Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Antifrank: How the Conservatives will lose their hegemony

SystemSystem Posts: 12,220
edited October 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Antifrank: How the Conservatives will lose their hegemony

In 1897, the British Empire was at its zenith.  “The sun never sets on the British Empire” was a literal truth.  It was the world’s dominant military power and gloried in its success as leader of the industrial revolution.  Its puissance seemed unchallengeable.  It was against that background that Rudyard Kipling composed a poem for Queen Victoria’s diamond jubilee.  This is i…

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
    What a very long-winded pile of........ wishful thinking.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,685
    An excellent and well written piece. Thanks antifrank
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,685
    And greetings from Sydney :-)
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    A good stab Antifrank but there were similar articles on Conhome in 1998 - nothing lasts forever but 13 years is a long time.

    The indyref 2 issue is a red herring however - that's done until 2035.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,515
    Thanks Antifrank; a well thought-out article as usual.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,685
    Time zone funnies. I've just finished a meeting here in Sydney, and am flying to LA, where I will have a meeting which started half an hour ago...
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071

    Thanks Antifrank; a well thought-out article as usual.

    Do not mistake 'long' for 'well thought out'. There's a lot of lefty straw-grasping in that post.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,515
    GeoffM said:

    Thanks Antifrank; a well thought-out article as usual.

    Do not mistake 'long' for 'well thought out'. There's a lot of lefty straw-grasping in that post.
    I'm not sure it's 'lefty straw-grasping'.

    In fact, it's exactly the sort of thinking the government should be doing if they want to win in 2020, if only so they can plan ahead to mitigate these negatives by policy changes or spin.

    Forewarned is forearmed.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,175

    GeoffM said:

    Thanks Antifrank; a well thought-out article as usual.

    Do not mistake 'long' for 'well thought out'. There's a lot of lefty straw-grasping in that post.
    I'm not sure it's 'lefty straw-grasping'.

    In fact, it's exactly the sort of thinking the government should be doing if they want to win in 2020, if only so they can plan ahead to mitigate these negatives by policy changes or spin.

    Forewarned is forearmed.
    It is relentlessly full of extreme negative scenarion for the Tories whils ignoring most of the alternatives It also has precious little evidence to support the assertions - like the polling with regard to benefits for example. Hence the 'wishful thinking'. It also includes the latest lefty strateg yof hoping for a recession to go alongside wanting a bad winter for the NHS - all pretty desperate stuff - the morning after 21MPs rebel and 5 shadow cabinet members are 'allowed' to miss a vote!
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223
    "I anticipate that he will secure a modest (but not embarrassingly modest) set of concessions for Britain from the rest of the EU."

    We need a predictions page, so that when we find out what the PM has got we can argue about what constitutes "embarrassingly modest"!
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    rcs1000 said:

    And greetings from Sydney :-)

    Who is Sydney Smithson? ....

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040
    Excellent piece with much of which I agree. If Labour were not so busy committing hari kari they really ought to be favourites by the next election by which time the Tories will have had a good run. Blair and Thatcher/Major both got another turn but they both started from a much higher base of support and could afford to lose more seats.

    For me, even more that the EU, the next recession is key. For the last 3-4 years of the last Parliament and so far in this one the economic news has been consistently good with record employment, very low inflation, rising living standards for the majority and a falling deficit. This has given the Tories in general and Osborne in particular a lustre of competence and capability which may not be sufficient for victory but is a very good start.

    What does Osborne do when the sun is no longer shining and he has still not managed to rebalance the economy by eliminating the deficit which starts to creep up again? Yesterday evening must have been enormous fun for him (although an overly smug looking Osborne is not the most attractive look) but that is when he will start earning his corn.

    Of course, luckily for politicians, we do not judge our leaders in absolute terms but in relative terms. At an election the country faces a choice. At the moment Labour seem determined not to be a part of that choice and the sane part of the party is not willing to do anything about it, hence the best part of 200 trudging through the lobbies in support of that guff from McConnell. The best hope for a continuing Tory hegemony is that, as in 2015, there will not be a credible choice for those who simply want competent government.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,515
    felix said:

    GeoffM said:

    Thanks Antifrank; a well thought-out article as usual.

    Do not mistake 'long' for 'well thought out'. There's a lot of lefty straw-grasping in that post.
    I'm not sure it's 'lefty straw-grasping'.

    In fact, it's exactly the sort of thinking the government should be doing if they want to win in 2020, if only so they can plan ahead to mitigate these negatives by policy changes or spin.

    Forewarned is forearmed.
    It is relentlessly full of extreme negative scenarion for the Tories whils ignoring most of the alternatives It also has precious little evidence to support the assertions - like the polling with regard to benefits for example. Hence the 'wishful thinking'. It also includes the latest lefty strateg yof hoping for a recession to go alongside wanting a bad winter for the NHS - all pretty desperate stuff - the morning after 21MPs rebel and 5 shadow cabinet members are 'allowed' to miss a vote!
    It's pretty much a worst-case scenario. But the government should be considering how to counter attacks on such issues that may come in the next few years when (if) Labour pulls itself together.

    A little subtle change in positioning or spin now could save a few seats in 2020 at little cost.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842
    1/2

    A well-argued case from antifrank, though not one I agree with particularly because of the following line:

    "The Conservatives’ current hegemony is not produced from their own innate strength but from the extraordinary weakness of their opponents"

    This is true. It is also unlikely to stop being true any time soon - unless the Conservatives do develop further innate strength (we should remember that the Tories polled more votes in the 2015GE than any party at any election this century; it is not *that* weak a mandate). But the main point is that Labour will remain divided whether or not Corbyn falls, the Lib Dems will remain with a handful of seats, the SNP will remain maxed out, UKIP will remain a fringe party under Farage (and will lose some relevance after the Eurovote whichever way it goes unless, perhaps, it's a very narrow Remain). The anti-Tory coalition is not simply dispersed; it does not exist in any meaningful sense.

    Consequently, the potency of all the other challenges declines relatively.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842
    2/2

    The EuroRef will be a major challenge for the party, one which divides Westminster from the voluntary party to a large extent (we've focussed on Labour's activist/MP division but this is the Blue equivalent). It is not, however, insurmountable. We got a strong hint from Juncker yesterday that he gets the seriousness of the problem. Merkel's position is much weaker now than it was six months ago. A deal is doable because the EU seems to have belatedly woken up to the need for one. And a done deal is saleable.

    As for cuts, yes, there'll be lots more squealing but we saw how far shouting 'Bedroom Tax' got last time. The Child Tax Credit cuts were not well handled and caused problems at the time but were largely forgotten three or four years on, not least because personal circumstances change: those affected at the time were not necessarily even potential beneficiaries by the election, while some of those who were didn't feel the cut because they didn't qualify when it was made.

    A ScotRef2 will not be particularly damaging at all. There's probably a sense of fatalism now; that if it happens then there's little that could reasonably be done to stop it, unless HMG conducts itself particularly cack-handedly. But if it is a Yes then the Tories gain an (almost) instant 55-seat boost to their majority and if it's another No then it's no change.

    While a recession could be a positive benefit for the Tories, providing that the cause is external. Even in 1992, when the cause was in large part internal, the Conservatives' better rating on the economy proved critical. Labour too recovered *after* the Great Recession hit when Brown started looking not quite so incompetent. Against Corbyn, at worst the Tories could bank on cling-to-nurse up against Corbyn and McDonnell. We are not in Greek places yet. Indeed, if a recession did hit then it would give further credibility to the case for the cuts beforehand, to get the public finances into some kind of order.

    All in all, yes, there are problems ahead. There always are. Antifrank could easily have added a fifth: 'events, dear boy'. Stuff happens: unknown unknowns and all that. But the overall lie of that land is more favourable now to the Tories than it was six months ago and will be more so once the boundary review is embedded.

    If the Tory hegemony is to fall, it will - as in the 1990s - be at least as much down to self-destruction as opposition ability. Though on that latter point, Corbyn is no Blair.
  • Thanks Antifrank - your articles are a joy to read.. always thought provoking..

    BUT one point: why should not a UK Party not have a LONG period of Government? Say 30 years.. After all, it's possible - if there has been a sea change in attitudes. And the Party renews itself every so often.

    Suppose there is a recession and a number of countries with extreme debt/deficit positions start having to make cuts in a hurry - cuts that make these ones look minor. And the UK is relatively untouched. Surely that would vindicate teh Tories?

    Who knows? I don't . But suppose there is a recession. Will a new Labour Government cope with a bad one? Not very well given the current thinking I would suggest...

    And Labour could well split over the In/Out EC vote... and UKIP under a new Leader change to become more appealing...

  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,141
    "The Conservatives secured that small majority and vote share by drawing reluctant Lib Dem and UKIP supporters in England and Wales to their ranks to prevent an unpopular Labour leader taking office with the doubtful support of an alien SNP."

    Good thing that in 2020 there will be a hugely popular Labour leader with the firm support of an England-loving SNP then.

    I agree the Government is facing numerous trials, though I don't think these are worse than any other government's, and I agree nothing lasts forever, but you've missed out most of the huge factors in their favour. Boundary changes, an English society moving further to the right in many ways, the utter lack of talent on Labour's front bench and the pernennial hopelessness of UKIP at general elections are all massive advantages.

    And if the country votes for Brexit it could work in the Conservatives' favour as the only mainstream party with significant opposition to the EU, while Scotland leaving would result in a massive block of opposition MPs leaving Westminster forever. Any recession, as long as it was not caused by governmental incompetence, could swing popular opinion further against the welfare state, especially if the opposition has no plausible narrative. And the cuts will mostly be felt by people - public sector workers and the lower classes - who wouldn't vote Conservative anyway.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Very well written piece.

    I agree that the current opposition is dreadful but that needn't be a problem, the EU referendum will be enough to weaken the conservatives without any interference from anybody else.

    The condescending gloating from Tories on here has been unedifying but we all know what eventually happens in that scenario.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    GeoffM said:

    Thanks Antifrank; a well thought-out article as usual.

    Do not mistake 'long' for 'well thought out'. There's a lot of lefty straw-grasping in that post.
    I'm not sure it's 'lefty straw-grasping'.

    In fact, it's exactly the sort of thinking the government should be doing if they want to win in 2020, if only so they can plan ahead to mitigate these negatives by policy changes or spin.

    Forewarned is forearmed.
    Budget deficit vs cuts. Both bad things - but voters do want their cake and eat it too.

    Recession though does consolidate support around the percieved competent party and that is very unlikely to be Labour.

    The risk for the Tories is Euroref-suicide. To have another party split and ungovernable would mean no party electable in England, just a political wasteland.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,141
    rcs1000 said:

    Time zone funnies. I've just finished a meeting here in Sydney, and am flying to LA, where I will have a meeting which started half an hour ago...

    My condolences. Jetlag is terrible and long haul flights are shit, even if you're in business class. I'll never understand why so many people (mostly those who don't fly regularly) think of air travel as glamorous and sexy. Going to exotic foreign places is, but getting there is pretty horrific.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    I also wonder if the tagline on this thread had been "Don Brind" whether the comments would have been so complimentary ;)
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    edited October 2015
    http://new.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/centralising-illiberal-catastrophic-the-snps-one-party-state/

    "But what is far less known south of the border is that the SNP have been in government since 2007 — and that its rule has been a disaster."

    "If you want to know what England would be like under Jeremy Corbyn, the answer would not be far off what the SNP is doing to Scotland."
  • One of the best pieces I've ever read on PB. Top notch stuff. The tax credit cuts look particularly problematic.

    However, boundary reform, FPTP and Corbyn Labour currently give the Tories a free pass. For as long as the latter endures, the first two will enable the Tories to get through any storm relatively unscathed.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,825
    edited October 2015
    Between 1915 and 1945 the Conservatives (or Unionists, as they were officially known from 1912 to 1925) were in power either alone or as part of a coalition, for all but three years. Only in 1930 was there a calendar year when they were not in government for at least some part of it.

    Only twice - in 1924 and 1931 - did they get over 45% of the popular vote. At other times, they won largely on a split vote, helped by boundaries that strongly favoured them by tending to emphasise suburban areas where their vote was strongest, and chronic under-representation for inner-city industrial areas (although, remarkable though it may seem now, as late as the 1950s the Conservatives had pockets of real strength in many such areas, notably Sheffield, Glasgow, Liverpool and Birmingham). As a result, even in the disastrous tarriff election of 1923, by far their worst performance, they still got 258 seats and were the largest party by 67 seats.

    Something similar could happen now. Labour has no credibility, the Liberal Democrats have no presence, the SNP have only a very narrow voter base. It is hard to see where the challenge could come from. After one month of Corbyn, while Cameron and Osborne are carefully holding back from the fray, Labour is already badly split and a national laughing stock, with a policy position so confused, incoherent and to use Bradshaw's word, 'shambolic' that it is tempting to resurrect the old Soviet joke: 'Can a snake break its back? It would if it tried to crawl along the general line of the party.' Never mind five years, another 12-18 months of this coupled with the horrible blow about to be dealt to its finances by trade union reforms and Labour could well be finished as a political entity. Bankruptcy and a mass exodus of MPs are not unrealistic scenarios even if they are not probable.

    Where I agree entirely with antifrank is that the Conservatives would be extremely wise to be very careful. The EU referendum will almost certainly get nasty - which could leave them split as well. The economy, to my inexpert eye, also looks ripe for some unpleasant shocks (Redcar could easily be a straw in the wind). If the price of fuel rises suddenly (one bombing in Tehran by IS would do it) life would become difficult.

    But as long as they physically hold together, the weakness of the opposition means it is hard to see where a meaningful challenge could come from. Which is why the idea of them being still in office in 2035, while horrifying to anyone who values good government (no party could hope to rule well for that length of time) is not something we should rule out.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited October 2015
    When Dave goes its goona get a lot more difficult for the Tories Noone of his caibre is waiting to take over. It rather depends when and if Labour boot out the loons.. The loons will still be there if not with their hands on the tiller.... there will be much infighting for the soul of the Labour Party which will help the Tories.
    My thinking is a new centrist party joining with the LD's
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994
    DavidL said:


    Of course, luckily for politicians, we do not judge our leaders in absolute terms but in relative terms. At an election the country faces a choice. At the moment Labour seem determined not to be a part of that choice and the sane part of the party is not willing to do anything about it, hence the best part of 200 trudging through the lobbies in support of that guff from McConnell. there will not be a credible choice for those who simply want competent government.

    McDonnell's position was utter nonsense. Many of those 200 are smart enough to know that, smart enough to think "WTF am I doing???" Yet they still ambled through the lobbies like a herd of Fresians for their regular encounter with the milking machines. And yet these 200 are somehow supposed to rebel and kick over Farmer Corbyn. It's not going to happen, is it? They have developed a bad case of Bovine Socialist Encephalopathy.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,743
    edited October 2015
    Fishing said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Time zone funnies. I've just finished a meeting here in Sydney, and am flying to LA, where I will have a meeting which started half an hour ago...

    My condolences. Jetlag is terrible and long haul flights are shit, even if you're in business class. I'll never understand why so many people (mostly those who don't fly regularly) think of air travel as glamorous and sexy. Going to exotic foreign places is, but getting there is pretty horrific.
    Going to exotic places maybe glamorous and sexy but probably not if one is going to work. Both my sons travel all over the place for work, and have done for many years, but son 1 has only taken his family with him once, to the Gulf in school holidays.
    Son 2 has only, I think, taken his family with him once, when the need for a trip to Australia coincided with school holidays. He lives in Bangkok, so that trip’s less off a trek than it would be from UK.
    Both of them get home asap.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,515

    When Dave goes its goona get a lot more difficult for the Tories Noone of his caibre is waiting to take over. It rather depends when and if Labour boot out the loons.. The loons will still be there if not with their hands on the tiller.... there will be much infighting for the soul of the Labour Party which will help the Tories.
    My thinking is a new centrist party joining with the LD's

    Cameron was elected in Witney in 2001, and became leader of the party in 2005.

    It's perfectly possible that one of the 2010 (or even at a push 2015) intake could be the next leader. Personally I think Rory Stewart would be a good bet. He's got a CV that very few politicians can match.

    My only issue with him is that helping run two Iraqi provinces might not be enough experience to handle the infighting within the Conservative party!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,743

    When Dave goes its goona get a lot more difficult for the Tories Noone of his caibre is waiting to take over. It rather depends when and if Labour boot out the loons.. The loons will still be there if not with their hands on the tiller.... there will be much infighting for the soul of the Labour Party which will help the Tories.
    My thinking is a new centrist party joining with the LD's

    Last line. Been there, done that. History repeats itself, OK, but next time is farce.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    I love to travel...hate the journey..
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Good article.

    Problem 1 starts the day after the EU referendum. If REMAIN wins narrowly, do the Tory LEAVERS just meekly accept it or they will start talking about a second referendum.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    DavidL said:


    Of course, luckily for politicians, we do not judge our leaders in absolute terms but in relative terms. At an election the country faces a choice. At the moment Labour seem determined not to be a part of that choice and the sane part of the party is not willing to do anything about it, hence the best part of 200 trudging through the lobbies in support of that guff from McConnell. there will not be a credible choice for those who simply want competent government.

    McDonnell's position was utter nonsense. Many of those 200 are smart enough to know that, smart enough to think "WTF am I doing???" Yet they still ambled through the lobbies like a herd of Fresians for their regular encounter with the milking machines. And yet these 200 are somehow supposed to rebel and kick over Farmer Corbyn. It's not going to happen, is it? They have developed a bad case of Bovine Socialist Encephalopathy.

    Well they have form. This is largely the same bunch who backed Gordon who was clearly...unwell and Ed who was, well, not very good. People used to say that loyalty was the Tories' secret weapon. If it was they mislaid it at some point but for Labour it seems to be a weapon constantly aimed at their own feet.

    Labour need to wake up and ask their Scottish back benchers how this ends. It won't take long.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,515
    Following on from my previous post, it'd be good to see figures for how long party leaders had been in parliament before becoming party leader.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,685
    @ydoether

    A bombing in Tehran by ISIS isn't going to affect the price of oil, as Iran (currently) doesn't export much oil to the rest of the world.

    Bombs in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait or ISIS getting down South in Iraq near the Rumallah oil fields might have an affect, mind.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842
    surbiton said:

    Good article.

    Problem 1 starts the day after the EU referendum. If REMAIN wins narrowly, do the Tory LEAVERS just meekly accept it or they will start talking about a second referendum.

    But it's *only* a problem if it's a narrow Remain.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,825

    Following on from my previous post, it'd be good to see figures for how long party leaders had been in parliament before becoming party leader.

    Depends on how you define 'in parliament'. I think the record for the shortest time before elevation was William Pitt the Younger, who was PM within three years of entering parliament. But arguably Alec Douglas-Home is the most remarkable, as he remains the only Prime Minister who for part of his premiership was not a member of either House, having renounced his peerage upon appointment before winning the vacated seat of Perth and Kinross to enter the Commons again.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842

    I love to travel...hate the journey..

    It helps if you can make the journey part of the travelling.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I love to travel...hate the journey..

    Air travel sucks. May I commend rail and sea? Getting there is half the fun. See "the man in seat 61" for more details.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040
    edited October 2015
    Moeen just got his first boundary in the 28th over of the innings. Nothing like having a free flowing striker of the ball up front is there?

    I have come to the view that life could be worse. Like being a fast bowler in Abu Dhabi on this pitch. Absolute torture for both sides' bowlers.

    And on that happier note it is off to work.
  • not to mention losing a leader by 2020 who polls as more popular than his party.

    how labour would wish for one of those....

    more seriously, how long to a Burgon thread!!

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Related to the second point, and far more substantially argued than my post, is this from Election Data:

    http://elxn-data.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/the-quiet-ones.html

    It is a must-read.

    The most legitimate counter-argument to both is to raise the question where the opposition is going to come from. That, however, is a very dangerous question for the Conservatives. Profound hostility will find an outlet for itself, whether through Labour, UKIP, dissident Conservatives or the Lib Dems or by some as yet unseen route. It will express itself somehow.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    Over40 years of filming Whickers World and many other shows worldwide it was always a relief when the travelling stopped..no matter what we were traveling on....great to get into a bed that is not moving
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,706
    In 2003 Labour utterly dominated the IDS led Tories. They won in 2005 with a similar vote to the Tories in 2015, but a much larger majority. 5 years later they were gone.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    One of the things that's struck me about the EU referendum debate is how civilised it's been amongst all branches of the Conservative Party. This is very different to how it felt in the 1990s. On here, amongst pbTories, we have DavidL, Richard Nabavi and David Herdson leaning to Remain, TSE and JEO on the fence, and me, Marquee Mark, Charles and Morris Dancer who are leaning to Leave.

    I don't think we'll have much trouble coming back together after the event.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Jonathan said:

    In 2003 Labour utterly dominated the IDS led Tories. They won in 2005 with a similar vote to the Tories in 2015, but a much larger majority. 5 years later they were gone.

    And after 2005, and certainly 2007, I don't think anyone would have said Labour were hegemonic. Authority drains before power does.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    One of the things that's struck me about the EU referendum debate is how civilised it's been amongst all branches of the Conservative Party. This is very different to how it felt in the 1990s. On here, amongst pbTories, we have DavidL, Richard Nabavi and David Herdson leaning to Remain, TSE and JEO on the fence, and me, Marquee Mark, Charles and Morris Dancer who are leaning to Leave.

    I don't think we'll have much trouble coming back together after the event.

    It has barely started. You may yet be right but it is far too soon to say that. Tempers will rise later.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    Jonathan said:

    In 2003 Labour utterly dominated the IDS led Tories. They won in 2005 with a similar vote to the Tories in 2015, but a much larger majority. 5 years later they were gone.

    You omitted to mention that Watson colluded to get rid of Labour's best asset, Blair..., however damaged by the war, and replaced him with a leader who had no idea once in power and who looked bonkers and acted bonkers.. Sub optimal dontcha think ?
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    Thinking this through.. if the EU referendum is effectively a referendum on whether David Cameron remains as Prime Minister - probably a way of Cameron getting far more Tory votes for Remain, if he can subtly put that out there - and he quits after a Leave vote, likely (75%?) but not certain, then the leadership candidates are worth reviewing.

    I'd be looking at any Next PM candidates after Cameron priced quite a bit longer than Leave to win, which is currently 3.1 on Betfair.

    That would make Theresa May at 16/1 and Philip Hammond at 40/1 on Betfair look interesting. Gove at 140/1 is another possibility too.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842
    ydoethur said:

    Following on from my previous post, it'd be good to see figures for how long party leaders had been in parliament before becoming party leader.

    Depends on how you define 'in parliament'. I think the record for the shortest time before elevation was William Pitt the Younger, who was PM within three years of entering parliament. But arguably Alec Douglas-Home is the most remarkable, as he remains the only Prime Minister who for part of his premiership was not a member of either House, having renounced his peerage upon appointment before winning the vacated seat of Perth and Kinross to enter the Commons again.
    Technically, all PMs are not a member of either House during an election period but I take the point that it's at least unusual and probably unique for one to have been in that position while parliament was sitting (IIRC, Gladstone did somewhat bizarrely lose his seat at one election that his party won, but he'd taken the precaution of standing in a safe seat too).

    Worth noting that Douglas-Home was first elected to parliament in 1931 and had just short of thirty years experience in one House or other on becoming PM.

    I think you're right with Pitt in terms of PM. In recent years, Cameron and Miliband both served only five years before becoming leader, and Clegg did just half that.

    Prior to Major (11 years as MP before becoming PM), it was more normal to serve 20 years or more before making that atep, and at least 15 before becoming leader. Since then, the rule has been parties have looked to MPs who've served less than that, though there are exceptions.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728
    antifrank said:

    One of the things that's struck me about the EU referendum debate is how civilised it's been amongst all branches of the Conservative Party. This is very different to how it felt in the 1990s. On here, amongst pbTories, we have DavidL, Richard Nabavi and David Herdson leaning to Remain, TSE and JEO on the fence, and me, Marquee Mark, Charles and Morris Dancer who are leaning to Leave.

    I don't think we'll have much trouble coming back together after the event.

    It has barely started. You may yet be right but it is far too soon to say that. Tempers will rise later.
    They will, but there's a level of mutual respect here now that wasn't there in the 1990s. I remember it well - both sides thought the other should be thrown out of the party.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,743
    What about an unknown unknown?
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842
    Jonathan said:

    In 2003 Labour utterly dominated the IDS led Tories. They won in 2005 with a similar vote to the Tories in 2015, but a much larger majority. 5 years later they were gone.

    The Conservatives in 2015 polled 1.8m more votes than Labour did in 2005.

    For reference, they also polled 2.7 more than Labour did in 2010 and 600k more than Labour did in 2001.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994
    antifrank said:

    One of the things that's struck me about the EU referendum debate is how civilised it's been amongst all branches of the Conservative Party. This is very different to how it felt in the 1990s. On here, amongst pbTories, we have DavidL, Richard Nabavi and David Herdson leaning to Remain, TSE and JEO on the fence, and me, Marquee Mark, Charles and Morris Dancer who are leaning to Leave.

    I don't think we'll have much trouble coming back together after the event.

    It has barely started. You may yet be right but it is far too soon to say that. Tempers will rise later.
    The Tory Party of now and twenty years ago are very different beasts. If you think that Tories are prepared to tear themselves apart over the EU and risk letting in a Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party, then you do not have the pulse of the party.
  • Jonathan said:

    In 2003 Labour utterly dominated the IDS led Tories. They won in 2005 with a similar vote to the Tories in 2015, but a much larger majority. 5 years later they were gone.

    Gordon Brown.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994

    What about an unknown unknown?

    Dunno. Tell us about it.....
  • Thinking this through.. if the EU referendum is effectively a referendum on whether David Cameron remains as Prime Minister - probably a way of Cameron getting far more Tory votes for Remain, if he can subtly put that out there - and he quits after a Leave vote, likely (75%?) but not certain, then the leadership candidates are worth reviewing.

    As a Conservative who likes Cameron (and indeed I voted for him in the 2005 leadership contest) I can categorically say that I will not give two hoots about his prospects post-referendum should there be a Leave vote (and he has been campaigning hard for a Remain vote)... and I will be voting to Leave.

    I have little loyalty to the Prime Minister, even one as great at DC - I have great loyalty to my country and its constitution and people.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,743

    What about an unknown unknown?

    Dunno. Tell us about it.....
    If I knew, I would!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @DAaronovitch: 'The figure we used has not transpired', John Swinney of the SNP utters the under-statement of the year. @BBCr4today
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Good morning, everyone.

    Point of order, Mr. Antifrank: Labour got a larger majority on a small number of votes and share of the vote.

    Old news: Labour are bloody pansies. A perfect opportunity to ram one's boots between the legs of Corbyn, and what do they do? March in line, baaing occasionally. Only 20 odd abstentions [and only abstentions, not even voting the other way].

    It's depressing. It's like Rome under Honorius. Where's the fighting spirit?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758


    Fishing said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Time zone funnies. I've just finished a meeting here in Sydney, and am flying to LA, where I will have a meeting which started half an hour ago...

    My condolences. Jetlag is terrible and long haul flights are shit, even if you're in business class. I'll never understand why so many people (mostly those who don't fly regularly) think of air travel as glamorous and sexy. Going to exotic foreign places is, but getting there is pretty horrific.
    Going to exotic places maybe glamorous and sexy but probably not if one is going to work. Both my sons travel all over the place for work, and have done for many years, but son 1 has only taken his family with him once, to the Gulf in school holidays.
    Son 2 has only, I think, taken his family with him once, when the need for a trip to Australia coincided with school holidays. He lives in Bangkok, so that trip’s less off a trek than it would be from UK.
    Both of them get home asap.
    Work travel is just not fun. Hauling yourself out of bed to catch the 7am flight from Heathrow; another night in an anonymous hotel room. I get home as quickly as possible every time - familt time is far more important
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Point of order, Mr. Antifrank: Labour got a larger majority on a small number of votes and share of the vote.

    Old news: Labour are bloody pansies. A perfect opportunity to ram one's boots between the legs of Corbyn, and what do they do? March in line, baaing occasionally. Only 20 odd abstentions [and only abstentions, not even voting the other way].

    It's depressing. It's like Rome under Honorius. Where's the fighting spirit?

    I'd say Labour are like Rome under Caligula.

    Though a horse ended up as a Senator it doesn't match the weirdness of Corbyn as Labour leader.

    Also top work Antifrank.
  • Robert_Of_SheffieldRobert_Of_Sheffield Posts: 207
    edited October 2015
    surbiton said:

    Good article.

    Problem 1 starts the day after the EU referendum. If REMAIN wins narrowly, do the Tory LEAVERS just meekly accept it or they will start talking about a second referendum.

    Probably not immediately, but as soon as they think they have a decent excuse.

    The leavers will look for any signs of Remain reneging on its election promises, or the EU ignoring them. The moment they think that has happened, they'll accuse Remain of having lied in the referendum campaign, and say that should invalidate the result.

    Basically, if REMAIN wins narrowly, it and the EU will need to be gracious in victory, not triumphalist. Gloating wouldn't go down well, and a new push to full European integration would be widely opposed.

    If they win narrowly, REMAIN and the EU should instead be conciliatory, talking about soothingly about addressing their opponents' legitimate concerns.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,842
    Jonathan said:

    In 2003 Labour utterly dominated the IDS led Tories. They won in 2005 with a similar vote to the Tories in 2015, but a much larger majority. 5 years later they were gone.

    Thinking about it, is that first part even true? popular memory might have it so and certainly IDS was a very poor leader but by 2003 the polls were closer than they had been for a decade - indeed, in July that year the Tories recorded their first leads since the ERM fiasco destroyed Major's credibility - and in the local elections of 2003, the Conservatives enjoyed a 5 point lead over Labour and made over 500 gains, while Labour finished only two points ahead of the Lib Dems and lost over 800 seats.

    Now, it's true that IDS was not seen as PM material whereas both Blair and his almost-certain successor were. On that score alone Labour held a significant advantage. But to say Labour "utterly dominated" is to seriously misread history.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    Morning all. Catching up from yesterday, it seems that Osborne got his wish of making Labour look like the satirical Omnishambles. They really need a new bod to do the TV news interviews though, that prat Burgon almost elicited sympathy for two huge car crashes.

    I still don't know what to make of the new PMQs, it's good to see some more civilised debate rather than the usual shouting match, but the PM still needs to be challenged on policy, Corbyn's questions were very easily batted away.

    Talking of which, I might head down to the cricket for the afternoon session, free admission. England's batsmen can't be as bad as their bowlers, surely? Not a match to lay the draw on this flat sandy pitch.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,591
    edited October 2015
    Conservatives lose their hegemony? Blasphemy!

    Seriously good article though. Yes, naysayers, it's long, but there are some major upcoming challenges for the Tories, some of which they can try to address, and others where their fate seems to be in the hands of the gods. I like the thread of sass running through it too.

    Personally I think the cuts and the economy are key. I thought the public would be sick of cuts by now, but I was wrong, but there has to be a limit, particularly as harder cuts hit and the economy looking better, currently, leads people to ask why it is necessary. Conversely, an inevitable slowing of the economy at some point will have to hit their credibility. Yes, labour are not convincing me in that front at the moment, but if the Tory strength on the subject is punctured then it old be enough even with labour weakness given the slightness of the Tory majority.

    The eu and Scottish issues could be more immediately deadly, but more can be done to try to address them, and the opponents could mess them up.
  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    edited October 2015
    antifrank said:

    One of the things that's struck me about the EU referendum debate is how civilised it's been amongst all branches of the Conservative Party. This is very different to how it felt in the 1990s. On here, amongst pbTories, we have DavidL, Richard Nabavi and David Herdson leaning to Remain, TSE and JEO on the fence, and me, Marquee Mark, Charles and Morris Dancer who are leaning to Leave.

    I don't think we'll have much trouble coming back together after the event.

    It has barely started. You may yet be right but it is far too soon to say that. Tempers will rise later.
    Nobody knows yet on what terms the referendum will be fought. So all the Conservative MPs can carry on happily dreaming away that it will be fought on the terms that each of them prefers.

    But once Cameron stops dithering and has to come up with something concrete, then the fun will start in the Tory hen-coop.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    http://www.cityam.com/226491/twelve-more-reasons-brexit-campaigners-have-momentum

    An interesting read, if a lot is old hat stuff. Lets get out and regain our self respect, sanity and society.
  • @MattSingh_: YouGov/Times (Holyrood FPTP):

    SNP 51 (=)
    CON 19 (+1)
    LAB 21 (-1)
    LIB 5 (+1)

    Dates 9th-13th October
    N=1,026
    Writeup http://t.co/fC4PO7iE6e
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited October 2015
    Charles said:


    Fishing said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Time zone funnies. I've just finished a meeting here in Sydney, and am flying to LA, where I will have a meeting which started half an hour ago...

    My condolences. Jetlag is terrible and long haul flights are shit, even if you're in business class. I'll never understand why so many people (mostly those who don't fly regularly) think of air travel as glamorous and sexy. Going to exotic foreign places is, but getting there is pretty horrific.
    Going to exotic places maybe glamorous and sexy but probably not if one is going to work. Both my sons travel all over the place for work, and have done for many years, but son 1 has only taken his family with him once, to the Gulf in school holidays.
    Son 2 has only, I think, taken his family with him once, when the need for a trip to Australia coincided with school holidays. He lives in Bangkok, so that trip’s less off a trek than it would be from UK.
    Both of them get home asap.
    Work travel is just not fun. Hauling yourself out of bed to catch the 7am flight from Heathrow; another night in an anonymous hotel room. I get home as quickly as possible every time - familt time is far more important
    Poor Charles, that all sounds horrible if your workdays are too full of that sort of travel.
  • @MattSingh_: YouGov/Times (Holyrood list):

    SNP 45 (=)
    CON 19 (+1)
    LAB 20 (=)
    LIB 5 (+1)

    Dates 9th-13th October
    N=1,026
    Writeup http://t.co/fC4PO7iE6e
  • I call Scottish Tory surge.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited October 2015

    Good morning, everyone.

    Point of order, Mr. Antifrank: Labour got a larger majority on a small number of votes and share of the vote.

    Old news: Labour are bloody pansies. A perfect opportunity to ram one's boots between the legs of Corbyn, and what do they do? March in line, baaing occasionally. Only 20 odd abstentions [and only abstentions, not even voting the other way].

    It's depressing. It's like Rome under Honorius. Where's the fighting spirit?

    Not sure that's true any more.. the Labour bias has gone and its now a Tory one.. (IIRC and acc to Mr Smithson (sen)..) but historically that was the case.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I call Scottish Tory surge.

    In % terms the LD surge is greater - a 20% rise above baseline ;-)
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Mr. Root, whether true today or not, I was referring to Mr. Antifrank's 'never before...' line. It happened to a greater extent (regarding both the small nature of the vote and large nature of the majority) a decade ago.

    Otherwise, another good article.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    I note that no one disputes that the Conservatives have a hegemony at present. Given the underlying seat counts and vote shares, isn't that an extraordinary state of affairs? We shall marvel at its implausibility in the future.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,728

    Thinking this through.. if the EU referendum is effectively a referendum on whether David Cameron remains as Prime Minister - probably a way of Cameron getting far more Tory votes for Remain, if he can subtly put that out there - and he quits after a Leave vote, likely (75%?) but not certain, then the leadership candidates are worth reviewing.

    As a Conservative who likes Cameron (and indeed I voted for him in the 2005 leadership contest) I can categorically say that I will not give two hoots about his prospects post-referendum should there be a Leave vote (and he has been campaigning hard for a Remain vote)... and I will be voting to Leave.

    I have little loyalty to the Prime Minister, even one as great at DC - I have great loyalty to my country and its constitution and people.
    Fair enough. I will add you to my "Leave Tories" list!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited October 2015
    On topic, a thoughtful article as always by @antifrank, with some good responses, especially by @david_herdson and @ydoethur

    My personal view is that cuts as a storyline will be diminished by the hyperbolic language used by those against them, such as we saw in the last Parliament.

    The result of the economic argument was seen at the ballot box less than six months ago, any opposition group wishing to form the next government will have to be credible on this point, a recession between now and the election wil only hammer that point further.

    Scotland - really, with oil at half the price it was a couple of years ago?

    The most likely scenario for a big change is if the PM and his inner circle are forced out after the EU referendum, leading to a more right wing group of eurosceptic Tories taking over.

    Also, as others have said. Events and unknown unknowns.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    African immigrants tear up Chinese textbooks:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34531861
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,977
    Mr. Antifrank, jein. It's not the strength of the Conservatives but the split nature of their opposition which bolsters the blue position.

    It's somewhat similar to when Heraclius was ageing and Chosroes was mad/deposed/dead, the Persians and Eastern Empire exhausted by prolonged war and Islam rolled up and started taking chunks out of both.

    If Islam had been founded a few decades earlier during the Maurice-Chosroes truce, it might well have run into a brick wall, instead of expanding so rapidly.

    Or, to rephrase, the whole Middle East could still be Christian if Maurice hadn't refused to buy his soldiers new sandals.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited October 2015
    Charles said:


    Fishing said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Time zone funnies. I've just finished a meeting here in Sydney, and am flying to LA, where I will have a meeting which started half an hour ago...

    My condolences. Jetlag is terrible and long haul flights are shit, even if you're in business class. I'll never understand why so many people (mostly those who don't fly regularly) think of air travel as glamorous and sexy. Going to exotic foreign places is, but getting there is pretty horrific.
    Going to exotic places maybe glamorous and sexy but probably not if one is going to work. Both my sons travel all over the place for work, and have done for many years, but son 1 has only taken his family with him once, to the Gulf in school holidays.
    Son 2 has only, I think, taken his family with him once, when the need for a trip to Australia coincided with school holidays. He lives in Bangkok, so that trip’s less off a trek than it would be from UK.
    Both of them get home asap.
    Work travel is just not fun. Hauling yourself out of bed to catch the 7am flight from Heathrow; another night in an anonymous hotel room. I get home as quickly as possible every time - familt time is far more important
    Agree entirely. Although the modern generation of planes are better than the previous, their increased efficiency means that almost any two cities in the world can now be connected. 18 hours on a plane (DXB-LAX) is no fun, even in Business. In Economy it's unbearable. Qantas now talk about flying from London to Perth, that will be 20 hours in the new 787-9 :open_mouth:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3270237/Qantas-plans-fly-non-stop-Perth-London-19-hours-2017-making-longest-commercial-flight-world.html
  • JWisemannJWisemann Posts: 1,082
    I'm glad to see that anti frank, one of PB's few sensible right-leaning commentators, is taking note of the musings of the most sensible left-leaning analyst here, JWisemann. He's one to watch.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @bbclaurak: Message in hall - indy stil on agenda, but we all need to work for it, message outside hall - we're not obsessed with indy, not in a hurry
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    Jonathan said:

    In 2003 Labour utterly dominated the IDS led Tories. They won in 2005 with a similar vote to the Tories in 2015, but a much larger majority. 5 years later they were gone.

    Thinking about it, is that first part even true? popular memory might have it so and certainly IDS was a very poor leader but by 2003 the polls were closer than they had been for a decade - indeed, in July that year the Tories recorded their first leads since the ERM fiasco destroyed Major's credibility - and in the local elections of 2003, the Conservatives enjoyed a 5 point lead over Labour and made over 500 gains, while Labour finished only two points ahead of the Lib Dems and lost over 800 seats.

    Now, it's true that IDS was not seen as PM material whereas both Blair and his almost-certain successor were. On that score alone Labour held a significant advantage. But to say Labour "utterly dominated" is to seriously misread history.
    History is written by the victors. Contrary to myth, as David says or at least implies, the Conservatives under IDS were more successful than most now remember. IDS was not ousted because the Tories flopped at the ballot box but because backbenchers panicked when IDS was trounced every week by Tony Blair at PMQs, and perhaps because the men in grey suits had never accepted him.
  • this is a horrible innings by Bell.

    spreading panic where there was calm amongst all english men and no doubt the changing room too.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @CJTerry: Slightly unencyclopedic start on Richard Burgon's wiki page. Like that they cited it though https://t.co/xhF4hStYGd http://t.co/jTcYSQFTnq
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    antifrank said:

    I note that no one disputes that the Conservatives have a hegemony at present. Given the underlying seat counts and vote shares, isn't that an extraordinary state of affairs? We shall marvel at its implausibility in the future.

    It really doesn't matter which party is in power in Westminster; they will all act the same as long as Britain belongs in the EU embrace. No matter what different policies are trotted out at election times, if Brussels says jump, we jump.

    My bet is that Osbo's cuts in the end come to nothing, as happened in the coalition government. It's all knickers waving in the wind!
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492

    this is a horrible innings by Bell.

    spreading panic where there was calm amongst all english men and no doubt the changing room too.

    I thought he'd retire with some sort of reputation intact after the Ashes, it seems not

  • Scott_P said:

    @CJTerry: Slightly unencyclopedic start on Richard Burgon's wiki page. Like that they cited it though https://t.co/xhF4hStYGd http://t.co/jTcYSQFTnq

    LOL

    Richard Burgon is a left-wing[1] Labour Party politician in the United Kingdom who is the Member of Parliament (MP) for Leeds East, elected at the 2015 general election.[2]His performance in a Channel 4 interview shortly following his appointment as Shadow City Minister was universally considered as pisspoor[3][4].
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994

    @MattSingh_: YouGov/Times (Holyrood list):

    SNP 45 (=)
    CON 19 (+1)
    LAB 20 (=)
    LIB 5 (+1)

    Dates 9th-13th October
    N=1,026
    Writeup http://t.co/fC4PO7iE6e

    Crossover imminent!
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,553

    antifrank said:

    One of the things that's struck me about the EU referendum debate is how civilised it's been amongst all branches of the Conservative Party. This is very different to how it felt in the 1990s. On here, amongst pbTories, we have DavidL, Richard Nabavi and David Herdson leaning to Remain, TSE and JEO on the fence, and me, Marquee Mark, Charles and Morris Dancer who are leaning to Leave.

    I don't think we'll have much trouble coming back together after the event.

    It has barely started. You may yet be right but it is far too soon to say that. Tempers will rise later.
    The Tory Party of now and twenty years ago are very different beasts. If you think that Tories are prepared to tear themselves apart over the EU and risk letting in a Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party, then you do not have the pulse of the party.
    Even if the party did tear itself apart, I couldn't see Labour benefitting that much, so long as Corbyn was in charge.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    *claps*

    DavidL said:


    Of course, luckily for politicians, we do not judge our leaders in absolute terms but in relative terms. At an election the country faces a choice. At the moment Labour seem determined not to be a part of that choice and the sane part of the party is not willing to do anything about it, hence the best part of 200 trudging through the lobbies in support of that guff from McConnell. there will not be a credible choice for those who simply want competent government.

    McDonnell's position was utter nonsense. Many of those 200 are smart enough to know that, smart enough to think "WTF am I doing???" Yet they still ambled through the lobbies like a herd of Fresians for their regular encounter with the milking machines. And yet these 200 are somehow supposed to rebel and kick over Farmer Corbyn. It's not going to happen, is it? They have developed a bad case of Bovine Socialist Encephalopathy.

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,137
    Morning all,

    Excellent piece Antifrank. I agree also that Osborne needs to get a grip of the smug look. He's not going to look so clever when those million brown envelopes arrive just after Xmas telling hard working families they are losing £1000 or more. This will be in black and white. All the hot air about looking at the situation in the round will count for naught.

    We should also add international events to this list. Syria is looking bleaker by the day and we could well end up being dragged in much further than we would like.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,553

    Mr. Antifrank, jein. It's not the strength of the Conservatives but the split nature of their opposition which bolsters the blue position.

    It's somewhat similar to when Heraclius was ageing and Chosroes was mad/deposed/dead, the Persians and Eastern Empire exhausted by prolonged war and Islam rolled up and started taking chunks out of both.

    If Islam had been founded a few decades earlier during the Maurice-Chosroes truce, it might well have run into a brick wall, instead of expanding so rapidly.

    Or, to rephrase, the whole Middle East could still be Christian if Maurice hadn't refused to buy his soldiers new sandals.

    The Empire reached it's greatest extent under Maurice. It's curious how he dropped the ball at the last moment. And, within 50 years, the Empire had lost 75% of it's territory.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,994

    What about an unknown unknown?

    Dunno. Tell us about it.....
    If I knew, I would!
    If I knew, I'd keep quiet and bet accordingly!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Many of those 200 are smart enough to know that, smart enough to think "WTF am I doing???" Yet they still ambled through the lobbies like a herd of Fresians for their regular encounter with the milking machines.

    And here is the problem with “wait and see”: with every day that passes, the political situation gets progressively worse, not better. It is not enough to merely let Corbynism burn itself out, or let it be comprehensively defeated in five years’ time. Here’s why.
    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2015/10/14/why-wait-and-see-is-a-fools-strategy/
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,553
    antifrank said:

    I note that no one disputes that the Conservatives have a hegemony at present. Given the underlying seat counts and vote shares, isn't that an extraordinary state of affairs? We shall marvel at its implausibility in the future.

    Great article. And, these are only the known unknowns.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    When Dave goes its goona get a lot more difficult for the Tories Noone of his caibre is waiting to take over. It rather depends when and if Labour boot out the loons.. The loons will still be there if not with their hands on the tiller.... there will be much infighting for the soul of the Labour Party which will help the Tories.
    My thinking is a new centrist party joining with the LD's

    Cameron was elected in Witney in 2001, and became leader of the party in 2005.

    It's perfectly possible that one of the 2010 (or even at a push 2015) intake could be the next leader. Personally I think Rory Stewart would be a good bet. He's got a CV that very few politicians can match.

    My only issue with him is that helping run two Iraqi provinces might not be enough experience to handle the infighting within the Conservative party!
    Rory Stewart is the Tory Dan Jarvis: touted as future leaders on the back of military careers but not, so far, having done anything of note in parliament. Is the country ready for an old Etonian Oxford PPE graduate? Well, yes.
Sign In or Register to comment.