If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Everybody loves a (Cambridge educated) lawyer.
I think that he’s gone from One Nation to radicalised Brexiteer with no intervening period and has the zeal of a convert is what is winning it for him.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I thought Patel would be an excellent opposition leader, the most likely to turn the screw at PMQs.
I think you can guess my personal views don't align as closely as they do with some other candidates.
I can’t see Robert Generic appealing to either potential LD or Reform switchers. The only thing he might have going for him is an Aussie style personal ruthless ambition. That’s a bit of a stretch, otherwise he appears to be the candidate for the 2024 Tory member. Oh dear.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I thought Patel would be an excellent opposition leader, the most likely to turn the screw at PMQs.
I think you can guess my personal views don't align as closely as they do with some other candidates.
I don't think this is really the case - she certainly has the attitude and scorn to do it but she doesn't speak massively well.
First! All the way from sunny breakfast time Colorado…
No dog?
Breakfast?
Hello JohnO, who are you supporting in this clash of the titans?
Preferences are Stride, Cleverly, Tugendhat….shrugs shoulders…then Badenoch but NEVER Jenrick.
Why never Jenrick?
Borderline corruption over the Richard Desmond Westferry planning application; breaching COVID rules, that mural, and open public support for Trump (I’m not sure which is worse: his actually endorses MAGA or cynically that will heighten his appeal to the membership).
Labour and LDs would have a field day…
Jenrick is the best positioned to be able to deliver poll leads by suppressing the Reform vote and then pivoting to the centre for the next election. The others all risk oblivion for the party.
He will ensure that the Tories will be eclipsed by the Lib Dems in terms of seats.
That’s how bad he is.
Rubbish, on the latest poll the Tories are already just 4% behind Labour while the LDs are 8% now behind Reform.
If that holds the Tories would regain some seats lost to the LDs
I put that poll into Electoral Calculus. It would give the Tories 175 seats. If the trend is your friend, you might be looking at a majority some time around 2044.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
I don’t see that either. I don’t see a politician that excelled in the job but she wasn’t “shit”. She had a tough gig
And she is self aware. Her spontaneous speech on growing up as a young Asian woman was one of the best off the cuff commons speeches I can remember. Powerful and eloquent
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Everybody loves a (Cambridge educated) lawyer.
I think that he’s gone from One Nation to radicalised Brexiteer with no intervening period and has the zeal of a convert is what is winning it for him.
It's good that he's gone as PM. The party needed a reset. It would have been great to do that without letting Labour in, but it needed to happen either way.
First! All the way from sunny breakfast time Colorado…
No dog?
Breakfast?
Hello JohnO, who are you supporting in this clash of the titans?
Preferences are Stride, Cleverly, Tugendhat….shrugs shoulders…then Badenoch but NEVER Jenrick.
Why never Jenrick?
Borderline corruption over the Richard Desmond Westferry planning application; breaching COVID rules, that mural, and open public support for Trump (I’m not sure which is worse: his actually endorses MAGA or cynically that will heighten his appeal to the membership).
Labour and LDs would have a field day…
Jenrick is the best positioned to be able to deliver poll leads by suppressing the Reform vote and then pivoting to the centre for the next election. The others all risk oblivion for the party.
He will ensure that the Tories will be eclipsed by the Lib Dems in terms of seats.
That’s how bad he is.
Rubbish, on the latest poll the Tories are already just 4% behind Labour while the LDs are 8% now behind Reform.
If that holds the Tories would regain some seats lost to the LDs
I put that poll into Electoral Calculus. It would give the Tories 175 seats. If the trend is your friend, you might be looking at a majority some time around 2044.
Labour were ahead of the Tories in September 2010. Ed Miliband is PM.
Mary Harrington (transhumanism), Abby Innes (sovietisation/free market horseshoe theory) and Erica Thompson (the limits of models) all have the same voice: clipped posh Hampstead, every word a nailgun. It's weird.
Based on these results, at least 1 of Jen. rick and Kemi will reach the members. Either of them comfortably beat any other candidate with the members, whilst Kemi probably wins between the two.
Will be fun post Conference to see if things have changed or Jenrick needs to play games trying to get an alternative opponent.
I'm no expert on the Conservative party, but my main take home from this is that there's no stand out candidate who is obviously better than the others, and shown that to their fellow MPs.
If we go back to the 2019 contest, in the first round there were ten (10) candidates and Boris Johnson had the support of 36.4% of his colleagues.
This time the leading candidate, of six, is Jenrick with a mere 23.7%.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
You're right. I can't be bothered to bet on it, or care much who wins.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I thought Patel would be an excellent opposition leader, the most likely to turn the screw at PMQs.
I think you can guess my personal views don't align as closely as they do with some other candidates.
I don't think this is really the case - she certainly has the attitude and scorn to do it but she doesn't speak massively well.
Unfortunately she does tend to come across as a bit thick - case in point her only remotely memorable contribution to this leadership election has been complaining at people attacking high immigration levels. Read the room.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
She does however look better in latex than the rest
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
Me. Robert Jenrick and I are a very poor match - we wouldn't get past the prawn cocktail - but out of this field I think he's the best risk/reward choice for the Cons.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
She does however look better in latex than the rest
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
Only in the negative.
I don't think any of them match my views, I don't think any of them will return the Tories to power.
I think the next Tory PM is probably not an MP yet
If someone came along with the exact Tory platform that you backed in 2015, would you support them?
I'm guessing most ex-Tory voters from 2015 (including myself) would say "no". First, things have changed since 2015. Second, the Tories of 2024 are incompetent, grift-ridden no-hopers who seemed to have learned nothing from their drubbing at the ballot box.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I thought Patel would be an excellent opposition leader, the most likely to turn the screw at PMQs.
I think you can guess my personal views don't align as closely as they do with some other candidates.
I don't think this is really the case - she certainly has the attitude and scorn to do it but she doesn't speak massively well.
Unfortunately she does tend to come across as a bit thick - case in point her only remotely memorable contribution to this leadership election has been complaining at people attacking high immigration levels. Read the room.
Her team seems to have decided that the right wing was lost fairly early on, and pitch her as the unity candidate instead. Her rioty intervention was probably aimed at a pivot to the centre but it was a reach. Would have been better to stay in her lane and hope something came up.
Just curious - is there anyone on here who doesn't think the Tory leadership candidate best placed to win votes and seats is also the candidate whose views most match their own? (e.g. I favour candidate x because that candidate most matches my views, though I acknowledge it's not obvious how that candidate will appeal to the electorate?)
I thought Patel would be an excellent opposition leader, the most likely to turn the screw at PMQs.
I think you can guess my personal views don't align as closely as they do with some other candidates.
I don't think this is really the case - she certainly has the attitude and scorn to do it but she doesn't speak massively well.
Unfortunately she does tend to come across as a bit thick - case in point her only remotely memorable contribution to this leadership election has been complaining at people attacking high immigration levels. Read the room.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
For me it's not so much a case of whether he's a "right winger" but rather whether he's a "winner"
I just can't see him winning a general election but LOTO is one of those roles politicians can grow into. It was very hard to see Keith ever winning an election when he became LOTO in 2020 and then there's the example of the Blessed Margaret who certainly didn't look much like a PM in waiting in 1975.
But for every Maggie and Keir there many more Kinnocks, Hague's and Corbyns... LOTO's who always looked like losers and that is indeed what they were...
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
She does however look better in latex than the rest
Middle aged doughy men do not look good in latex, or indeed anything other than a good suit (see posts passim). Arguably Badenoch would look good but there would be balloon squeaking as she is more curvy than Patel.
If the culture secretary has time to price Oasis tickets, I hope she's on the real scandal of channel 4 press releasing the return of Ally Mcbeal after years of it being mysteriously unavailable to stream, only to not follow through.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
That's simplistic.
I don't rate Jenrick, but I can see the appeal of both Patel and Badenoch on the right of the party, even though I'd never* vote for any of the three.
*Badenoch less of a known quantity - I wouldn't completely rule it out, although she'd have to substantially surprise on the upside - versus e.g. Corbyn it could be a real possibility. Patel I'd never vote for due to views on capital punishment. Jenrick I just find repellent and dodgy as hell.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
For me it's not so much a case of whether he's a "right winger" but rather whether he's a "winner"
I just can't see him winning a general election but LOTO is one of those roles politicians can grow into. It was very hard to see Keith ever winning an election when he became LOTO in 2020 but then there's the example of the Blessed Margerat who certainly didn't look much like a PM in waiting in 1975.
But for every Maggie and Keir there many more Kinnocks, Hague's and Corbyns... LOTO's who always looked like losers and that is indeed what they were...
Kinnock and Hague failed to make headway because the Governments they faced failed to lose. Of those LOTOs, only Corbyn could be said to have really 'lost' the election, because he faced May, a weak PM, and despite getting a lot of votes, he also motivated a lot of people to vote against him. Starmer didn't 'win' either, Sunak (and those leaders who had come before him) lost.
Jenrick will be fine - the Government will have swathes of seats to lose at the next election, so as long as he holds the party together, he'll improve on Sunak's result handsomely. Governing with Reform support isn't out of the question either.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
She does however look better in latex than the rest
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
I can usually see why some politicians simply irritate the voters. Ed Miliband. Young William Hague. Gove
But I don’t see why Patel. Maybe Racism? Misogyny? Snobbery?
I suspect a complex mix of all three are at work, with varying blends in individuals
Because she's shit, and has no self-awareness?
She does however look better in latex than the rest
Middle aged doughy men do not look good in latex, or indeed anything other than a good suit (see posts passim). Arguably Badenoch would look good but there would be balloon squeaking as she is more curvy than Patel.
Something to be taken note of by the lycra clad I feel
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Every single party fucked up besides Reform
Labour obvs won a huge majority coz of the split right. On examination it is startling how badly Starmer did as against expectations and polls. Even in his own constituency
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Every single party fucked up besides Reform
Labour obvs won a huge majority coz of the split right. On examination it is startling how badly Starmer did as against expectations and polls. Even in his own constituency
The unreported story of the election was Labour's massive under performance. Dimwit journo's got stuck looking at seats and missed the stunningly weak support for it.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Every single party fucked up besides Reform
Labour obvs won a huge majority coz of the split right. On examination it is startling how badly Starmer did as against expectations and polls. Even in his own constituency
The unreported story of the election was Labour's massive under performance. Dimwit journo's got stuck looking at seats and missed the stunningly weak support for it.
Yes. Starmer dropped 18,000 votes in Camden. Despite my personal and ardent support
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
That's simplistic.
I don't rate Jenrick, but I can see the appeal of both Patel and Badenoch on the right of the party, even though I'd never* vote for any of the three.
*Badenoch less of a known quantity - I wouldn't completely rule it out, although she'd have to substantially surprise on the upside - versus e.g. Corbyn it could be a real possibility. Patel I'd never vote for due to views on capital punishment. Jenrick I just find repellent and dodgy as hell.
Parties don't entirely select leaders on who will win them the next election, nor should they. They choose people who represent them and will promote their values. Helpful if the two overlap of course.
If they select Jenrick it will be because "dodgy and repellent" is what they like.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
With France Italy and now Germany all surging to the hard or far right it’s a brave, probably foolish pundit that says Britain won’t follow. We have the exact same migrational and economic challenges
Also note the rise of the weird hard left in Germany and France
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Yes - only 72 MPs.
We're talking about appeal, not how it is converted in to MPs.
Despite dreadful alternatives, he got considerably fewer people to vote Lib Dem than the great Jo Swinson managed.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
That's simplistic.
I don't rate Jenrick, but I can see the appeal of both Patel and Badenoch on the right of the party, even though I'd never* vote for any of the three.
*Badenoch less of a known quantity - I wouldn't completely rule it out, although she'd have to substantially surprise on the upside - versus e.g. Corbyn it could be a real possibility. Patel I'd never vote for due to views on capital punishment. Jenrick I just find repellent and dodgy as hell.
Parties don't entirely select leaders on who will win them the next election, nor should they.
Blair and Cameron are two examples I can think of who were elected by the parties more or less purely on the basis that they looked like potential winners?
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
Isn't one of the main concerns about the far right, particularly in the US, that it seems to be extolling precisely the opposite of a "prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with", and in several cases is actually quite partial to said foreign autocrats?
Eyeballing the first round numbers it looks to me as if Cleverly is well placed to pick up Tugendhat switchers and quite possibly Stride switchers in due course, and that might mean him up against one of Jenrick or Badenoch with the members. But HYUFD will know the dynamics better than me. I don't know where Priti's supporters will go but I kind of assume Jenrick.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
Isn't one of the main concerns about the far right, particularly in the US, that it seems to be extolling precisely the opposite of a "prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with", and in several cases is actually quite partial to said foreign autocrats?
The world has gone to complete sh1t during the Biden years and there’s a pretty fair case to be made it’s primarily been driven by the world’s autocrats sensing weakness. Far Right Meloni has done a better job of standing up to Putin than certainly Merkel and arguably Sholz. The world is not as simple as you make it out to be.
First! All the way from sunny breakfast time Colorado…
No dog?
Breakfast?
Hello JohnO, who are you supporting in this clash of the titans?
Preferences are Stride, Cleverly, Tugendhat….shrugs shoulders…then Badenoch but NEVER Jenrick.
Why never Jenrick?
Borderline corruption over the Richard Desmond Westferry planning application; breaching COVID rules, that mural, and open public support for Trump (I’m not sure which is worse: his actually endorses MAGA or cynically that will heighten his appeal to the membership).
Labour and LDs would have a field day…
Most Reform voters back Trump and hated the COVID lockdown and sad to say are not keen on warm treatment of asylum seekers either and the Tories lost more 2019 voters to Reform than Labour and the LDs combined at the general election.
As for planning applications, may boost the LDs a bit locally but being a bit over keen to endorse developers planning applications may not be too bad a thing for a Tory leader who needs to get more affordable homes built for young people
Reform voters are aged Brexiteers without passports who wanted nightclubs to never re-open after COVID. They loved Boris in 2021.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
Don’t be silly. None of those things are far right. But there are plenty of far right people around who demonise all immigrants and all Muslims, who favour “strong man” nationalists (Putin, Netanyahu, etc.), and who think “high status men” should replace democracy.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Yes - only 72 MPs.
We're talking about appeal, not how it is converted in to MPs.
Despite dreadful alternatives, he got considerably fewer people to vote Lib Dem than the great Jo Swinson managed.
Under FPTP there is no point in trying maximise national vote count - look at Reform and the Greens to see why. LDs appealed in 72 constituencies and got higher average majorities than either Tories or Labour.
To say "the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom" is weird.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
First! All the way from sunny breakfast time Colorado…
No dog?
Breakfast?
Hello JohnO, who are you supporting in this clash of the titans?
Preferences are Stride, Cleverly, Tugendhat….shrugs shoulders…then Badenoch but NEVER Jenrick.
Why never Jenrick?
Borderline corruption over the Richard Desmond Westferry planning application; breaching COVID rules, that mural, and open public support for Trump (I’m not sure which is worse: his actually endorses MAGA or cynically that will heighten his appeal to the membership).
Labour and LDs would have a field day…
Most Reform voters back Trump and hated the COVID lockdown and sad to say are not keen on warm treatment of asylum seekers either and the Tories lost more 2019 voters to Reform than Labour and the LDs combined at the general election.
As for planning applications, may boost the LDs a bit locally but being a bit over keen to endorse developers planning applications may not be too bad a thing for a Tory leader who needs to get more affordable homes built for young people
Reform voters are aged Brexiteers without passports who wanted nightclubs to never re-open after COVID. They loved Boris in 2021.
This is a mischaracterisation, I know enough young, internationally mobile, sociable self made people who strongly flirted with Reform in the summer. Blair typically, is correct. At the next election it likely that it’s Starmer’s flank that is most vulnerable to Reform (or whatever replaces it). See well rehearsed arguments about the riots and smoking bans.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
Isn't one of the main concerns about the far right, particularly in the US, that it seems to be extolling precisely the opposite of a "prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with", and in several cases is actually quite partial to said foreign autocrats?
The world has gone to complete sh1t during the Biden years and there’s a pretty fair case to be made it’s primarily been driven by the world’s autocrats sensing weakness. Far Right Meloni has done a better job of standing up to Putin than certainly Merkel and arguably Sholz. The world is not as simple as you make it out to be.
The far right is no more homogenous than the far left, which also has a number of unreconstructed tankies in its ranks. And Meloni (and PiS in Poland) are closer to traditionalist authoritarian right - Francoists - than the particular form of trolling as politics that is being illustrated daily by simply looking down a list of people Elon Musk is retweeting or Tucker Carlson is interviewing (and in many cases Putin's trolls are amplifying).
Extraordinary that Tiddy Tom is not level pegging with Stride. Was never going to be popular with members and now we know the MPs don't like him either.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
For me it's not so much a case of whether he's a "right winger" but rather whether he's a "winner"
I just can't see him winning a general election but LOTO is one of those roles politicians can grow into. It was very hard to see Keith ever winning an election when he became LOTO in 2020 and then there's the example of the Blessed Margaret who certainly didn't look much like a PM in waiting in 1975.
But for every Maggie and Keir there many more Kinnocks, Hague's and Corbyns... LOTO's who always looked like losers and that is indeed what they were...
SKS is just the latest proof of the old adage that oppositions don't win general elections, governments lose them...
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Don't disagree, but the appeal of ex-post office minister, Ed-the-clown Davey is a complete mystery to me also.
There is no appeal - he was running against a hated Tory party and a Labour leader who couldn't top 33% in that context. Despite successfully running a distraction campaign to make people forget his role in the post office scandal the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom given the context.
Yes - only 72 MPs.
We're talking about appeal, not how it is converted in to MPs.
Despite dreadful alternatives, he got considerably fewer people to vote Lib Dem than the great Jo Swinson managed.
Under FPTP there is no point in trying maximise national vote count - look at Reform and the Greens to see why. LDs appealed in 72 constituencies and got higher average majorities than either Tories or Labour.
To say "the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom" is weird.
OK, so he would be hugely attractive, but wisely choose to hide that to focus on seats. Fair enough.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
Everybody loves a (Cambridge educated) lawyer.
I think that he’s gone from One Nation to radicalised Brexiteer with no intervening period and has the zeal of a convert is what is winning it for him.
So Robert Jenrick is a UKer version of JD Vance?
He’s more the Tory Richard Burgon.
Even Richard Burgon would have won the general election this year
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
As you know, I find terms like "left" and "right" ridiculous in this day and age but still we throw them around like confetti in lieu of anything else I suppose.
The Devil is as usual in the detail - I'm not sure there's as much desire for a smaller state/lower taxes as some think or there was 20 or 30 years ago. People quite like their public services.
"Productivity Gains" - again, just words. If we're talking about investing in technology, that needs money and time. AI will help eventually.
As for defence, we spend £66 billion now, what do people think we should spend - £100 billion, £200 billion, and on what, tanks, troops, helmets, drone, cyber defences? I'm not sure the "threat" is well defined - it's not the same threat as in the 1980s.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
Yes, if this was 1975 PB woke centrist dads on here would have been going 'ooh look at that awful nasty rightwing Thatcher woman. How on earth the Tories could have chosen her over nice centrist Willie Whitelaw is beyond me. Bring back Heath I say! Wilson and Callaghan are set for a landslide in 1979 now, nailed on!'
"Why did the Grenfell Inquiry take so long to tell us what we know already? Ross Clark
Predictably enough, and not unreasonably, the 1700-page final report into the Grenfell disaster apportions the bulk of the blame with the companies who manufactured and sold the flammable cladding and insulation.
What has emerged from this inquiry is astonishing: you hardly need a degree in engineering to work out that it is not a good idea to wrap a tower block in combustible material. That manufacturers seem to have ‘deliberately concealed’ the risk that their products posed is something which is almost inevitably going to be picked over further in the courts. Why it has taken seven years to produce this report – thereby holding up possible criminal cases – is itself a scandal. As ever with our drawn-out public inquiries many of the guilty parties will no longer be around to face the music, at least not in the roles they held."
More importantly, for only the fifth time in my career I have been given a hotel room with its own snooker table
This is, however, the first one overlooking Lake Skardar
That is actually a pool table....
It's a good job that @Leon is more than used to playing with himself...
I’m in an enormous suite. With stupendous views and a balcony for mass dining
I do sometimes think all this is wasted on one solitary knappers gazette travel scribe
On the upside I have just had a few raikas with the owners grandson and he told me how his great grandfather only came to own this winery/hotel (and before that the land) because he was summoned home by the Montenegrin king from the USA to fight the ottomans and after the great Balkan war victory of 1912 this fertile lakeside territory was parcelled out to the triumphant Montenegrin officers. There was plenty to go round as so many Montenegrins died
Very cool story. They still have the seized Ottoman weapons on the wall and they still dislike Turks - as does everyone around here. They haven’t forgotten the Collection
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
Isn't one of the main concerns about the far right, particularly in the US, that it seems to be extolling precisely the opposite of a "prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with", and in several cases is actually quite partial to said foreign autocrats?
The world has gone to complete sh1t during the Biden years and there’s a pretty fair case to be made it’s primarily been driven by the world’s autocrats sensing weakness. Far Right Meloni has done a better job of standing up to Putin than certainly Merkel and arguably Sholz. The world is not as simple as you make it out to be.
The far right is no more homogenous than the far left, which also has a number of unreconstructed tankies in its ranks. And Meloni (and PiS in Poland) are closer to traditionalist authoritarian right - Francoists - than the particular form of trolling as politics that is being illustrated daily by simply looking down a list of people Elon Musk is retweeting or Tucker Carlson is interviewing (and in many cases Putin's trolls are amplifying).
I hope you are in the former camp.
Did you miss the bit where I said all I wanted was low tax/spend, productivity growth and something, anything of a defence capability? You’ve proven my point that ridiculously many now characterise this as “hard right” when really not so long ago, this was the position of all but a weird fringe of the Labour Party.
The modern “centre” has completely effed up the world, with its appalling debasement of fiat, anti growth fiscal policies, unwillingness to maintain pride in western values or the strength to defend them from nefarious actors.
These used to be common values across the political spectrum but suddenly they’re viewed as embarrassing or almost fringe. Strange times.
They're all weak - but then Starmer is terrible and has an appallingly untalented cabinet. And they only have to beat the opposition, not the love child of Thatcher and Abe Lincoln
I'm not sure I care if Jenrick can build a good team and do the job.
He needs to not be solely obsessed with Rwanda/boats, though; that's important, and a big issue, but there will be huge opportunities to regain lots of DNV Tories and LD switchers on quasi-socialist economics.
I'd keep Hunt as Shadow Chancellor and go hard on Labour on tax & spend.
I think while in government the Rwanda policy only served to highlight how badly the government were failing on reducing those arrivals. Now that the Tories aren't in government they will need to work the boats angle hard to drive Labour voters to Reform and Reform voters back to the Tories. I think they also need an answer on winning back Lib Dem voters in the south of England but I'm not sure Jenrick would be well placed for it.
Are there really tonnes of Boris Johnson 'Get Brexit Done' 2019 fans who've gone over to the Lib Dems? It has never struck me as likely. Surely Lib Dem growth is mostly tactical Labour voters. And why go after them, when they represent a tiny number - Lib Dems underpolled Reform.
Because they hold 72 seats, most (but not all) of which had pretty low Reform totals. The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
Yes, if this was 1975 PB woke centrist dads on here would have been going 'ooh look at that awful nasty rightwing Thatcher woman. How on earth the Tories could have chosen her over nice centrist Willie Whitelaw is beyond me. Bring back Heath I say! Wilson and Callaghan are set for a landslide in 1979 now, nailed on!'
Prediction: whoever wins the Tory leadership they will be attacked for being the worst/most useless one.
The key number is 41. That's what you need to be confirmed in the final two. What's is Cleverly's USP?
He is the John Major figure who rises without trace as the compromise candidate. May not get past the membership though. They would want some one a bit more nasty.
"Why did the Grenfell Inquiry take so long to tell us what we know already? Ross Clark
Predictably enough, and not unreasonably, the 1700-page final report into the Grenfell disaster apportions the bulk of the blame with the companies who manufactured and sold the flammable cladding and insulation.
What has emerged from this inquiry is astonishing: you hardly need a degree in engineering to work out that it is not a good idea to wrap a tower block in combustible material. That manufacturers seem to have ‘deliberately concealed’ the risk that their products posed is something which is almost inevitably going to be picked over further in the courts. Why it has taken seven years to produce this report – thereby holding up possible criminal cases – is itself a scandal. As ever with our drawn-out public inquiries many of the guilty parties will no longer be around to face the music, at least not in the roles they held."
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
Yes, if this was 1975 PB woke centrist dads on here would have been going 'ooh look at that awful nasty rightwing Thatcher woman. How on earth the Tories could have chosen her over nice centrist Willie Whitelaw is beyond me. Bring back Heath I say! Wilson and Callaghan are set for a landslide in 1979 now, nailed on!'
In all honesty, Whitelaw would likely have won in 1979. I'm not convinced Thatcher had any more influence in the collapse of the Callaghan Government than Starmer had in the collapse of the Truss or Sunak Governments.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
Yes, if this was 1975 PB woke centrist dads on here would have been going 'ooh look at that awful nasty rightwing Thatcher woman. How on earth the Tories could have chosen her over nice centrist Willie Whitelaw is beyond me. Bring back Heath I say! Wilson and Callaghan are set for a landslide in 1979 now, nailed on!'
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
Perhaps it will be another example of the ludicrousness of allowing loony members to have the final say on whom should be the MPs' boss.
Isn't it far more ridiculous to have a group of like-minded individuals form a political party, and use their own money, time and shoe leather to elect a slate of MPs and a leader who don't agree with them on anything and will pretty much do whatever the f*** they like once elected, mainly what all the other parties were doing anyway?
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
Isn't one of the main concerns about the far right, particularly in the US, that it seems to be extolling precisely the opposite of a "prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with", and in several cases is actually quite partial to said foreign autocrats?
The world has gone to complete sh1t during the Biden years and there’s a pretty fair case to be made it’s primarily been driven by the world’s autocrats sensing weakness. Far Right Meloni has done a better job of standing up to Putin than certainly Merkel and arguably Sholz. The world is not as simple as you make it out to be.
The far right is no more homogenous than the far left, which also has a number of unreconstructed tankies in its ranks. And Meloni (and PiS in Poland) are closer to traditionalist authoritarian right - Francoists - than the particular form of trolling as politics that is being illustrated daily by simply looking down a list of people Elon Musk is retweeting or Tucker Carlson is interviewing (and in many cases Putin's trolls are amplifying).
I hope you are in the former camp.
The modern “centre” has completely effed up the world, with its appalling debasement of fiat, anti growth fiscal policies, unwillingness to maintain pride in western values or the strength to defend them from nefarious actors.
Weren't you just saying the world is not as simple as I make it out to be? Yet you just posted a reply as sweeping and simplified as it's possible to be.
Likewise the original comment that "It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with" is just polemic. This is what culture war does - takes the most extreme views to be found on the other side of the argument, then treats them as the mainstream opinion of ones opponents and condemns them as such.
We all know the real far right when we see them. One of them was on the air yesterday telling us the real villain of WW2 was Churchill, and the Nazis accidentally killed a few million Jews.
If we had to cast a generic Tory with no interesting characteristic, the casting agency would pick him, somehow managing to be both bland and off putting. A curious combo. Ed Daveys ideal choice.
I guess he’s ambitious? What’s the appeal?
The MPs might like him, I doubt the membership will.
As for the voters...
A truly terrible night for the Conservatives. They are simply continuing to talk amongst themselves, with no recognition that they seem to be stumbling towards oblivion.
Blah, blah, blah. This is NOT 1997. Starmer is NOT Blair but a dull Brownite already whacking up tax to fund union backed public sector workers and cutting pensioners fuel allowance and ending right to buy, hitting private schools with VAT and completely incapable of stopping the boats.
Jenrick is perfectly reasonable and can capitalise on the unpopularity this awful government already has. He also does not have the negatives Priti Patel had who has now gone out (and I admired Priti's toughness but she is not popular with swing voters)
Surprise surprise, PB's centrist brigade fiercely object to a political leader who doesn't conform to their world view, even as leader of a right wing party.
Quite. The woke centrist dads don’t like right wingers. Amazing
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
Yes, if this was 1975 PB woke centrist dads on here would have been going 'ooh look at that awful nasty rightwing Thatcher woman. How on earth the Tories could have chosen her over nice centrist Willie Whitelaw is beyond me. Bring back Heath I say! Wilson and Callaghan are set for a landslide in 1979 now, nailed on!'
You’re a Corbyn fan in 2015.
Corbyn was always outside the Overton window. Given Reform's showing in July, I'm not sure the same can be definitively said for any of the Tory contenders.
The key number is 41. That's what you need to be confirmed in the final two. What's is Cleverly's USP?
He is the John Major figure who rises without trace as the compromise candidate. May not get past the membership though. They would want some one a bit more nasty.
Cleverly is the only candidate I would attach the moniker "avuncular" to. That can take you places. They probably don't need avuncularity right now, but I think they could do worse.
Comments
I think you can guess my personal views don't align as closely as they do with some other candidates.
It’s SO FUCKING BORING
https://x.com/timesradio/status/1831309657266135143
And she is self aware. Her spontaneous speech on growing up as a young Asian woman was one of the best off the cuff commons speeches I can remember. Powerful and eloquent
Come back Rishi. All is forgiven.
Will be fun post Conference to see if things have changed or Jenrick needs to play games trying to get an alternative opponent.
If we go back to the 2019 contest, in the first round there were ten (10) candidates and Boris Johnson had the support of 36.4% of his colleagues.
This time the leading candidate, of six, is Jenrick with a mere 23.7%.
I can't be bothered to bet on it, or care much who wins.
Have a good evening.
I just can't see him winning a general election but LOTO is one of those roles politicians can grow into. It was very hard to see Keith ever winning an election when he became LOTO in 2020 and then there's the example of the Blessed Margaret who certainly didn't look much like a PM in waiting in 1975.
But for every Maggie and Keir there many more Kinnocks, Hague's and Corbyns... LOTO's who always looked like losers and that is indeed what they were...
I don't rate Jenrick, but I can see the appeal of both Patel and Badenoch on the right of the party, even though I'd never* vote for any of the three.
*Badenoch less of a known quantity - I wouldn't completely rule it out, although she'd have to substantially surprise on the upside - versus e.g. Corbyn it could be a real possibility. Patel I'd never vote for due to views on capital punishment. Jenrick I just find repellent and dodgy as hell.
Jenrick will be fine - the Government will have swathes of seats to lose at the next election, so as long as he holds the party together, he'll improve on Sunak's result handsomely. Governing with Reform support isn't out of the question either.
https://x.com/skynews/status/1831367604147253433
Labour obvs won a huge majority coz of the split
right. On examination it is startling how badly Starmer did as against expectations and polls. Even in his own constituency
·
3m
BREAKING: Oasis have announced two extra Wembley Stadium shows after their tour sold out over the weekend
But she strikes me as deeeeeply ambitious and she might have been able to carry it off. She has that steely self confidence
And, again, the Tories are facing Starmer, not peak season Blair
If a right wing Tory leader aligned with the views of the membership is such a ludicrously off-putting concept, let it happen, let it put people off, and let the Tories be a Lib Dem size party - at least people will know what they're voting for. But personally, I don't think those demanding a centrist Tory Party are that confident in the unelectability of the right.
If they select Jenrick it will be because "dodgy and repellent" is what they like.
Also note the rise of the weird hard left in Germany and France
Despite dreadful alternatives, he got considerably fewer people to vote Lib Dem than the great Jo Swinson managed.
I haven’t really tuned in but is there a candidate that will satisfy my “far right” craving?
This is, however, the first one overlooking Lake Skardar
But it DOES overlook Lake Skardar
They loved Boris in 2021.
To say "the Lib Dem result was really pretty rock bottom" is weird.
Badenoch 3.05
Cleverly 7.8
Tugendhat 11.5
Stride 70
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.205526560
I hope you are in the former camp.
Also loved the local sellers selling their own spirits. Very strong and very very nice.
JENRICK
The Devil is as usual in the detail - I'm not sure there's as much desire for a smaller state/lower taxes as some think or there was 20 or 30 years ago. People quite like their public services.
"Productivity Gains" - again, just words. If we're talking about investing in technology, that needs money and time. AI will help eventually.
As for defence, we spend £66 billion now, what do people think we should spend - £100 billion, £200 billion, and on what, tanks, troops, helmets, drone, cyber defences? I'm not sure the "threat" is well defined - it's not the same threat as in the 1980s.
Ross Clark
Predictably enough, and not unreasonably, the 1700-page final report into the Grenfell disaster apportions the bulk of the blame with the companies who manufactured and sold the flammable cladding and insulation.
What has emerged from this inquiry is astonishing: you hardly need a degree in engineering to work out that it is not a good idea to wrap a tower block in combustible material. That manufacturers seem to have ‘deliberately concealed’ the risk that their products posed is something which is almost inevitably going to be picked over further in the courts. Why it has taken seven years to produce this report – thereby holding up possible criminal cases – is itself a scandal. As ever with our drawn-out public inquiries many of the guilty parties will no longer be around to face the music, at least not in the roles they held."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-did-the-grenfell-inquiry-take-so-long-to-tell-us-what-we-already-knew/
I do sometimes think all this is wasted on one solitary knappers gazette travel scribe
On the upside I have just had a few raikas with the owners grandson and he told me how his great grandfather only came to own this winery/hotel (and before that the land) because he was summoned home by the Montenegrin king from the USA to fight the ottomans and after the great Balkan war victory of 1912 this fertile lakeside territory was parcelled out to the triumphant Montenegrin officers. There was plenty to go round as so many Montenegrins died
Very cool story. They still have the seized Ottoman weapons on the wall and they still dislike Turks - as does everyone around here. They haven’t forgotten the Collection
The modern “centre” has completely effed up the world, with its appalling debasement of fiat, anti growth fiscal policies, unwillingness to maintain pride in western values or the strength to defend them from nefarious actors.
These used to be common values across the political spectrum but suddenly they’re viewed as embarrassing or almost fringe. Strange times.
The Tories will inevitably win a lot of those back in due course. I don't see Reform displacing them as the main challengers in blue wall seats. But the Tories will certainly need to look competent for a bit first.
As to what they should do now. I think they should have a bit of fun. It's too early to start trying to elect a leader who looks like a PM in waiting. Have a go with Kemi Badenoch. She will entertain the base, give Labour some discomfort in PMQs, and keep the party in the headlines. I find her unappealing and antagonistic as a politician but that needn't matter yet, and I'm not the target audience.
What Conservatives can embrace now, which we've already seen on PB, is the joy of being in opposition. You can no longer be blamed for everything, that's someone else's problem. You can focus on policies and platforms that you really believe in, and you can really lay into the new government. It's a sort of release. It can be electorally disastrous - see both Corbyn and Swinson in 2019 - but quite cathartic. I would say they should lean into that for now. Do the whole triangulation and hugging of huskies later if they need to.
Ignore.
Likewise the original comment that "It has become “far right” to want a smaller state/lower tax burden, strive for economic growth through productivity gains rather than imported headcount, and to have a prickly enough defence capability that foreign autocrats think twice about messing with" is just polemic. This is what culture war does - takes the most extreme views to be found on the other side of the argument, then treats them as the mainstream opinion of ones opponents and condemns them as such.
We all know the real far right when we see them. One of them was on the air yesterday telling us the real villain of WW2 was Churchill, and the Nazis accidentally killed a few million Jews.
@CBCNews
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is terminating the supply-and-confidence agreement his party made with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberal government. https://cbc.ca/news/politics/jagmeet-singh-ndp-ending-agreement-1.7312910 "
https://x.com/CBCNews/status/1831374140814848137
https://x.com/theJagmeetSingh/status/1831375557507850740
Maybe that's what's needed but boy oh boy does he have a few murky areas for Labour to go after.