and Sunak's bids to be PM aren't really comparable or as newsworthy. Only one of them is likely to succeed.
The other candidates need to declare today and get their supporters and statements into the Sundays if they're going to have any chance at all.
Rishi is building up a serious head of steam.
How so? According to con home, he still doesn’t have enough declared backers to enter the contest.
He's got the big mo. Other candidates don't want columnists and opinion-formers starting to talk about him behind the one-to-beat or the inevitability of his victory, as is starting to happen today.
Many MPs won't declare until Monday/Tuesday next week, but they'll make their minds up over the weekend.
He’s used wealth and media connections to generate the appearance of the big mo. I would have been more impressed if he has stood outside the commons with a bunch of MPs behind him, Any fool can knock up a glossy website if they have the time and the cash.
Does have the feel of an AstroTurf candidate. I think he would be terrible, but for one thing... He would probably lead his party to anhiliation. His enemies on the party will find plenty of ammo in his CIF career and family tax arrangements.
Agree. It will be a question of whether the MPs and membership fall for slick presentation and the aura of wealth over longer term issues.
The sense that all those in senior places who stayed with Boris after January this year are complicit may well, correctly, grow.
But Rishi is much the most affected, though it goes down the ranks as well. Added to the question marks - non dom, Green card etc, this makes Rishi a high risk appointment.
On the other hand his neutralising many of the negatives that, not without justification, get thrown at the Tories, and potential ability to expand their electoral base, represent significant potential upside.
Trying to think, in as objective terms as possible, which of the potential Tory leaders has the best track record of actual delivery. It’s hard. No one really blows you away with how they have used office.
Another day, another OTT Daily Mail headline. What is going on in that paper? I mean, it’s fine to not support Labour, but this coalition of chaos BS is alarmist, somewhat ironic given the past week and that the last coalition was more stable then every administration that has followed. It’s fine to attack your opponents, the it get weary and undermines democracy to keep going OTT.
Maintaining the same level of emotional intensity in their headlines is exhausting and counter productive. Papers tells stories, and stories need peaks and troughs or else it all just blurs together.
Good morning fellow Pbers! I suggest Rishi might well have peaked too early! Suspect Wallace is the one to watch; if of course he actually stands!
Wallace is viewed as a popular option amongst the membership - so may well fail to make the run-off even if he decides to stand. The system used to elect the leader is vulnerable to supporters of rival candidates trying to game it at the MP stage, by lending votes to a numpty in an attempt to eliminate the front runner before he or she can be put forward to the activists.
If the MPs don't game it we end up with the loony. The membership must be the least discerning and cool headed voting constituency in the country. (Apart from Labour ones of course). As every single actual Tory politico at every level knows perfectly well.
They are the groups who let um....various people out of care in the community and into the House of Commons.
And they voted for him despite that. It makes me proud to be a council estate graduate. It didn't go well, but as they say ... "Eton and Oxford, born and bred ..."
As Ms Heatherer says, it will be decided on superficiality as always.
On Sunak’s height I have just seen on BBC1 a shot of the four declared candidates, and they have Sunak appearing taller by inches than the other three... Talk about misleading.
Good morning fellow Pbers! I suggest Rishi might well have peaked too early! Suspect Wallace is the one to watch; if of course he actually stands!
Wallace is viewed as a popular option amongst the membership - so may well fail to make the run-off even if he decides to stand. The system used to elect the leader is vulnerable to supporters of rival candidates trying to game it at the MP stage, by lending votes to a numpty in an attempt to eliminate the front runner before he or she can be put forward to the activists.
If the MPs don't game it we end up with the loony. The membership must be the least discerning and cool headed voting constituency in the country. (Apart from Labour ones of course). As every single actual Tory politico at every level knows perfectly well.
They are the groups who let um....various people out of care in the community and into the House of Commons.
Thank you for your refreshing honesty. Although TBF we had already noticed.
And they voted for him despite that. It makes me proud to be a council estate graduate. It didn't go well, but as they say ... "Eton and Oxford, born and bred ..."
As Ms Heatherer says, it will be decided on superficiality as always.
Indeed. Most of the criticisms of Starmer are not 'really' about him or his character as such. He's done a pretty good job of making Labour electable again and his policies seem to me to be sound enough.
It's the superficial: he has a pretty monotonous voice and comes across as dull. It shouldn't matter but it does.
Another day, another OTT Daily Mail headline. What is going on in that paper? I mean, it’s fine to not support Labour, but this coalition of chaos BS is alarmist, somewhat ironic given the past week and that the last coalition was more stable then every administration that has followed. It’s fine to attack your opponents, the it get weary and undermines democracy to keep going OTT.
Maintaining the same level of emotional intensity in their headlines is exhausting and counter productive. Papers tells stories, and stories need peaks and troughs or else it all just blurs together.
Always worth checking the *Scottish* edition. Compare and contrast ... less Red Wall, more ScoTories demanding unity (hah!) for Party and Empire
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak says is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
Naturally no individual is ever found acting on baldism, heightism, racism or any other ism. However though no individual so acts, other individuals do, as we all know.
This is the same phenomenon as 'the wrong crowd', which as every mother knows threatens all teenage boys, but can never be identified as the son of any particular mother.
(For various reasons I have had the 'wrong crowd' conversation loads of times, and have never met a single person who thinks their son might constitute and instantiate 'the wrong crowd'.)
Bet accordingly WRT: Wallace, Rishi.
The fact that Tories seem fairly free of racism in this sense (look at the list) is one of the major miracles of modern times. Labour needs to look out.
The Left's problem is that such people are supporting the Conservatives and they seem them as traitors to the cause.
They see identities as entirely political and you can only truly be "gay" or "black" if you support radical socialism.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality, and it's not their issue if they are either bald or short, but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
(As a matter of interest, I generally don't like very tall men. They intimidate me and I find they are often bullies.)
I am 6'2 but I have always respected ladies and indeed many years ago used to lecture on their personal security and safety
On Sunak’s height I have just seen on BBC1 a shot of the four declared candidates, and they have Sunak appearing taller by inches than the other three... Talk about misleading.
Trying to think, in as objective terms as possible, which of the potential Tory leaders has the best track record of actual delivery. It’s hard. No one really blows you away with how they have used office.
I can't think of any "objective" way of saying that, but I would have to subjectively say Sunak. He was tasked with supporting employment through the pandemic and he clearly delivered on that, some might say too well.
After Sunak, I would say Truss.
One could make a bizarre argument for Braverman too. She was tasked with delivering legal advice to show that the government's proposed policies were legal and she delivered that every single time, regardless of what other lawyers thought of the proposals. 😉
The other candidates need to declare today and get their supporters and statements into the Sundays if they're going to have any chance at all.
Rishi is building up a serious head of steam.
How so? According to con home, he still doesn’t have enough declared backers to enter the contest.
He's got the big mo. Other candidates don't want columnists and opinion-formers starting to talk about him behind the one-to-beat or the inevitability of his victory, as is starting to happen today.
Many MPs won't declare until Monday/Tuesday next week, but they'll make their minds up over the weekend.
He’s used wealth and media connections to generate the appearance of the big mo. I would have been more impressed if he has stood outside the commons with a bunch of MPs behind him, Any fool can knock up a glossy website if they have the time and the cash.
Does have the feel of an AstroTurf candidate. I think he would be terrible, but for one thing... He would probably lead his party to anhiliation. His enemies on the party will find plenty of ammo in his CIF career and family tax arrangements.
Agree. It will be a question of whether the MPs and membership fall for slick presentation and the aura of wealth over longer term issues.
The sense that all those in senior places who stayed with Boris after January this year are complicit may well, correctly, grow.
But Rishi is much the most affected, though it goes down the ranks as well. Added to the question marks - non dom, Green card etc, this makes Rishi a high risk appointment.
On the other hand his neutralising many of the negatives that, not without justification, get thrown at the Tories, and potential ability to expand their electoral base, represent significant potential upside.
British Hindus are already fairly Tory inclined, but more potential there. The Tories do need to consider expanding their base, as it is a fairly rapidly ageing one.
And they voted for him despite that. It makes me proud to be a council estate graduate. It didn't go well, but as they say ... "Eton and Oxford, born and bred ..."
As Ms Heatherer says, it will be decided on superficiality as always.
Indeed. Most of the criticisms of Starmer are not 'really' about him or his character as such. He's done a pretty good job of making Labour electable again and his policies seem to me to be sound enough.
It's the superficial: he has a pretty monotonous voice and comes across as dull. It shouldn't matter but it does.
Brexit is terrific and the Scots will dae whit they’re telt.
Labour and the Tories = two faces of the same dud coin.
Why does the Rishi campaign team use an American road sign for Southampton in the campaign video. Seems a bit sloppy.
Yes, but the point of the video is to show that he can campaign, and to give members a glimpse of the sort of pitch the Tories would be able to make in an election, under Rishi. Labour is going to find the ‘poor immigrant made good’ story very challenging to counter or beat, even if the video does skip over the bit about marrying a millionaire.
I am 5 foot six; or at least I was until I started shrinking due to old age! I've never regarded myself as particularly short although I did once have to do some work in Newmarket and was rather pleased find myself taller than a large number of the men around.
I also enjoy going to Thailand for the same reason (among others) and I don't get knocked off motorcycle taxis there as people who are 6 foot+ tend to do!
I've no doubt that Tony Blair's height, good looks and telegenic smile played a huge part in 1997.
I didn't personally like him but many found him winsome.
I saw Blair speak at a Labour party event in the mid nineties. At that time he had real charisma, and New Labour was a very slick operation. It was becoming a kissarse to Dubya that did for him.
Why does the Rishi campaign team use an American road sign for Southampton in the campaign video. Seems a bit sloppy.
Yes, but the point of the video is to show that he can campaign, and to give members a glimpse of the sort of pitch the Tories would be able to make in an election, under Rishi. Labour is going to find the ‘poor immigrant made good’ story very challenging to counter or beat, even if the video does skip over the bit about marrying a millionaire.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality, and it's not their issue if they are either bald or short, but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
(As a matter of interest, I generally don't like very tall men. They intimidate me and I find they are often bullies.)
I am 6'2 but I have always respected ladies and indeed many years ago used to lecture on their personal security and safety
I'm sure they appreciated that.
I met Diane Lamplugh and she was very impressive and as I was involved in lecturing on aspects of the Home Information packs before they were abandoned, I expanded my lectures to include personal safety and security particularly for women
Trying to think, in as objective terms as possible, which of the potential Tory leaders has the best track record of actual delivery. It’s hard. No one really blows you away with how they have used office.
I can't think of any "objective" way of saying that, but I would have to subjectively say Sunak. He was tasked with supporting employment through the pandemic and he clearly delivered on that, some might say too well.
After Sunak, I would say Truss.
One could make a bizarre argument for Braverman too. She was tasked with delivering legal advice to show that the government's proposed policies were legal and she delivered that every single time, regardless of what other lawyers thought of the proposals. 😉
Sunak reacted to events, furlough did achieve its stated aims though. I would be curious to know how much of that was him personally. I was looking for someone who led policy from concept to execution and achieved something. Hunt has longevity, but has an underwhelming record. I got stuck.
To my mind the problem Rishi has is that, if he gets through to the final two, his opponent will almost certainly be to the right of him and/or the populist right.
Will slick campaigning win over Tory members over red meat policies?
It's way too soon to write about Brexit legacies. Legacy is a term about the past and it's only 18 months since we left.
Most of us think Brexit is an almighty fuck up. You don't, which is fair enough. But neither side of this debate can know how it will pan out for 5, 15, probably 25 years. Then the 'legacy' will become clear.
Though I think Rishi would be their best hope there are definitely a few hostages to fortune. There was his famous 'Eat Out to Help Out'. There can't be many incoming PMs with a higher body count.
.........And then there's 'Rishi the Movie'. Not a great idea promoting your immigrant background quite so glowingly while supporting sending future 'Rishis' to Rwanda.
.........As for making a promotional video for your bosses job in your bosses time....I suppose he could argue that when it comes to disloyalty he learnt from the best!
I've no doubt that Tony Blair's height, good looks and telegenic smile played a huge part in 1997.
I didn't personally like him but many found him winsome.
I saw Blair speak at a Labour party event in the mid nineties. At that time he had real charisma, and New Labour was a very slick operation. It was becoming a kissarse to Dubya that did for him.
Blair was an absolute giant as Leader of the Opposition. Major’s ministers were absolutely terrified. Classic bunnies in headlights.
Starmer is a total lightweight in comparison. And his frontbench team is just laughable compared to Blair’s in the pre-1997 period.
Most of us think Brexit is an almighty fuck up. You don't, which is fair enough. But neither side of this debate can know how it will pan out for 5, 15, probably 25 years. Then the 'legacy' will become clear.
One side of this 'debate' knows how it pans out, and have known since before the vote.
"Close allies of Johnson said there was “huge anger” in Downing Street over Sunak’s resignation. One senior Number 10 official called Sunak “a treacherous bastard”. Sunak launched his candidacy to become Tory leader on Friday, with a video in which he pledged to end “comforting fairy tales” — a coded attack on Johnson’s time as prime minister. One government official close to Johnson said Sunak did not inform the prime minister of his intention to quit, although another Whitehall insider said Sunak “tried to call the prime minister but he didn’t answer”.
I’m not sure Boris matters that much, right now. He does not have an ideology, and he therefore does not have a tribe that follows the ideology (unlike Thatcher)
And for his people to accuse others of disloyalty when he demanded, for years, that ministers lie painfully on his behalf with scant return from him, is quite rich
I like Boris. But he needs to butt out of this campaign
Of course, he might get that, and this is just his aides venting their angst
Boris will now use Machiavelli style tactics in the MPs ballots I believe via his supporters to knock Sunak out before the members stage in revenge for his treachery
His credibility with most of his colleagues is already shit. I was going to write shot, but the iPad knows best.
Another to add to the 10 commandments - Thy shall commit revenge.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak says is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
The fact that Tories seem fairly free of racism in this sense (look at the list) is one of the major miracles of modern times. Labour needs to look out.
Ethnic minority representation in parliament seems to have really ramped up on the last few decades. And selection of candidates in winnable seats too. Outside the occasional loon it's only rosette colour parties care about.
Most of us think Brexit is an almighty fuck up. You don't, which is fair enough. But neither side of this debate can know how it will pan out for 5, 15, probably 25 years. Then the 'legacy' will become clear.
One side of this 'debate' knows how it pans out, and have known since before the vote.
As I wish for a moment to represent the superficiality of the British electorate, we've mentioned follicly challenged but have we mentioned vertically challenged?
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak says is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
Naturally no individual is ever found acting on baldism, heightism, racism or any other ism. However though no individual so acts, other individuals do, as we all know.
This is the same phenomenon as 'the wrong crowd', which as every mother knows threatens all teenage boys, but can never be identified as the son of any particular mother.
(For various reasons I have had the 'wrong crowd' conversation loads of times, and have never met a single person who thinks their son might constitute and instantiate 'the wrong crowd'.)
Bet accordingly WRT: Wallace, Rishi.
The fact that Tories seem fairly free of racism in this sense (look at the list) is one of the major miracles of modern times. Labour needs to look out.
The Left's problem is that such people are supporting the Conservatives and they seem them as traitors to the cause.
They see identities as entirely political and you can only truly be "gay" or "black" if you support radical socialism.
The death of overt racism in British politics and in the Conservative party in particular is a major piece of social progress over my adult lifetime. Certainly racism still exists in British life, but it is either much more marginal or unconscious.
Ditto homophobia, which has also become anathema to respectable parties.
I think Sajid Javid is the best option for PM, but I doubt he’ll get it.
Too boring.
Could this be the key dimension? Truss may be the least boring of the current runners.
At that rate, Boris might stand and win. I wouldn’t put it past him. The Tories looked into the abyss, saw a bunch of nobodies and went back to big dog.
Comments
It is said he would prefer taking over as head of NATO in September 2023
The sense that all those in senior places who stayed with Boris after January this year are complicit may well, correctly, grow.
But Rishi is much the most affected, though it goes down the ranks as well. Added to the question marks - non dom, Green card etc, this makes Rishi a high risk appointment.
Someone in the last two and a bit years back Ruth Davidson @ 26
Leadsom @ 30
Aaron Bell @ 400
Rory Stewart @ 7 !
But:
With the possible (doubtful) exception of Javid, he is considerably less rubbish than any other plausible candidate.
That may be enough.
The last bald man to be elected in this country was Clement Attlee in 1950, although you could make a case for Winston Churchill in 1952 although he was 78 and not entirely bald either.
But who is the shortest ever male British PM to be elected? I'm genuinely curious. Do we like Napolean figures in this country?
Rishi Sunak is apparently 5ft 6"
I wish to make clear that I don't approve of this kind of superficiality, and it's not their issue if they are either bald or short, but it's pertinent IF the electorate are swayed by such things, which they might be?
(As a matter of interest, I generally don't like very tall men. They intimidate me and I find they are often bullies.)
Wise man. The George Robertson route. Undoubtedly better for his mental health and for his family.
Then everything slowly changed. It became a disadantaged start, and preferably a darker skin colour. Because you're always punching upwards. Unless of course you start off rich and are a Tory. That's why Michael Foot was OK in the Labour Party, despite having major disadvantages.
Am I right in believing that Sunak has no chance in the Tory party now too because a rich start trumps skin colour?
I'm beginning to feel my age.
But the main thing is the markets are still very thin. I'd not take them too seriously at this stage.
BETTING POINT: remember Betfair and some bookmakers have two markets: next prime minister and next Conservative leader, so there might be arbs now and again.
ETA Betfair also has a Rishi-specific market.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/26/newsid_3687000/3687425.stm
Edit - Lloyd George was 5 foot 5.
180 would guarantee you going to the members but in practice it's less than that because the 3rd placed candidate will have "some" and then drop out.
But I have no clue who will win. Which is exciting!
I forgot to mention the baldies, No chance. And don't downplay the superficial. Truss isn't pretty enough for many, although the possession of a vagina is becoming a factor.
ETA are you still living in the 20th Century? Heath, Thatcher and Major were from less advantaged backgrounds.
This was a fairly spectacular routine. Skip to one minute for the action.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYFtL360j_w
Wallace is your man guys!
This is the same phenomenon as 'the wrong crowd', which as every mother knows threatens all teenage boys, but can never be identified as the son of any particular mother.
(For various reasons I have had the 'wrong crowd' conversation loads of times, and have never met a single person who thinks their son might constitute and instantiate 'the wrong crowd'.)
Bet accordingly WRT: Wallace, Rishi.
The fact that Tories seem fairly free of racism in this sense (look at the list) is one of the major miracles of modern times. Labour needs to look out.
Re. your last paragraph I totally agree. Labour needs to be very careful on this score, on both race and gender. A major Achilles heel.
Regardless of the details, I am an immigrant to Europe despite, in my case, the distinct possibviluty of a fair dose of Neandertaler genes in this corner (at least on one theory for pale skin and freckles: have not been keeping up admittedly).
And so is any other European.
So HYUFD is still talking ripe gonads.
That private school/Oxbridge thing has surely just received a significant blow. And I don’t mean from C….
I didn't personally like him but many found him winsome.
They are the groups who let um....various people out of care in the community and into the House of Commons.
"Eh? Boris was Eton and Oxford"
And they voted for him despite that. It makes me proud to be a council estate graduate. It didn't go well, but as they say ... "Eton and Oxford, born and bred ..."
As Ms Heatherer says, it will be decided on superficiality as always.
Top tip: visit Santa Maria del Carmine.
Heck, visit Florence full stop.
Visit Italy. Expand your mind and your soul.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/08/opinion/boris-johnson-brexit-legacy.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
Amazingly, for the NYT, it is balanced. In short: Yes some damage was done, but not nearly as much as the doomsayers predicted
Awesome
It's the superficial: he has a pretty monotonous voice and comes across as dull. It shouldn't matter but it does.
Always worth checking the *Scottish* edition. Compare and contrast ... less Red Wall, more ScoTories demanding unity (hah!) for Party and Empire
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1545503437894434817/photo/1
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1545513877353500673/photo/1
BTW what's with the DE headlining on sending unfortunates to Rwanda regardless of legality??
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1545526671968698368?cxt=HHwWgICwmbqU6PIqAAAA
An image that sums up BoZo's government.
A giant Fuck You to the public
They see identities as entirely political and you can only truly be "gay" or "black" if you support radical socialism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average_human_height_by_country
Of course, heightism may be insidious but it is no less real and universal.
After Sunak, I would say Truss.
One could make a bizarre argument for Braverman too. She was tasked with delivering legal advice to show that the government's proposed policies were legal and she delivered that every single time, regardless of what other lawyers thought of the proposals. 😉
Labour and the Tories = two faces of the same dud coin.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jul/08/boris-johnson-out-resignation-tory?CMP=share_btn_tw
Boris Johnson is leaving office with the same dignity he brought to it: none. I’ve seen more elegant prolapses.
I don't think Truss would do that. Others might.
I also enjoy going to Thailand for the same reason (among others) and I don't get knocked off motorcycle taxis there as people who are 6 foot+ tend to do!
It is a kind of progress I suppose.
All very slick. Some would even say superficial. Thoroughly false.
Whose interests does he represent?
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Southampton,+NY+11968,+USA/@40.8702208,-72.4133549,13z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x89e894ffe7b76a09:0xfff847a4af47d809!8m2!3d40.884267!4d-72.3895296
Will slick campaigning win over Tory members over red meat policies?
Most of us think Brexit is an almighty fuck up. You don't, which is fair enough. But neither side of this debate can know how it will pan out for 5, 15, probably 25 years. Then the 'legacy' will become clear.
.........And then there's 'Rishi the Movie'. Not a great idea promoting your immigrant background quite so glowingly while supporting sending future 'Rishis' to Rwanda.
.........As for making a promotional video for your bosses job in your bosses time....I suppose he could argue that when it comes to disloyalty he learnt from the best!
Starmer is a total lightweight in comparison. And his frontbench team is just laughable compared to Blair’s in the pre-1997 period.
Quite surprised.
Unless there was a twit in the crowd shouting personal abuse
And lo, it came to pass...
Ditto homophobia, which has also become anathema to respectable parties.
They just had a terrible leader who was charismatic and had nothing else going for him.
'Not boring' is an idiotic characteristic to base leadership on. Being set on fire is 'not boring', that doesn't mean it's a good thing.