Something along those lines is probably what a majority of the public could have accepted ever since the Brexit vote. Had it been offered. It’s a massive failure of government that we’re still arguing about it.
It's a massive failure of politics full stop. There's not one pragmatic party in the country.
I think no change is often under valued by political betting markets. For there to be change requires a majority of those who have the power to enact change to act to do so. For Truss to be removed from Number Ten requires a majority of Tory MPs to force her out.
But the majority that want her out want different things. ERGers who want her out want to replace her with a true believer. Sunak supporters who want her out obviously want to replace her with Sunak. Each of these two groups must fear that removing Truss results in a replacement that is even worse from their perspective. So they may well not act to remove her. Nor is it in the interests of the “payroll” to remove her. They want to keep their ministerial positions.
Hunt’s appointment appears to have gone down well with economic commentators. The markets want a clear, believable plan backed up by numbers that add up. Hunt is offering to provide just that. The markets also want stability and would be spooked, once again, by a Truss defenestration without a pre-agreed convincing replacement “unity” PM. And so far that person has yet to be identified and may not exist.
So I’m betting on Truss/Hunt being given the chance to have a go at providing a period of realistic, responsible government which seeks to repair some of the damage wrought by the mini-budget and minimise Tory losses at the next General Election.
Of course there is a significant chance that Truss is forced out soon and certainly she could go before the next General Election. But I think she has a decent chance of hanging on for the reasons argued. Hence my view that Starmer to be next PM at current odds of 7.6 is a great value bet.
Much depends on whether Truss can move out of the 'rabbit in the headlights' phase. If she continues, it is as PM in name only. But I have a suspicion she is actually temperamentally incapable of performing such a role. How can you, when no-one takes you seriously? Her performance in the press conference was abysmal.
The Tories have a big problem - a leader who is utterly unsuitable for the job she won but no means of removing her sanely and quickly due to the rules of appointment which make a coronation of a suitable replacement impossible
And that’s ignoring the “bedding down” rule that gives a new leader 1 year before complaints can be processed
Yes , but they could a) change the rules or b) force her to quit. I think B is more likely. I don't think she will be able to handle the pressure - no one could. We are rapidly approaching the point where - whenever she emerges in public - she is just met with howls of scorn, laughter and derision.
Edit - there are lots of stories that are simply devastating for her. Like the one from Kwarteng yesterday that she forced him in to the 45p tax cut etc. And then she sacked him for the consequences of the policy. Without giving any explanation why. The disasters are happening faster than we are able to process or assess them.
So you force Truss to quit How do you stop the Tory membership voting for another candidate offering similar policies at the subsequent leadership election.
Because the Tory party has another fractions that a single party uniting candidate doesn’t exist
To replace Truss you need to ensure her replacement is appointed unopposed and it’s that more than anything else which is keeping Truss in place
The Tories are paralysed and stuck with Truss until they figure out a way to bypass the barking mad membership.
John Major's "bastards" have now got too strong a foothold in parliament and the membership is right behind them - they would elect Farage if that was an option.
I can't see a unity candidate emerging - it only takes 20 MPs to dissent and it goes to the members.
Re your last sentence, that can be changed by the 1922 committee at anytime
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
No, I would still support a Hunt led party over a Farage led party.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
I am not sure you have this right HY.
Left leaning Centrists like me are not frightened by the hugely impressive Hunt, some would even be prepared to vote for him against an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer. Hunt is economically and to a degree socially incompatible with us, but not full on scary, these are the voters you need.
Farage, Braverman and Badenoch on the other hand frighten the bejeezuz out of us, and they appeal to a tiny proportion of the population. The fact that this tiny percentage are already Conservative Party members makes your argument even weaker. Going full on Trump GOP is not a winning strategy.
The number of voters like you who might switch from Starmer to Hunt is tiny. It is dwarfed by the number of populist right voters who might switch from a Hunt led Tories to Farage's party.
Wow. Apols if already discussed, just seen it. Chimes with my assertion the other day that we’re living through Project Fear. Except that this is Jeremy Warner, of the Telegraph, saying it, not some random northern simian schmuck:
’Project Fear was right all along’
Downbeat predictions by the Treasury and others on the economic consequences of leaving the EU, contemptuously dismissed at the time by Brexit campaigners as "Project Fear", have been on a long fuse, but they have turned out to be overwhelmingly correct, and if anything have underestimated both the calamitous loss of international standing and the scale of the damage that six years of policy confusion and ineptitude has imposed on the country.
…Perhaps I exaggerate, but not since the humiliation of the International Monetary Fund bailout in 1976 have we seen an unravelling quite as spectacular. This too from a Tory Government with a substantial overall majority. It is scarcely believable.
These are dark days for Tory MPs, who will be acutely aware that loss of reputation for economic competence is electoral poison for their party. As the former Chancellor, Philip Hammond, has already observed, that reputation has been comprehensively trashed by what's just occurred.
…We'll be paying the consequences in reduced standing and prosperity for years, if not decades, to come.
The big question is how much is down to Brexit and how much down to the incompetence of the Brexiteers? I actually don't think things are that complicated. There's a lot of psychobabble talked about the markets but they probably want to see two things:
1) Stop threatening a trade war with our biggest trading partner over Northern Ireland 2) Have a plan that shows percentage debt to GDP falling in the medium term
It's not that complicated. Will those measures make up for the costs of leaving the single market and customs union? Probably not and the lack of compensatory benefits to leaving bodes ill for our economic future. But I remain unconvinced by the disaster analysis.
Brexit and the incompetence of the Brexiteers are two sides of the same arse.
How are the contributions to Ukraine being funded? If they are coming out of the defence budget 3% will not be enough. As it is a hell of a lot of kit is going to need replaced.
They will just copy the Russians and dust off the Churchill's, 17 pounders and pitchforks.
We now why @Leon ran away to Pembrokeshire in the lockdown.
Why would the Welsh want sparkling wine when they have Brains beer?
Bloody hell man. Have you tasted Brains??? I don't know what it is but it sure as hell ain't beer.
Lived in Cardiff for three years, Richard. Happily there were plenty of compensations.
3 years? Were you at university there then? I did Archaeology and Geology there 83-86. Excellent place all round (except the beer)
Off topic.
The five pints of Brains Dark I consumed in the Splottlands each evening from my three University years would have helped numb the pain of the last few weeks.
We used to have a theory that Brains SA didn't travel well. The brewery was in those days in St Mary's Street. A pint in the Old Arcade was sublime, but by the time it reached the Owain Glyndwr ten yards further up the road it wasn't so good.
Although I barely drink now I keep a stock of Double Dragon, Reverend James and Skull Attack Gold for wayward travellers. My next door neighbour owns the Draig Cider Brewery, I was never a Cider drinker, but that is a sublime pint of Welsh gold, if you haven't yet sampled.
There are a range of political views within the pro-European cause as there were fir Brexit.
The “Brexit is a ruse to destroy the NHS, despoil the environment and enable tax avoidance” is from the lefty / monbiot remain flank.
“Brexit is economic self harm imposed by retired golf club bores out of touch with the real world of business” is the centrist dad remain battalion.
Finally, “Brexit shows Britain is a nation of awful racists who by the way practised murder and eugenics with their lax lockdown policies” is the FBPE / blue heart paramilitary wing.
I am in the centrist dad battalion most of whom had accepted things in 2019 and got on with life but find the occasional “told you so” irresistible.
90% of what most Remainers want from the EU, the stuff they like, is deliverable by joining the EFTA. I see little evidence that the EU is heading in a direction the UK would be comfortable with in the long term. If they wanted to settle the Brexit issue for 50 years either join EFTA or mirror it. If Remainers make their goal rejoining the EU they can look forward to 50 years of failing.
Frankly we could probably get 50%+ of what they want with something less than EFTA that a competent government could sneak past the electorate, and then we could concentrate of actually important issues, like energy and defence, rather than listening to moaning about stuff that barely 1% of the population really gives a monkey's about, like Horizon.
And 90% of remainers would I think be happy with this. Most would be happy simply to see a grown up respectful relationship to be honest.
The opportunity cost is in areas where full membership gives us influence to shape regulation, as we did for decades on financial services and indeed in areas like Horizon. But that influence is gone since 2016 and won’t be coming back in a hurry anyway even if we rejoin. Thems the breaks.
ManCock on Laura Kuenssberg saying "this needs sorting out" but that we shouldn't get rid of the Prime Minister.
So that isn't sorting it out then is it.
Wanted for Matt Hancock, one backbone.
Friends watched This England so I didn’t have to and they said that Hancock actually came out quite well from the Covid Hokey Cokey clusterfcuk. Doesn’t make more inclined to watch it I have to say.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
No, I would still support a Hunt led party over a Farage led party.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
I am not sure you have this right HY.
Left leaning Centrists like me are not frightened by the hugely impressive Hunt, some would even be prepared to vote for him against an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer. Hunt is economically and to a degree socially incompatible with us, but not full on scary, these are the voters you need.
Farage, Braverman and Badenoch on the other hand frighten the bejeezuz out of us, and they appeal to a tiny proportion of the population. The fact that this tiny percentage are already Conservative Party members makes your argument even weaker. Going full on Trump GOP is not a winning strategy.
The number of voters like you who might switch from Starmer to Hunt is tiny. It is dwarfed by the number of populist right voters who might switch from a Hunt led Tories to Farage's party.
Why don't you lead the way and let the rest of us take back control of the conservative party from the little Englander types and the declining ERG much as the same way Starmer has marginalised Corbynites
I think no change is often under valued by political betting markets. For there to be change requires a majority of those who have the power to enact change to act to do so. For Truss to be removed from Number Ten requires a majority of Tory MPs to force her out.
But the majority that want her out want different things. ERGers who want her out want to replace her with a true believer. Sunak supporters who want her out obviously want to replace her with Sunak. Each of these two groups must fear that removing Truss results in a replacement that is even worse from their perspective. So they may well not act to remove her. Nor is it in the interests of the “payroll” to remove her. They want to keep their ministerial positions.
Hunt’s appointment appears to have gone down well with economic commentators. The markets want a clear, believable plan backed up by numbers that add up. Hunt is offering to provide just that. The markets also want stability and would be spooked, once again, by a Truss defenestration without a pre-agreed convincing replacement “unity” PM. And so far that person has yet to be identified and may not exist.
So I’m betting on Truss/Hunt being given the chance to have a go at providing a period of realistic, responsible government which seeks to repair some of the damage wrought by the mini-budget and minimise Tory losses at the next General Election.
Of course there is a significant chance that Truss is forced out soon and certainly she could go before the next General Election. But I think she has a decent chance of hanging on for the reasons argued. Hence my view that Starmer to be next PM at current odds of 7.6 is a great value bet.
Much depends on whether Truss can move out of the 'rabbit in the headlights' phase. If she continues, it is as PM in name only. But I have a suspicion she is actually temperamentally incapable of performing such a role. How can you, when no-one takes you seriously? Her performance in the press conference was abysmal.
The Tories have a big problem - a leader who is utterly unsuitable for the job she won but no means of removing her sanely and quickly due to the rules of appointment which make a coronation of a suitable replacement impossible
And that’s ignoring the “bedding down” rule that gives a new leader 1 year before complaints can be processed
Yes , but they could a) change the rules or b) force her to quit. I think B is more likely. I don't think she will be able to handle the pressure - no one could. We are rapidly approaching the point where - whenever she emerges in public - she is just met with howls of scorn, laughter and derision.
Edit - there are lots of stories that are simply devastating for her. Like the one from Kwarteng yesterday that she forced him in to the 45p tax cut etc. And then she sacked him for the consequences of the policy. Without giving any explanation why. The disasters are happening faster than we are able to process or assess them.
So you force Truss to quit How do you stop the Tory membership voting for another candidate offering similar policies at the subsequent leadership election.
Because the Tory party has another fractions that a single party uniting candidate doesn’t exist
To replace Truss you need to ensure her replacement is appointed unopposed and it’s that more than anything else which is keeping Truss in place
The Tories are paralysed and stuck with Truss until they figure out a way to bypass the barking mad membership.
John Major's "bastards" have now got too strong a foothold in parliament and the membership is right behind them - they would elect Farage if that was an option.
I can't see a unity candidate emerging - it only takes 20 MPs to dissent and it goes to the members.
I'm inclined to agree and I'm not so convinced as others that Truss' removal is imminent.
She isn't going to resign having spent her political career u-turning at every opportunity in order to gain traction. Not quite as unprincipled as her predecessor but much less affected than him by the sentiment around her. She has a remarkably robotic manner of operating under scrutiny which may serve her well in the current furore.
So how do they boot her out? And how, as you rightly point out, can a Party that is shattered into a dozen factions possibly unite around a single candidate? They can't and they won't.
Remember that Sunak was well on course to succeed Johnson until Boris and his starry-eyed vedettes trashed his reputation.
They are in open civil war and rebellion and there isn't an obvious end in sight. Like 1992-7 only 1000x worse.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
No, I would still support a Hunt led party over a Farage led party.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
I am not sure you have this right HY.
Left leaning Centrists like me are not frightened by the hugely impressive Hunt, some would even be prepared to vote for him against an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer. Hunt is economically and to a degree socially incompatible with us, but not full on scary, these are the voters you need.
Farage, Braverman and Badenoch on the other hand frighten the bejeezuz out of us, and they appeal to a tiny proportion of the population. The fact that this tiny percentage are already Conservative Party members makes your argument even weaker. Going full on Trump GOP is not a winning strategy.
The number of voters like you who might switch from Starmer to Hunt is tiny. It is dwarfed by the number of populist right voters who might switch from a Hunt led Tories to Farage's party.
I would respectfully disagree, though not entirely.
That populist right wing army is simply smaller and less motivated than you think. They got Brexit. Most probably won’t bother voting in 2024.
Hunt could do some form of repair job on the blue wall, though not if the cabinet retains people like JRM or Braverman (or even the Raabs and Patels of this world).
Mr. Royale, as an uncontested successor, it could be Hunt. But there's no chance if it goes to the members.
Start at the other end - if there's a vacancy, neither the Tories nor the country can afford a contest lasting months. We'd be lucky to get 50 cents for a £ by the end of it.
So if there's a replacement, it has to be done by the MPs. You don't even need to think about any personalities to get that far.
Yes the 1922 committee should add a rule that leadership candidates must have at least 40% of MPs vote for them in a final round to make a members ballot.
Nah. They should just scrap the members ballot completely and have the MPs decide.
That's not a decision for the 1922 Committee.
The members' ballot is in the Conservative Party Constitution, which isn't set by the 1922 Committee and places a duty on them to offer a "choice of candidates" for a members' ballot. There is a get-out where only one person puts their name forward (Howard in 2003). In 2017, the 1922 Committee did offer a choice of candidates but one (Leadsom) subsequently withdrew.
The 1922 Committee's role relates to setting the Round One rules for coming up with the "choice of candidates" to go to Round Two (in consultation with the Party Board, in fact, but the decision is ultimately the 1922's) - they can't simply refuse to come up with a choice of candidates. That gives them a certain amount of power - for instance, the fact it's two rather than more candidates at Round Two is because of the 1922 Committee - the Constitution just refers to a "choice".
A response may be that the 1922 Committee could make the rules of Round One so restrictive that only one candidate can realistically make it, but there would be a pretty strong argument that's unconstitional. In theory, they could do it anyway as the PM just has to have the confidence of Parliament so would probably be appointed if sent to the Palace. But it would be very messy.
Their better bet is probably to achieve a gentlemen's agreement that the second person in the MPs' ballot would be put forward with the winner, but would decide, in the interests of Party unity, to withdraw at that point. They can't enforce that though.
A lot of nonsense being talked about Hunt being defacto PM whilst Truss is in a straightjacket.
Yes, but she can't sack him, and he can (effectively) sack her.
Yes. Though he would also be ending his own time in front bench politics. He's leadership poison, and there would be no need for anyone not as desparate as Liz to give him a job. The best hope for both of them is actually working well together. He is totally untrustworthy but let's hope that enlightened self-interest works its magic.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
Some day, people who can count will be in charge again.
Many of the same voters who believed the BoZo bullshit and voted for Brexit believed the Truss bullshit and voted for her.
They have proven that are not fit to choose again...
Perhaps wiping out the Bluekippers will be the one tangible Brexit Benefit.
The best thing that could happen to the Conservatives would be for a competent Remainer to take over the leadership and half the membership can then scuttle back to the UKIP fringes from whence they came, huffing and puffing. Sanity may then be restored.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
No, I would still support a Hunt led party over a Farage led party.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer.
The rest of your post was pretty good but I don't really know how anyone can allow a thought like this to wander through their neocortex let alone release it into the public domain.
Starmer has done a remarkable job in turning Labour from totally unelectable to the Government in waiting. Weak and ineffective you say? You tell that to the Corbynistas who are fuming on twitter or to the opinion pollsters who now have his Labour Party with 30% + leads.
His real achievement is internal - that, rather than the civil war so many were predicting, the lefties have had their hands prised off the party apparatus and most of them seem to have drifted away, re-invented themselves or are keeping quiet, rather than fighting back. In the public arena or the new thinking/policy arena Starmer really hasn't done that much - not being a clown and now not being a lunatic is doing the job for him, just like not being Corbyn was enough for the Tories in 2019.
Another stunningly renewable day on the grid. Just 3.5gw of CCGT generation currently, which seems to be the minimum it ever manages presumably because a couple of gas plants are cheaper to keep running than switch off and on.
Didn't see the Andrew Griffith interview but it seems the Treasury mood music is all about "tough decisions" and every other word is "calm" or "stability". Clearly, the fear in Government is now the markets have tasted blood they'll want more and until we see some actual proposals (and preferably some which might get through the Commons) the markets will continue to look at the UK as a wounded stumbling confused behemoth lurching directionless through the jungle.
The "Magic Money Tree" has been uprooted, cut up and even the stump taken out and burned.
Hunt will put forward his tax rises and spending cuts in the guise of restoring the public finances - it will be interesting to see whether he emulates Osborne (£5 in spending cuts for every £1 raised through new taxes) or whether the pain will be more evenly shared.
Politically, it's not going to be an easy sell but it forces Labour to look at its own spending commitments which might in turn bolster Reeves in her own campaign for credibility.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
Mr. Royale, as an uncontested successor, it could be Hunt. But there's no chance if it goes to the members.
Start at the other end - if there's a vacancy, neither the Tories nor the country can afford a contest lasting months. We'd be lucky to get 50 cents for a £ by the end of it.
So if there's a replacement, it has to be done by the MPs. You don't even need to think about any personalities to get that far.
Yes the 1922 committee should add a rule that leadership candidates must have at least 40% of MPs vote for them in a final round to make a members ballot.
Nah. They should just scrap the members ballot completely and have the MPs decide.
That's not a decision for the 1922 Committee.
The members' ballot is in the Conservative Party Constitution, which isn't set by the 1922 Committee and places a duty on them to offer a "choice of candidates" for a members' ballot. There is a get-out where only one person puts their name forward (Howard in 2003). In 2017, the 1922 Committee did offer a choice of candidates but one (Leadsom) subsequently withdrew.
The 1922 Committee's role relates to setting the Round One rules for coming up with the "choice of candidates" to go to Round Two (in consultation with the Party Board, in fact, but the decision is ultimately the 1922's) - they can't simply refuse to come up with a choice of candidates. That gives them a certain amount of power - for instance, the fact it's two rather than more candidates at Round Two is because of the 1922 Committee - the Constitution just refers to a "choice".
A response may be that the 1922 Committee could make the rules of Round One so restrictive that only one candidate can realistically make it, but there would be a pretty strong argument that's unconstitional. Their better bet is probably to achieve a gentlemen's agreement that the second person in the MPs' ballot would be put forward with the winner, but would decide, in the interests of Party unity, to withdraw at that point. They can't enforce that though.
I haven't really followed this in depth but Pesto said on Friday that there was a clear mechanism for replacing Truss and then gave no explanation.
Is there?
Am I right in thinking that the membership elect the party leader and that's "constitutionally" all they do?
Can Party MPs decide who leads their own group of MPs in Parliament, as opposed to who leads the wider Party?
Which leads to the related point that in our unwritten constitution is there any reason why any Member of Parliament cannot go to the Palace if he or she commands a majority in the House of Commons?
The problem comes back to the one that such a divided group of MPs aren't going to be able to unite around one candidate.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
Didn't see the Andrew Griffith interview but it seems the Treasury mood music is all about "tough decisions" and every other word is "calm" or "stability". Clearly, the fear in Government is now the markets have tasted blood they'll want more and until we see some actual proposals (and preferably some which might get through the Commons) the markets will continue to look at the UK as a wounded stumbling confused behemoth lurching directionless through the jungle.
The "Magic Money Tree" has been uprooted, cut up and even the stump taken out and burned.
Hunt will put forward his tax rises and spending cuts in the guise of restoring the public finances - it will be interesting to see whether he emulates Osborne (£5 in spending cuts for every £1 raised through new taxes) or whether the pain will be more evenly shared.
Politically, it's not going to be an easy sell but it forces Labour to look at its own spending commitments which might in turn bolster Reeves in her own campaign for credibility.
On that Hunt will be a more difficult opponent for Reeves than ever Kwarteng was or even could have been
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Not how FPTP works. And they will still have to pass the SNP and LDs to become LOTO. If Tories are on 10% the LDs are going to pick up loads.
It is.
In 1983 Labour still got 27% to 25% for the SDP, so Labour remained the main opposition to the Tories and took most non Tory seats
That is a very different scenario to Farage's party winning say 25% to 10% for the Tories, in which case Farage's party would be the main opposition to Labour and would win most non Labour seats
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
Within a week there will be a poll showing the Tories doing better with Hunt as leader than with Truss.
That 40% dissatisfied with Sturgeon is a significant increase from 2 years ago
Huh?
She’s been at approximately +5 to +15 for years now, and DK is steadily very low (she has almost universal awareness in Scotland), so hard to believe that the number of dissatisfied has changed much.
I’ll dismiss this as your usual Scotch idiocy unless and until rock solid independent evidence is supplied.
As a demonstration of how and why Whitehall is pretty much useless in any kind of a crisis it would be hard to beat. And Matt Hancock doesn't exactly come out of it well either.
Edit, apologies, this is actually from last week but it is still interesting.
Read that article, then re-visit all those claims that this was one of the clown's biggest achievements.
Bits of this have come out before - and it is already clear that the UK's vaccine success was down to some determined and clever people keeping it all as far away from government as possible.
And judging by her candour now Bingham will be tarred as 'too woke' to be brought into help any other Tory government.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
No it implies wholesale shift to Farage. A quarter to a third of the electorate will always vote for rightwing parties.
Take as an example the 2000 Canadian election result which was Liberals 41%, Reform 25%, Conservatives 12% and BQ 10% and NDP 8%
I know the senior Civil Service is widely despised by many Tories, but I suspect that one of the reasons the mini-budget shambles occurred is because Tom Scholar was sacked, and senior CS folk at the Treasury ignored - or even not asked for advice.
Had Sir Humphrey been asked about the mini-budget by the PM. I'm pretty sure he would have said "Are you sure this is a prudent course of action, Prime Minister? I thought you hoped to be in the job for years rather than weeks"?
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
No, I would still support a Hunt led party over a Farage led party.
Just I also know that a Remainer Hunt led tax rising and spending cutting Tory party would be toxic not only in the redwall but with most Leave voters who still back the Tories even now (many of whom backed the Brexit Party in early 2019). I am in a minority of Remain voting Tories like you don't forget and voted for Sunak.
Most Tories are Leave voters who backed Truss and Boris
I am not sure you have this right HY.
Left leaning Centrists like me are not frightened by the hugely impressive Hunt, some would even be prepared to vote for him against an incredibly weak and ineffective LOTO like Starmer. Hunt is economically and to a degree socially incompatible with us, but not full on scary, these are the voters you need.
Farage, Braverman and Badenoch on the other hand frighten the bejeezuz out of us, and they appeal to a tiny proportion of the population. The fact that this tiny percentage are already Conservative Party members makes your argument even weaker. Going full on Trump GOP is not a winning strategy.
The number of voters like you who might switch from Starmer to Hunt is tiny. It is dwarfed by the number of populist right voters who might switch from a Hunt led Tories to Farage's party.
I would respectfully disagree, though not entirely.
That populist right wing army is simply smaller and less motivated than you think. They got Brexit. Most probably won’t bother voting in 2024.
Hunt could do some form of repair job on the blue wall, though not if the cabinet retains people like JRM or Braverman (or even the Raabs and Patels of this world).
An indicator of this is that there isn't an army of Cons threatening to go off to Reform or Farage on ConHome; only the occasional random comment. Most of the Trussites have drifted off, for the time being - suggesting a lot of Tory voters might (currently) abstain - and the remainder are turning on their colleagues with lots of conspiracy and betrayal stuff.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Not how FPTP works. And they will still have to pass the SNP and LDs to become LOTO. If Tories are on 10% the LDs are going to pick up loads.
It is.
In 1983 Labour still got 27% to 25% for the SDP, so Labour remained the main opposition to the Tories and took most non Tory seats
That is a very different scenario to Farage's party winning say 25% to 10% for the Tories, in which case Farage's party would be the main opposition to Labour and would win most non Labour seats
Except that is a fantasy, as has already been pointed out to you.
A belated Good Morning to one and all. I don't know what the BBC was up to, but it was showing some remarkably 'wooden' pictures of our prime minister last night. I suspect too that we reached a point in electoral politics where there is really no way back for the governing party.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
As a demonstration of how and why Whitehall is pretty much useless in any kind of a crisis it would be hard to beat. And Matt Hancock doesn't exactly come out of it well either.
Edit, apologies, this is actually from last week but it is still interesting.
Read that article, then re-visit all those claims that this was one of the clown's biggest achievements.
Bits of this have come out before - and it is already clear that the UK's vaccine success was down to some determined and clever people keeping it all as far away from government as possible.
And the civil service who wanted to strangle the scheme at birth
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
As a demonstration of how and why Whitehall is pretty much useless in any kind of a crisis it would be hard to beat. And Matt Hancock doesn't exactly come out of it well either.
Edit, apologies, this is actually from last week but it is still interesting.
I think she makes some valid points but we ought to remember that we did manage to vaccinate the mass of our population quicker than any other major country. So things can't be that bad!
'Yet there’s no doubt that their hesitancy over risk held back the pace of what the Vaccine Taskforce was trying to do. Far better, from the Civil Service viewpoint, to do that rather than risk career suicide by pushing ahead with an even vaguely controversial task.'
The last couple of sentences are very instructive. Avoiding mistakes is the civil service mantra. She's probably right about diversity too - certainly the dominance of economics and humanities graduates. Maybe that's why the senior civil service is so keen to talk about diversity? Ultimately politicians need to take responsibility for this. The Tories have been in power for twelve years. Hancock obviously comes out of it very badly.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
Within a week there will be a poll showing the Tories doing better with Hunt as leader than with Truss.
But still doing worse than they would with almost every other potential leader. So Hunt needs Truss - he'd be back in the political wilderness with anyone more popular.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Not how FPTP works. And they will still have to pass the SNP and LDs to become LOTO. If Tories are on 10% the LDs are going to pick up loads.
It is.
In 1983 Labour still got 27% to 25% for the SDP, so Labour remained the main opposition to the Tories and took most non Tory seats
That is a very different scenario to Farage's party winning say 25% to 10% for the Tories, in which case Farage's party would be the main opposition to Labour and would win most non Labour seats
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
Wonderful idea. We start digging the foundations of barrages, and the spoil gets buried in the very expensive holes already dug for HS2. Make work projects employing one group to dig holes and another group to fill holes.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
We're supposed to be getting a tidal scheme off the south of the island, currently seeking its various permissions. I believe the plan is to go live in 2025, but it's too early to know whether it will actually happen.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1581566937896980486 "An intelligence assessment shared in recent days with Ukrainian and U.S. officials contends that Iran’s armaments industry is preparing a first shipment of Fateh-110 and Zolfaghar missiles, two well-known Iranian short-range ballistic missiles" to Russia.
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
We're supposed to be getting a tidal scheme off the south of the island, currently seeking its various permissions. I believe the plan is to go live in 2025, but it's too early to know whether it will actually happen.
This is where we need radical planning reform. I think even a scheme to burn rubbish takes a decade to get through. Government should give itself emergency powers to greenlight energy projects - if this isn't a crisis what is?
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
Wonderful idea. We start digging the foundations of barrages, and the spoil gets buried in the very expensive holes already dug for HS2. Make work projects employing one group to dig holes and another group to fill holes.
The spoil from the Elizabeth line was used to create a bird sanctuary in the Crouch estuary.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Not how FPTP works. And they will still have to pass the SNP and LDs to become LOTO. If Tories are on 10% the LDs are going to pick up loads.
It is.
In 1983 Labour still got 27% to 25% for the SDP, so Labour remained the main opposition to the Tories and took most non Tory seats
That is a very different scenario to Farage's party winning say 25% to 10% for the Tories, in which case Farage's party would be the main opposition to Labour and would win most non Labour seats
Except that is a fantasy, as has already been pointed out to you.
I don’t think he reads what others put forward. He thinks he’s right, and it really doesn’t matter what anyone else says.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
If Hunt increases it back to the level Brown had it and which Osborne cut back what is the point of voting Tory?
A good question. I struggle to think of any.
It's pretty depressing that keeping tax low for the rich is apparently the only reason to vote Tory, from their most ardent supporter.
But the real answer to the question is to keep Labour out, just as it always was.
It also was to protect the monarchy and preserve Brexit but even Starmer Labour now sings God Save the King and is committed to Brexit.
If the Tories are also a party of high tax then maybe the only difference with Starmer is they also want spending cuts now with Hunt. However the number of voters wanting deep austerity now is tiny, even if the markets do
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
Wonderful idea. We start digging the foundations of barrages, and the spoil gets buried in the very expensive holes already dug for HS2. Make work projects employing one group to dig holes and another group to fill holes.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1581566937896980486 "An intelligence assessment shared in recent days with Ukrainian and U.S. officials contends that Iran’s armaments industry is preparing a first shipment of Fateh-110 and Zolfaghar missiles, two well-known Iranian short-range ballistic missiles" to Russia.
250km and 700km+ ranges, and pretty accurate.
We need a friendly third party to go and buy them from Iran at a higher price. Iran can then tell Russia their orders will be met in, oh, maybe three years time....
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
As this is, unbelievably, a slow news day, what do we think the % shares would be if we had full list PR? I'd guess something like:
Faragist RefUK 10 Huntist moderate Con 25 LibDems 20 Starmerist Labour 25 Corbynist left 15 Others 5
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
Wonderful idea. We start digging the foundations of barrages, and the spoil gets buried in the very expensive holes already dug for HS2. Make work projects employing one group to dig holes and another group to fill holes.
I'd think the spoil would get used within the project itself, but it would be interesting to hear.
The public were desperate to draw a line under the scandals and incompetence of the Johnson years - it was quite obvious that someone like Mordaunt was needed, assuming she could rise to the challenge.
Instead we got Truss who has doubled down on the worst of the clown, continuing the incompetence and retaining the cabinet of numpties, whilst abandoning even those bits of the clown’s agenda that were popular.
What is remarkable is how predictable, and predicted, this all was (except for poor Leondamus, obvs). Like a slow motion car crash, as Truss rose through the leadership contest, went before the members, and then rushed into number ten to trash everything.
There was one hustings in particular where she was genuinely impressive, and that made some believe (or hope) that she had hidden depths as a politician, but that was clearly a flash in the pan.
Truss was passable when addressing an audience that mostly shared her views and wanted her to succeed. Remember the first debate with an audience of 'floating voters' where she was terrible. Incidentally one Kemi Badenoch barely rated better than Truss with the public - that should be remembered for the future. For the last hustings - when Sunak seemed to have more support - Liz froze again. It was all out there in plain view.
I know quite well some of the so-called 'Turnip Taliban.' They strongly opposed Truss as candidate in 2010 not just due to the multiple affairs and the fact she had been parachuted in from Central Office but also because they thought she was useless. Not up to the standard they expected of a Con MP - and remember they had been pushed to accept a dud in the previous election.
I talked to one of them yesterday. This all comes as no surprise to him.
I don’t care what your politics are. This is a totally inappropriate intervention in another country’s domestic politics. Just not done to an ally. Being right doesn’t make it right
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
As this is, unbelievably, a slow news day, what do we think the % shares would be if we had full list PR? I'd guess something like:
Faragist RefUK 10 Huntist moderate Con 25 LibDems 20 Starmerist Labour 25 Corbynist left 15 Others 5
Lib Dem would be nearer 12 and the greens would be on 8. Otherwise, sounds about right.
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
To some extent. More marine transport required for the initial works, coastal works rather than in the central spine of the country. But the full fleet would employ up to 80,000, for the best part of a decade. Includes large numbers of apprentices.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
As this is, unbelievably, a slow news day, what do we think the % shares would be if we had full list PR? I'd guess something like:
Faragist RefUK 10 Huntist moderate Con 25 LibDems 20 Starmerist Labour 25 Corbynist left 15 Others 5
I think it's a slow news day Mr P. because we're all exhausted!
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
As this is, unbelievably, a slow news day, what do we think the % shares would be if we had full list PR? I'd guess something like:
Faragist RefUK 10 Huntist moderate Con 25 LibDems 20 Starmerist Labour 25 Corbynist left 15 Others 5
Probably now Starmer Labour 30, Corbyn Left 15, Truss/Hunt Tories 20, Farage RefUK 15, LDs 10, Greens 5
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
Not how FPTP works. And they will still have to pass the SNP and LDs to become LOTO. If Tories are on 10% the LDs are going to pick up loads.
It is.
In 1983 Labour still got 27% to 25% for the SDP, so Labour remained the main opposition to the Tories and took most non Tory seats
That is a very different scenario to Farage's party winning say 25% to 10% for the Tories, in which case Farage's party would be the main opposition to Labour and would win most non Labour seats
Very naught, young HY. You give a percentage for the SDP, but you seem to forget that they were fighting as part of an Alliance with the Liberal Party. What percentage of the vote did the Liberal Party get in 1983?
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
We're supposed to be getting a tidal scheme off the south of the island, currently seeking its various permissions. I believe the plan is to go live in 2025, but it's too early to know whether it will actually happen.
This is where we need radical planning reform. I think even a scheme to burn rubbish takes a decade to get through. Government should give itself emergency powers to greenlight energy projects - if this isn't a crisis what is?
It's not really planning - I'm not an expert but to generate electricity for the grid and to build something out at sea you need a lot of other permissions; I'm sure another PB'er knows more.
Stuck offshore I don't think the actual tidal turbines need planning permission at all - the planning is just for the substation onshore and digging the trench up the cliff for the cables, which is already with the council.
The Conservatives have taken a step in the right direction but their problem remains. A risk is that Hunt runs things, matters improve economically and politically, and Truss regains undeserved confidence and starts spouting off bright ideas again. They do need to replace her. That also involves not giving the membership a vote.
Hunt could be the chap. Next election is almost certainly a loss, recent contest indicated he probably won't win that way, but could be a safe pair of hands (Michael Howard a decade and a half later) to steady the ship.
Does require the stubborn, particularly pro-Boris types, to not have the numbers to rock the boat, though.
Hunt could also lead the Tories to extinction. With Farage becoming Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer in a Canada 1993 scenario.
If you impose a leader most Tory voters don't want let alone Tory members that is the risk Tory MPs take. Realistically only Wallace would do. Hunt can stay Chancellor but not become leader
Even if you are right and there was a Tory wipe out, Farage would not be LOTO under FPTP. That would be the SNP or LDs.
However as I said yesterday I think you are wrong re Hunt. Yes he would lose the wingnuts to the right, but he is sane and that attracts moderate non political voters.
Not necessarily, if Farage's party got 25 to 30% of the vote and Hunt's party say 10% them Farage's party would win 150 to 200 seats.
Farage would then be Leader of the Opposition
I disagree. It would be fun to find out though.
Farage will not have a ground game. He couldn't even do it in by-elections. He was rubbish in organising locally. Depending upon the seat, Lab (mainly) or the LDs will pick up tactical votes to win from the Tories. I don't believe Farage could win more than a few tens of seats even on that percentage.
I could be wrong of course.
If you get 25% of the vote you will win at least 50 to 100 seats even with no ground game.
Farage would easily win 50 to 100 strong Leave seats which voted for Boris on 25%
In 1983, the Alliance got 25% of the vote. They won 23 seats.
Only because they still trailed Labour as the main non Tory alternative. If Farage got 25% and Hunt got 10% then Farage would be the main non Labour alternative
If you take Electoral Calculus and put Reform at 25% with the Tories at 10%, leave 5% for the bits and pieces and assume Labour 40%, LibDem 20%, it's true that Reform comes out with 111 seats in opposition to the Labour majority, with the LibDems in opposition.
However switch the Reform and LibDem 20/25%s and Reform only gets 6 seats - so it's on a real knifeedge.
Equally if Labour hoovers a bigger share of the Lab/LibDem vote then its seats fall dramatically.
Just a bit of fun - and nonsense since your premise is flawed. There's not even any evidence that Farage wants the hassle and work of returning to front-line politics, and the boost to Labour/LibDem tactical voting would be tremendous.
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
RefUK are fishing in the pool of those who think Truss didn't go far enough, fast enough.
2.5% is unachievable, let alone 25%.
The cut to the basic income tax rate was popular with most voters though, now Farage wants to reverse that as well
Removing punitive marginal tax rates on typical incomes should be a bigger priority. It's perverse to remove incentives for normal workers to earn more.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1581566937896980486 "An intelligence assessment shared in recent days with Ukrainian and U.S. officials contends that Iran’s armaments industry is preparing a first shipment of Fateh-110 and Zolfaghar missiles, two well-known Iranian short-range ballistic missiles" to Russia.
250km and 700km+ ranges, and pretty accurate.
We need a friendly third party to go and buy them from Iran at a higher price. Iran can then tell Russia their orders will be met in, oh, maybe three years time....
Which friendly third party, which Iran might supply in preference to Russia, did you have in mind ? I’m drawing a bit of a blank.
If Hunt increases it back to the level Brown had it and which Osborne cut back what is the point of voting Tory?
A good question. I struggle to think of any.
It's pretty depressing that keeping tax low for the rich is apparently the only reason to vote Tory, from their most ardent supporter.
But the real answer to the question is to keep Labour out, just as it always was.
It also was to protect the monarchy and preserve Brexit but even Starmer Labour now sings God Save the King and is committed to Brexit.
If the Tories are also a party of high tax then maybe the only difference with Starmer is they also want spending cuts now with Hunt. However the number of voters wanting deep austerity now is tiny, even if the markets do
'However the number of voters wanting deep austerity now is tiny, even if the markets'
The important difference is the markets will determine the country's economic viability and future, no matter what your perception of voters demands are
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
As this is, unbelievably, a slow news day, what do we think the % shares would be if we had full list PR? I'd guess something like:
Faragist RefUK 10 Huntist moderate Con 25 LibDems 20 Starmerist Labour 25 Corbynist left 15 Others 5
Would Starmerist Labour prefer a coalition with the Corbynist left or the Huntist moderate Cons?
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1581566937896980486 "An intelligence assessment shared in recent days with Ukrainian and U.S. officials contends that Iran’s armaments industry is preparing a first shipment of Fateh-110 and Zolfaghar missiles, two well-known Iranian short-range ballistic missiles" to Russia.
250km and 700km+ ranges, and pretty accurate.
How many can Iran provide them with? If we assume that 50% will be shot out of the sky, perhaps more if the west provides better protection, what difference will it make? And I assume the Iranians will be charging top dollar. How long can Putin afford this?
If Hunt increases it back to the level Brown had it and which Osborne cut back what is the point of voting Tory?
A good question. I struggle to think of any.
It's pretty depressing that keeping tax low for the rich is apparently the only reason to vote Tory, from their most ardent supporter.
But the real answer to the question is to keep Labour out, just as it always was.
It also was to protect the monarchy and preserve Brexit but even Starmer Labour now sings God Save the King and is committed to Brexit.
If the Tories are also a party of high tax then maybe the only difference with Starmer is they also want spending cuts now with Hunt. However the number of voters wanting deep austerity now is tiny, even if the markets do
It used to be that Conservatives were the sensible, moderate and responsible people who could be trusted with all the various arms of government, whereas Labour were radical wreckers who always lead the country into a mess. The only reason my mother ever gave for voting Tory was "we can't let Labour in, and ruin everything".
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
As this is, unbelievably, a slow news day, what do we think the % shares would be if we had full list PR? I'd guess something like:
Faragist RefUK 10 Huntist moderate Con 25 LibDems 20 Starmerist Labour 25 Corbynist left 15 Others 5
Lib Dem would be nearer 12 and the greens would be on 8. Otherwise, sounds about right.
Yes, if there was a moderate Tory party and a sensible Labour one, the Libs would struggle to mark out a distinctive pitch, likely push towards libertarianism with a social consience, and would end up around 5-10% like the FDP in Germany. If Labour or the Tories tried to hold themselves together as is (and the name would be a huge issue for both) then they could do much better.
I don’t care what your politics are. This is a totally inappropriate intervention in another country’s domestic politics. Just not done to an ally. Being right doesn’t make it right
Utterly digusting intervention from the ghastly plastic-surgery experiment twat.
But also utterly predictable. As I've been saying here for years, America runs the show here, and they're not happy when anyone challenges their agenda. Which is why we need to support Liz in doing just that. This country is going nowhere in the world till we wriggle free of this. The general direction of world events is on the side of us doing so, so let's get on with it.
Another stunningly renewable day on the grid. Just 3.5gw of CCGT generation currently, which seems to be the minimum it ever manages presumably because a couple of gas plants are cheaper to keep running than switch off and on.
Enough wind, solar, biomass and nuclear to cover almost 100% of domestic demand right now.
I think they keep a few CCGT plants running because they can relatively quickly ramp up and down to match variations in demand (or wind supply) to balance the grid. I guess that might be one sign of a large increase in battery storage being added to the grid, that it would take over the balancing role.
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
Wonderful idea. We start digging the foundations of barrages, and the spoil gets buried in the very expensive holes already dug for HS2. Make work projects employing one group to dig holes and another group to fill holes.
Most of the work for barrages involves building sea walls, so you are actually quarrying and bringing rock in (from Cornwall, maybe Norway).
I know the senior Civil Service is widely despised by many Tories, but I suspect that one of the reasons the mini-budget shambles occurred is because Tom Scholar was sacked, and senior CS folk at the Treasury ignored - or even not asked for advice.
Had Sir Humphrey been asked about the mini-budget by the PM. I'm pretty sure he would have said "Are you sure this is a prudent course of action, Prime Minister? I thought you hoped to be in the job for years rather than weeks"?
Truss and Kwarteng decided to replace Tom Scholar with Antonia Romeo at the Treasury, then Truss 'panicked' and stopped the appointment. No idea about Romeo but she was one of these high flyers who moved from department to department, not a Treasury specialist, so it would have been a big disruption.
For years, trans activists have been trying to intimidate feminists and other refuseniks of trans ideology but we have fought back hard. And various organisations that have been brainwashed by Stonewall, including Garden Court Chambers, successfully sued by the black lesbian barrister Allison Bailey, have been given a legal kicking of late.
Women’s hard-won rights are not up for grabs. And I think the message might be finally getting through. So let this be a lesson to all councils. You need to follow equality law as it is, not the law as Stonewall wants it to be. Or you will be sued. And you may well lose.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
Within a week there will be a poll showing the Tories doing better with Hunt as leader than with Truss.
You sound very certain but there is simply no guarantee of that.
Hunt is not hugely popular, either with the public or his own MPs - he was eliminated in the first ballot. Truss, whose bar was set extremely low among tory MPs, was still over 3x more popular than Hunt.
I don’t care what your politics are. This is a totally inappropriate intervention in another country’s domestic politics. Just not done to an ally. Being right doesn’t make it right
Utterly digusting intervention from the ghastly plastic-surgery experiment twat.
But also utterly predictable. As I've been saying here for years, America runs the show here, and they're not happy when anyone challenges their agenda. Which is why we need to support Liz in doing just that. This country is going nowhere in the world till we wriggle free of this. The general direction of world events is on the side of us doing so, so let's get on with it.
Not context with Brexit, you now want to indulge in a complete fantasy ?
@MarqueeMark, with tidal barrages, would the construction of these need the same type of skills and labour as HS2? In other words, would mothballing HS2 free up capacity to build tidal barrages if such a scheme were prioritised above building HS2?
We're supposed to be getting a tidal scheme off the south of the island, currently seeking its various permissions. I believe the plan is to go live in 2025, but it's too early to know whether it will actually happen.
This is where we need radical planning reform. I think even a scheme to burn rubbish takes a decade to get through. Government should give itself emergency powers to greenlight energy projects - if this isn't a crisis what is?
It's not really planning - I'm not an expert but to generate electricity for the grid and to build something out at sea you need a lot of other permissions; I'm sure another PB'er knows more.
Stuck offshore I don't think the actual tidal turbines need planning permission at all - the planning is just for the substation onshore and digging the trench up the cliff for the cables, which is already with the council.
Yep. Planning has bugger all to do with it. To do anything offshore there are a huge range of investigations and permissions that need to be established. Some of these are imposed by government to ensure we don't damage stuff like fisheries and spawning grounds as well as other environmental hazards. Then there are hazards to shipping etc. The rest are all required to make sure the project actually works, doesn't sink without trace into unsuitable seabed, doesn't get eroded away by seasonal currents, doesn't get stuck on top of mines or other explosives (you would be horrified at how many WW1 and WW2 mines there are still scattered around the seabed) as well as other munitions - not least from all the aircraft returning from bombing missions in WW2 who had to ditch all undropped ordinance over the sea because of the risk of it going off on landing. And that isn't anywhere near everything.
The problem is we should have been doing all of this a couple of decades or more ago. If we had then by now the systems would long have been up and running. But successive governments have preferred wind and solar as an alternative to hydrocarbons and so have completely failed to support the tidal projects.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
Within a week there will be a poll showing the Tories doing better with Hunt as leader than with Truss.
You sound very certain but there is simply no guarantee of that.
Hunt is not hugely popular, either with the public or his own MPs - he was eliminated in the first ballot. Truss, whose bar was set extremely low among tory MPs, was still over 3x more popular than Hunt.
Yes, but away from an election, people aren't weighing up the parties or personalities, but are simply looking at the crisis and chaos, and saying they'll vote for the other lot (hence also why the invisible LibDems aren't doing better). If the atmosphere of the country being hours away from economic collapse recedes, inevitably the government ratings will improve a little. Especially if Liz stays off the media for a bit.
You really have a bee in your bonnet about Royale @Mexicanpete . In some ways you are no different to the ludicrous @bigjohnowls . How many points ahead do you think Labour would be under your preferred leader? (Who is your preferred leader?)
I don’t care what your politics are. This is a totally inappropriate intervention in another country’s domestic politics. Just not done to an ally. Being right doesn’t make it right
Utterly digusting intervention from the ghastly plastic-surgery experiment twat.
But also utterly predictable. As I've been saying here for years, America runs the show here, and they're not happy when anyone challenges their agenda. Which is why we need to support Liz in doing just that. This country is going nowhere in the world till we wriggle free of this. The general direction of world events is on the side of us doing so, so let's get on with it.
Not context with Brexit, you now want to indulge in a complete fantasy ?
Brexit was a complete fantasy till it happened.
And yes, being in favour of national sovereignty, I am naturally every bit as against being ruled by America over the telephone as I am being ruled by the EU by treaty.
By the way, it's already a sign of weakness that Biden has to make these public interventions rather than his word being automatic writ, as it would have in the Cameron or even Boris days.
Mr. HYUFD, how well is Truss polling with Conservative voters from 2019?
Better than Hunt would be.
Remainer Hunt's spending cuts and high tax agenda also has zero chance of regaining the Leave voting working class redwall voters Boris won now voting Labour again
Good morning
You simply do not know how the public will react to Hunt but you have a visceral hatred of him which is a narrative throughout your comments
Within a week there will be a poll showing the Tories doing better with Hunt as leader than with Truss.
You sound very certain but there is simply no guarantee of that.
Hunt is not hugely popular, either with the public or his own MPs - he was eliminated in the first ballot. Truss, whose bar was set extremely low among tory MPs, was still over 3x more popular than Hunt.
Indeed, the Tories replacing Truss with Hunt would be like Labour MPs replacing Corbyn with Liz Kendall in 2016 without giving the membership a vote.
There either would have been a mass movement of Labour voters to the Greens or Corbyn would have split and set up his own party
I don’t care what your politics are. This is a totally inappropriate intervention in another country’s domestic politics. Just not done to an ally. Being right doesn’t make it right
Utterly digusting intervention from the ghastly plastic-surgery experiment twat.
But also utterly predictable. As I've been saying here for years, America runs the show here, and they're not happy when anyone challenges their agenda. Which is why we need to support Liz in doing just that. This country is going nowhere in the world till we wriggle free of this. The general direction of world events is on the side of us doing so, so let's get on with it.
Just as long as we don’t need to borrow or trade sounds like a great idea!
If Hunt increases it back to the level Brown had it and which Osborne cut back what is the point of voting Tory?
A good question. I struggle to think of any.
It's pretty depressing that keeping tax low for the rich is apparently the only reason to vote Tory, from their most ardent supporter.
But the real answer to the question is to keep Labour out, just as it always was.
It also was to protect the monarchy and preserve Brexit but even Starmer Labour now sings God Save the King and is committed to Brexit.
If the Tories are also a party of high tax then maybe the only difference with Starmer is they also want spending cuts now with Hunt. However the number of voters wanting deep austerity now is tiny, even if the markets do
It used to be that Conservatives were the sensible, moderate and responsible people who could be trusted with all the various arms of government, whereas Labour were radical wreckers who always lead the country into a mess. The only reason my mother ever gave for voting Tory was "we can't let Labour in, and ruin everything".
Put in Labour 45%, RefUK 25%, LDs 15% and Tories 10% which is much more realistic in that scenario and you get RefUK 71, LDs 41. So Farage does become Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
I don’t see REFUK ever breaching 15-16% even in the case of total Tory collapse. Total Tory collapse implies the country falling out of love with right wing politics.
As this is, unbelievably, a slow news day, what do we think the % shares would be if we had full list PR? I'd guess something like:
Faragist RefUK 10 Huntist moderate Con 25 LibDems 20 Starmerist Labour 25 Corbynist left 15 Others 5
No big demur, Nick, but I sadly feel the hard populist right might do a touch better than 10%. I'd say there's a close to perfect correlation between that and those in the UK who - either overtly or secretly - like Donald Trump. They are pretty much the exact same people.
Comments
The five pints of Brains Dark I consumed in the Splottlands each evening from my three University years would have helped numb the pain of the last few weeks.
We used to have a theory that Brains SA didn't travel well. The brewery was in those days in St Mary's Street. A pint in the Old Arcade was sublime, but by the time it reached the Owain Glyndwr ten yards further up the road it wasn't so good.
Although I barely drink now I keep a stock of Double Dragon, Reverend James and Skull Attack Gold for wayward travellers. My next door neighbour owns the Draig Cider Brewery, I was never a Cider drinker, but that is a sublime pint of Welsh gold, if you haven't yet sampled.
The opportunity cost is in areas where full membership gives us influence to shape regulation, as we did for decades on financial services and indeed in areas like Horizon. But that influence is gone since 2016 and won’t be coming back in a hurry anyway even if we rejoin. Thems the breaks.
She isn't going to resign having spent her political career u-turning at every opportunity in order to gain traction. Not quite as unprincipled as her predecessor but much less affected than him by the sentiment around her. She has a remarkably robotic manner of operating under scrutiny which may serve her well in the current furore.
So how do they boot her out? And how, as you rightly point out, can a Party that is shattered into a dozen factions possibly unite around a single candidate? They can't and they won't.
Remember that Sunak was well on course to succeed Johnson until Boris and his starry-eyed vedettes trashed his reputation.
They are in open civil war and rebellion and there isn't an obvious end in sight. Like 1992-7 only 1000x worse.
And where did it go?
That populist right wing army is simply smaller and less motivated than you think. They got Brexit. Most probably won’t bother voting in 2024.
Hunt could do some form of repair job on the blue wall, though not if the cabinet retains people like JRM or Braverman (or even the Raabs and Patels of this world).
The members' ballot is in the Conservative Party Constitution, which isn't set by the 1922 Committee and places a duty on them to offer a "choice of candidates" for a members' ballot. There is a get-out where only one person puts their name forward (Howard in 2003). In 2017, the 1922 Committee did offer a choice of candidates but one (Leadsom) subsequently withdrew.
The 1922 Committee's role relates to setting the Round One rules for coming up with the "choice of candidates" to go to Round Two (in consultation with the Party Board, in fact, but the decision is ultimately the 1922's) - they can't simply refuse to come up with a choice of candidates. That gives them a certain amount of power - for instance, the fact it's two rather than more candidates at Round Two is because of the 1922 Committee - the Constitution just refers to a "choice".
A response may be that the 1922 Committee could make the rules of Round One so restrictive that only one candidate can realistically make it, but there would be a pretty strong argument that's unconstitional. In theory, they could do it anyway as the PM just has to have the confidence of Parliament so would probably be appointed if sent to the Palace. But it would be very messy.
Their better bet is probably to achieve a gentlemen's agreement that the second person in the MPs' ballot would be put forward with the winner, but would decide, in the interests of Party unity, to withdraw at that point. They can't enforce that though.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=Y&CON=10&LAB=45&LIB=15&Reform=25&Green=3&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=14&SCOTLAB=30.7&SCOTLIB=7&SCOTReform=0&SCOTGreen=1&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=45&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2019base
https://grid.energynumbers.info/
Enough wind, solar, biomass and nuclear to cover almost 100% of domestic demand right now.
Didn't see the Andrew Griffith interview but it seems the Treasury mood music is all about "tough decisions" and every other word is "calm" or "stability". Clearly, the fear in Government is now the markets have tasted blood they'll want more and until we see some actual proposals (and preferably some which might get through the Commons) the markets will continue to look at the UK as a wounded stumbling confused behemoth lurching directionless through the jungle.
The "Magic Money Tree" has been uprooted, cut up and even the stump taken out and burned.
Hunt will put forward his tax rises and spending cuts in the guise of restoring the public finances - it will be interesting to see whether he emulates Osborne (£5 in spending cuts for every £1 raised through new taxes) or whether the pain will be more evenly shared.
Politically, it's not going to be an easy sell but it forces Labour to look at its own spending commitments which might in turn bolster Reeves in her own campaign for credibility.
Is there?
Am I right in thinking that the membership elect the party leader and that's "constitutionally" all they do?
Can Party MPs decide who leads their own group of MPs in Parliament, as opposed to who leads the wider Party?
Which leads to the related point that in our unwritten constitution is there any reason why any Member of Parliament cannot go to the Palace if he or she commands a majority in the House of Commons?
The problem comes back to the one that such a divided group of MPs aren't going to be able to unite around one candidate.
In 1983 Labour still got 27% to 25% for the SDP, so Labour remained the main opposition to the Tories and took most non Tory seats
That is a very different scenario to Farage's party winning say 25% to 10% for the Tories, in which case Farage's party would be the main opposition to Labour and would win most non Labour seats
So in your opinion, what is the point of the Conservative Party?
She’s been at approximately +5 to +15 for years now, and DK is steadily very low (she has almost universal awareness in Scotland), so hard to believe that the number of dissatisfied has changed much.
I’ll dismiss this as your usual Scotch idiocy unless and until rock solid independent evidence is supplied.
Take as an example the 2000 Canadian election result which was Liberals 41%, Reform 25%, Conservatives 12% and BQ 10% and NDP 8%
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Canadian_federal_election
Had Sir Humphrey been asked about the mini-budget by the PM. I'm pretty sure he would have said "Are you sure this is a prudent course of action, Prime Minister? I thought you hoped to be in the job for years rather than weeks"?
I don't know what the BBC was up to, but it was showing some remarkably 'wooden' pictures of our prime minister last night.
I suspect too that we reached a point in electoral politics where there is really no way back for the governing party.
But the real answer to the question is to keep Labour out, just as it always was.
'Yet there’s no doubt that their hesitancy over risk held back the pace of what the Vaccine Taskforce was trying to do. Far better, from the Civil Service viewpoint, to do that rather than risk career suicide by pushing ahead with an even vaguely controversial task.'
The last couple of sentences are very instructive. Avoiding mistakes is the civil service mantra. She's probably right about diversity too - certainly the dominance of economics and humanities graduates. Maybe that's why the senior civil service is so keen to talk about diversity? Ultimately politicians need to take responsibility for this. The Tories have been in power for twelve years. Hancock obviously comes out of it very badly.
You are writing unmitigated b*ll*cks.
2.5% is unachievable, let alone 25%.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1581566937896980486
"An intelligence assessment shared in recent days with Ukrainian and U.S. officials contends that Iran’s armaments industry is preparing a first shipment of Fateh-110 and Zolfaghar missiles, two well-known Iranian short-range ballistic missiles" to Russia.
250km and 700km+ ranges, and pretty accurate.
He’s a proper Tory right enough.
If the Tories are also a party of high tax then maybe the only difference with Starmer is they also want spending cuts now with Hunt. However the number of voters wanting deep austerity now is tiny, even if the markets do
Faragist RefUK 10
Huntist moderate Con 25
LibDems 20
Starmerist Labour 25
Corbynist left 15
Others 5
I know quite well some of the so-called 'Turnip Taliban.' They strongly opposed Truss as candidate in 2010 not just due to the multiple affairs and the fact she had been parachuted in from Central Office but also because they thought she was useless. Not up to the standard they expected of a Con MP - and remember they had been pushed to accept a dud in the previous election.
I talked to one of them yesterday. This all comes as no surprise to him.
I don’t care what your politics are. This is a totally inappropriate intervention in another country’s domestic politics. Just not done to an ally. Being right doesn’t make it right
https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/1581552880494202880
Stuck offshore I don't think the actual tidal turbines need planning permission at all - the planning is just for the substation onshore and digging the trench up the cliff for the cables, which is already with the council.
I’m drawing a bit of a blank.
The important difference is the markets will determine the country's economic viability and future, no matter what your perception of voters demands are
On Brexit 'Put it this way in 2016 the UK's GDP was 90% of Germany's. Now it's 60%%
https://www.thenewseachday.com/comments/73051#:~:text=Mark Carney: ‘Doubling down on inequality was a,Budget October 14 • Edward Luce, Financial Times
The soldiers from Ukraine will soon be assigned to French units for several weeks.
https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1581563848808710144
How's it been going lately?
But also utterly predictable. As I've been saying here for years, America runs the show here, and they're not happy when anyone challenges their agenda. Which is why we need to support Liz in doing just that. This country is going nowhere in the world till we wriggle free of this. The general direction of world events is on the side of us doing so, so let's get on with it.
https://www.politico.eu/article/liz-truss-uk-treasury-chief-drops-antonia-romeo-kwasi-kwarteng/
Women’s hard-won rights are not up for grabs. And I think the message might be finally getting through. So let this be a lesson to all councils. You need to follow equality law as it is, not the law as Stonewall wants it to be. Or you will be sued. And you may well lose.
https://unherd.com/2022/10/the-toppling-of-the-trans-extremists/
Hunt is not hugely popular, either with the public or his own MPs - he was eliminated in the first ballot. Truss, whose bar was set extremely low among tory MPs, was still over 3x more popular than Hunt.
The problem is we should have been doing all of this a couple of decades or more ago. If we had then by now the systems would long have been up and running. But successive governments have preferred wind and solar as an alternative to hydrocarbons and so have completely failed to support the tidal projects.
And yes, being in favour of national sovereignty, I am naturally every bit as against being ruled by America over the telephone as I am being ruled by the EU by treaty.
By the way, it's already a sign of weakness that Biden has to make these public interventions rather than his word being automatic writ, as it would have in the Cameron or even Boris days.
There either would have been a mass movement of Labour voters to the Greens or Corbyn would have split and set up his own party