Jeremy Hunt would be the best of the candidates available. There is, however, no way on God's green earth that Conservative members could be persuaded to vote for him against any of the other conceivable candidates.
A Hunt led Tory Party would fall behind the LDs with Yougov with the Brexit Party still over 20%
I can't see what voters Hunt would be able to bring to the Tories that they don't already have. He even brings an anti vote with him because of his time as Health Secretary that could boost Labour. He has a lot of the downsides of Boris (perceived lack of competence, unpopular, lack of conviction in his views), but with no benefits to balance it out.
Agreed, he might be more electable than Gove but that is it.
If the Tories want an electable non Boris pick Javid, Stewart or even Raab
So Hunt’s plan is to do whatever is necessary to avoid a general election.
It’s as clear as day to me that if he becomes PM, he will call a second referendum. Let’s not forget that he called for one immediately after the result of the first one.
He'll be VONCed by the MPs in that scenario.
Not so sure. The membership I expect to be full of idiots. MPs? Not a majority dear god please say.
If Hunt proposes a second referendum that includes a remain scenario he'll be gone in a few days. There's no way the party will wear it.
He won't need to do that he will just say that with the exception of him being made PM and then the WA passing then any decision tree leads to a GE.
And he's right.
In which case the solution is to get an election winner in charge who can win the election.
Perhaps someone who has repeatedly won elections as a Tory mayor of a Labour city? Someone who led the leave side to an unexpected victory perhaps?
Do you have a vote in the leadership election?
No. I know people who think like me that do though.
God there are more of you?
More people who realise there's a big world out there beyond Europe? Yes.
Absolutely!
Independence for Yorkshire! There's a big world out there beyond Britain! Go Global!
If that’s what the people of Yorkshire wish, then good luck to them!
So Hunt’s plan is to do whatever is necessary to avoid a general election.
It’s as clear as day to me that if he becomes PM, he will call a second referendum. Let’s not forget that he called for one immediately after the result of the first one.
He'll be VONCed by the MPs in that scenario.
Not so sure. The membership I expect to be full of idiots. MPs? Not a majority dear god please say.
If Hunt proposes a second referendum that includes a remain scenario he'll be gone in a few days. There's no way the party will wear it.
I wonder who Labour would prefer between Johnson and Hunt?
In fact, given I am Labour, let's rephrase - who, with my Labour hat on, as opposed to my betting book, or the rigorously objective persona that I adopt for political debate on this forum, do I want to win?
It's obvious. I want the one who -
(i) is easier to beat in a GE - AND - (ii) is the more likely to be forced into one.
Trouble is, in my view the answer to (i) is Hunt, and to (ii) is Johnson.
So, all in all, on balance, all things considered - Come on Dom!
Hunt has a powerful argument. Boris would have to GE to get No Deal and it would be lost.
Will members listen to this logic?
Would it be lost though?
Suspect they would lose their majority at an absolute minimum (and then all bets are off). Also, what is the electoral narrative here for the Tory party? This also likely becomes existential as half their MPs are probably anti campaigning on a no deal platform. Having voted Tory forever, for example, I would also never vote for that.
Boris is more likely to win a GE than Hunt. Farage would siphon off far fewer voters. He might even do an electoral deal. For all that we sensible people think that Boris would be a disaster, he does have the charisma to win votes, so as of now I wouldn't bet against him winning a GE.
Supporting Hunt means buying into the idea that he can stave off a GE that he would lose because of Farage. But Hunt would be May mk 2, so success is excluded.
I think there would be queues round the block to kick Boris in the nads. You are confusing the Conservative membership with the general public.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
true - no one ever went broke, or perhaps failed to become PM, underestimating...
That and Boris wouldn't need to convince all 52%, 40% would be enough in a GE for a fairly large majority.
Its worth remembering though that as recently as 2016 Boris was instrumental in convincing 52%. We don't need to look back to London Mayoral elections to see Boris as an election winner.
The fact that some sore losers from 2016 who still haven't reconciled themselves to the fact they lostdon't like him for it doesn't mean he wouldn't be successful a fourth time.
His omnibus-based lies are now fully exposed. The man on the one to Clapham won’t be duped again.
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
It was a lie. You are dishonest, deluded, or mathematically inept, all of which are perfect qualifications for people who believe in a myth called Brexit, and the disease called English nationalism
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
Are we still going on about the bus? I agree its getting tedious now.
If they had put £250 million or £400 million or £200 million on the bus would it really have altered the impact on those - however many and we don't know - who apparently decided to vote leave because of it?
Because to most people - admittedly not rich remaininers living in London - £200 million a week is still a sh*t load of money which they might rather spend on the NHS than on subsidising Polish farmers or extending the Slovakian motorway network.
As for the wider debate ask people what they earn - is it their gross salary, their net salary after taxes and NI, do you include pension contributions which they are likely to get back in the future admittedly on terms and a a time someone else decides (e.g. the government of their employer). Do you also take into account the tax free personal allowance, tax credits (a rebate of sorts), pension contributions paid outside your pay which you get a rebate on later, charitable donations and other welfare payments.
Like most people's wage packet every month what we pay into the EU can be calculated in many ways! Whether its £150 million, £250 million or £350 million a week its still still a lot of money to the majority of people - and it is only likely to keep going up as unlike ordinary people in Europe the EU doesn't seem to have to experience the effects of austerity.
Hunt has a powerful argument. Boris would have to GE to get No Deal and it would be lost.
Will members listen to this logic?
Would it be lost though?
Suspect they would lose their majority at an absolute minimum (and then all bets are off). Also, what is the electoral narrative here for the Tory party? This also likely becomes existential as half their MPs are probably anti campaigning on a no deal platform. Having voted Tory forever, for example, I would also never vote for that.
Boris is more likely to win a GE than Hunt. Farage would siphon off far fewer voters. He might even do an electoral deal. For all that we sensible people think that Boris would be a disaster, he does have the charisma to win votes, so as of now I wouldn't bet against him winning a GE.
Supporting Hunt means buying into the idea that he can stave off a GE that he would lose because of Farage. But Hunt would be May mk 2, so success is excluded.
I think there would be queues round the block to kick Boris in the nads. You are confusing the Conservative membership with the general public.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
true - no one ever went broke, or perhaps failed to become PM, underestimating...
That and Boris wouldn't need to convince all 52%, 40% would be enough in a GE for a fairly large majority.
43% was not enough last time for a majority.
Personally I'd be astounded if Boris Johnson could get the Conservatives to 33%.
What time frame. I expect he may get an initial bump as people move back from Nigel to the Tories but he is going to disappoint that audience very early on.
I am sure the Brexit C2DE voters in Labour constituencies are delighted with the focus on making those on £80k richer.
DEs always vote plurality Labour and Corbyn won them in 2017, C2s mainly want Brexit delivered, they voted plurality Tory in 2017 and are now backing the Brexit Party but Boris could win them back.
Boris' tax cut is targeted at southern and London ABs who dislike Corbyn but are less keen on Brexit
It would be the most miserable election campaign in our lifetime. Millions of people to choose from and the pick is either Corbyn or Johnson. Would make even Americans feel sorry for our lack of talent. Probably a record low for the two-party vote.
Hunt has a powerful argument. Boris would have to GE to get No Deal and it would be lost.
Will members listen to this logic?
Would it be lost though?
Suspect they would lose their majority at an absolute minimum (and then all bets are off). Also, what is the electoral narrative here for the Tory party? This also likely becomes existential as half their MPs are probably anti campaigning on a no deal platform. Having voted Tory forever, for example, I would also never vote for that.
Boris is more likely to win a GE than Hunt. Farage would siphon off far fewer voters. He might even do an electoral deal. For all that we sensible people think that Boris would be a disaster, he does have the charisma to win votes, so as of now I wouldn't bet against him winning a GE.
Supporting Hunt means buying into the idea that he can stave off a GE that he would lose because of Farage. But Hunt would be May mk 2, so success is excluded.
I think there would be queues round the block to kick Boris in the nads. You are confusing the Conservative membership with the general public.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
true - no one ever went broke, or perhaps failed to become PM, underestimating...
That and Boris wouldn't need to convince all 52%, 40% would be enough in a GE for a fairly large majority.
43% was not enough last time for a majority.
Personally I'd be astounded if Boris Johnson could get the Conservatives to 33%.
What time frame. I expect he may get an initial bump as people move back from Nigel to the Tories but he is going to disappoint that audience very early on.
I am sure the Brexit C2DE voters in Labour constituencies are delighted with the focus on making those on £80k richer.
DEs always vote pluralrity Labour and Corbyn won them in 2017, C2s mainly want Brexit delivered, they voted pluralirity Tory in 2017 and are now backing the Brexit Party but Boris could win them back.
Boris' tax cut is target at southern and London ABs who dislike Corbyn but are less keen on Brexit
I fear Boris will be even more of a South-and-Home-Counties focussed leader than even the most recent inhabitants of the office.
Suspect they would lose their majority at an absolute minimum (and then all bets are off). Also, what is the electoral narrative here for the Tory party? This also likely becomes existential as half their MPs are probably anti campaigning on a no deal platform. Having voted Tory forever, for example, I would also never vote for that.
Boris is more likely to win a GE than Hunt. Farage would siphon off far fewer voters. He might even do an electoral deal. For all that we sensible people think that Boris would be a disaster, he does have the charisma to win votes, so as of now I wouldn't bet against him winning a GE.
Supporting Hunt means buying into the idea that he can stave off a GE that he would lose because of Farage. But Hunt would be May mk 2, so success is excluded.
I think there would be queues round the block to kick Boris in the nads. You are confusing the Conservative membership with the general public.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
true - no one ever went broke, or perhaps failed to become PM, underestimating...
That and Boris wouldn't need to convince all 52%, 40% would be enough in a GE for a fairly large majority.
43% was not enough last time for a majority.
Personally I'd be astounded if Boris Johnson could get the Conservatives to 33%.
Boris could even win a majority with under 30%.
Yougov last week had a Boris led Tory Party on 29%, Labour and the LDs on 22% each and the Brexit Party on 13% giving a Tory majority of 16
You do know that:
1 - Opinion polls are imprecise tools with issues with trying to chase accuracy 2 - Hypothetical opinion polls have notoriously poor utility 3 - In any case, they are a snapshot and not a prediction?
Coupled with that, there are no ready algorithms for accurately translating opinion polls to FPTP seats under our system (without the massive data aggregation exercise carried out by Curtice et al on election day), and the approximations that people have designed over the years break down totally with divisions on this level?
Because it seems to the casual reader that you're claiming that they are precise, accurate, reliable, predictive, and correspond to specific seat outcomes.
Interesting, but if "there is no right answer" surely the right thing to do is, in accordance with the last sentence of the rules, to declare the market void for uncertainty? Subjectivity shouldn't determine a bet surely? Though voiding the market will cost Betfair it's commission- so perhaps that is why it doesn't want to?
I wonder who Labour would prefer between Johnson and Hunt?
In fact, given I am Labour, let's rephrase - who, with my Labour hat on, as opposed to my betting book, or the rigorously objective persona that I adopt for political debate on this forum, do I want to win?
It's obvious. I want the one who -
(i) is easier to beat in a GE - AND - (ii) is the more likely to be forced into one.
Trouble is, in my view the answer to (i) is Hunt, and to (ii) is Johnson.
So, all in all, on balance, all things considered - Come on Dom!
I reckon Hunt would be tougher to beat in a GE than Boris.
So Hunt’s plan is to do whatever is necessary to avoid a general election.
It’s as clear as day to me that if he becomes PM, he will call a second referendum. Let’s not forget that he called for one immediately after the result of the first one.
He'll be VONCed by the MPs in that scenario.
Not so sure. The membership I expect to be full of idiots. MPs? Not a majority dear god please say.
If Hunt proposes a second referendum that includes a remain scenario he'll be gone in a few days. There's no way the party will wear it.
He won't need to do that he will just say that with the exception of him being made PM and then the WA passing then any decision tree leads to a GE.
And he's right.
In which case the solution is to get an election winner in charge who can win the election.
Perhaps someone who has repeatedly won elections as a Tory mayor of a Labour city? Someone who led the leave side to an unexpected victory perhaps?
Do you have a vote in the leadership election?
No. I know people who think like me that do though.
God there are more of you?
More people who realise there's a big world out there beyond Europe? Yes.
Ridiculous. There is no such world.
The universe as a whole is massive. That doesn't mean it's as easy to trade with as our neighbouring countries in a trading group we've been a member of for almost 50 years
Yet despite that, despite the proximity, despite the trading group, despite the fact the protectionist trading group forbids us from signing deals elsewhere . . . elsewhere still forms the majority of our trade.
Oh my goodness, this is the level of stupidity of the 32ish percent who want to wreck our economy. It is quite staggering. It is beyond parody.
As I said earlier, this is like being a supplier of fresh produce and saying; "hey we do slightly more business with Budgens, Spar shops and several hundred independent shops than we do to Tesco, Waitrose and Aldi. Let's tell the big guys to fuck themselves. They need us more than we need them." MMM GOOD BUSINESS SENSE!!
It would be the most miserable election campaign in our lifetime. Millions of people to choose from and the pick is either Corbyn or Johnson. Would make even Americans feel sorry for our lack of talent. Probably a record low for the two-party vote.
Timetable-wise, does anyone know if there will be any delay after 5pm today or will the 1922 Committee confirm nominees immediately? Wondering if any no-hopers will drop out.
It would be the most miserable election campaign in our lifetime. Millions of people to choose from and the pick is either Corbyn or Johnson. Would make even Americans feel sorry for our lack of talent. Probably a record low for the two-party vote.
Maybe. Perhaps even probably.
But OTOH it could have a polarizing effect driven by fear and intense dislike of the other side. Especially if the Tories offer Hard Brexit and Labour offer Ref/Remain.
The outcome could be a squeeze on LD and BP, therefore a high Lab/Con aggregate vote.
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
Are we still going on about the bus? I agree its getting tedious now.
If they had put £250 million or £400 million or £200 million on the bus would it really have altered the impact on those - however many and we don't know - who apparently decided to vote leave because of it?
Because to most people - admittedly not rich remaininers living in London - £200 million a week is still a sh*t load of money which they might rather spend on the NHS than on subsidising Polish farmers or extending the Slovakian motorway network.
As for the wider debate ask people what they earn - is it their gross salary, their net salary after taxes and NI, do you include pension contributions which they are likely to get back in the future admittedly on terms and a a time someone else decides (e.g. the government of their employer). Do you also take into account the tax free personal allowance, tax credits (a rebate of sorts), pension contributions paid outside your pay which you get a rebate on later, charitable donations and other welfare payments.
Like most people's wage packet every month what we pay into the EU can be calculated in many ways! Whether its £150 million, £250 million or £350 million a week its still still a lot of money to the majority of people - and it is only likely to keep going up as unlike ordinary people in Europe the EU doesn't seem to have to experience the effects of austerity.
Thank you, perfectly encapsulating why most leavers have zero understanding of economics. Which is why the lie worked, and similar lies about the EU continue to be perpetrated by people like Boris Johnson. Oh, how he laughs at you, but you fail to see it.
Suspect they would lose their majority at an absolute minimum (and then all bets are off). Also, what is the electoral narrative here for the Tory party? This also likely becomes existential as half their MPs are probably anti campaigning on a no deal platform. Having voted Tory forever, for example, I would also never vote for that.
Boris is more likely to win a GE than Hunt. Farage would siphon off far fewer voters. He might even do an electoral deal. For all that we sensible people think that Boris would be a disaster, he does have the charisma to win votes, so as of now I wouldn't bet against him winning a GE.
Supporting Hunt means buying into the idea that he can stave off a GE that he would lose because of Farage. But Hunt would be May mk 2, so success is excluded.
I think there would be queues round the block to kick Boris in the nads. You are confusing the Conservative membership with the general public.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
true - no one ever went broke, or perhaps failed to become PM, underestimating...
That and Boris wouldn't need to convince all 52%, 40% would be enough in a GE for a fairly large majority.
43% was not enough last time for a majority.
Personally I'd be astounded if Boris Johnson could get the Conservatives to 33%.
Boris could even win a majority with under 30%.
Yougov last week had a Boris led Tory Party on 29%, Labour and the LDs on 22% each and the Brexit Party on 13% giving a Tory majority of 16
You do know that:
1 - Opinion polls are imprecise tools with issues with trying to chase accuracy 2 - Hypothetical opinion polls have notoriously poor utility 3 - In any case, they are a snapshot and not a prediction?
Coupled with that, there are no ready algorithms for accurately translating opinion polls to FPTP seats under our system (without the massive data aggregation exercise carried out by Curtice et al on election day), and the approximations that people have designed over the years break down totally with divisions on this level?
Because it seems to the casual reader that you're claiming that they are precise, accurate, reliable, predictive, and correspond to specific seat outcomes.
i would imagine some kind of pact with the Brexit party who will only target remainer MPs seats, providing Boris goes hard brexit
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
Are we still going on about the bus? I agree its getting tedious now.
If they had put £250 million or £400 million or £200 million on the bus would it really have altered the impact on those - however many and we don't know - who apparently decided to vote leave because of it?
Because to most people - admittedly not rich remaininers living in London - £200 million a week is still a sh*t load of money which they might rather spend on the NHS than on subsidising Polish farmers or extending the Slovakian motorway network.
As for the wider debate ask people what they earn - is it their gross salary, their net salary after taxes and NI, do you include pension contributions which they are likely to get back in the future admittedly on terms and a a time someone else decides (e.g. the government of their employer). Do you also take into account the tax free personal allowance, tax credits (a rebate of sorts), pension contributions paid outside your pay which you get a rebate on later, charitable donations and other welfare payments.
Like most people's wage packet every month what we pay into the EU can be calculated in many ways! Whether its £150 million, £250 million or £350 million a week its still still a lot of money to the majority of people - and it is only likely to keep going up as unlike ordinary people in Europe the EU doesn't seem to have to experience the effects of austerity.
Thank you, perfectly encapsulating why most leavers have zero understanding of economics. Which is why the lie worked, and similar lies about the EU continue to be perpetrated by people like Boris Johnson. Oh, how he laughs at you, but you fail to see it.
Nige - are you suggesting that people of low intellect shouldn't vote ?
How can the Tories elect Boris if he is not prepared to face the media? They should be asking why is he not facing them?
If elected he will have to at some time answer some questions that he would prefer not to be asked. An embarrassing revelation or confession once leader would be disaster for the party. Why are they taking the risk?
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
Are we still going on about the bus? I agree its getting tedious now.
If they had put £250 million or £400 million or £200 million on the bus would it really have altered the impact on those - however many and we don't know - who apparently decided to vote leave because of it?
Because to most people - admittedly not rich remaininers living in London - £200 million a week is still a sh*t load of money which they might rather spend on the NHS than on subsidising Polish farmers or extending the Slovakian motorway network.
As for the wider debate ask people what they earn - is it their gross salary, their net salary after taxes and NI, do you include pension contributions which they are likely to get back in the future admittedly on terms and a a time someone else decides (e.g. the government of their employer). Do you also take into account the tax free personal allowance, tax credits (a rebate of sorts), pension contributions paid outside your pay which you get a rebate on later, charitable donations and other welfare payments.
Like most people's wage packet every month what we pay into the EU can be calculated in many ways! Whether its £150 million, £250 million or £350 million a week its still still a lot of money to the majority of people - and it is only likely to keep going up as unlike ordinary people in Europe the EU doesn't seem to have to experience the effects of austerity.
Thank you, perfectly encapsulating why most leavers have zero understanding of economics. Which is why the lie worked, and similar lies about the EU continue to be perpetrated by people like Boris Johnson. Oh, how he laughs at you, but you fail to see it.
Do Remainers even care about the NHS?
"Let's send £171 million a week* to Brussels, instead of spending it on our NHS!"
Hunt has a powerful argument. Boris would have to GE to get No Deal and it would be lost.
Will members listen to this logic?
Would it be lost though?
Suspect they would lose their majority at an absolute minimum (and then all bets are off). Also, what is the electoral narrative here for the Tory party? This also likely becomes existential as half their MPs are probably anti campaigning on a no deal platform. Having voted Tory forever, for example, I would also never vote for that.
Boris is more likely to win a GE than Hunt. Farage would siphon off far fewer voters. He might even do an electoral deal. For all that we sensible people think that Boris would be a disaster, he does have the charisma to win votes, so as of now I wouldn't bet against him winning a GE.
Supporting Hunt means buying into the idea that he can stave off a GE that he would lose because of Farage. But Hunt would be May mk 2, so success is excluded.
I think there would be queues round the block to kick Boris in the nads. You are confusing the Conservative membership with the general public.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
true - no one ever went broke, or perhaps failed to become PM, underestimating...
That and Boris wouldn't need to convince all 52%, 40% would be enough in a GE for a fairly large majority.
43% was not enough last time for a majority.
Personally I'd be astounded if Boris Johnson could get the Conservatives to 33%.
That was against a single party opposition. How does 33% do against everyone else in the low 20s?
It probably becomes a question of who can put a coalition together. A Lab/SNP/LD coalition might be unstable but there is potential common ground. A Conservative Party whose only selling point is no compromise on the austerest of Brexit, not so much. The BP don't help them because if they are doing well enough to win seats it will be at the expense of the Tories losing many more of them,
How can the Tories elect Boris if he is not prepared to face the media? They should be asking why is he not facing them?
If elected he will have to at some time answer some questions that he would prefer not to be asked. An embarrassing revelation or confession once leader would be disaster for the party. Why are they taking the risk?
Boris always has had supreme confidence in his own ability to wing anything when the day comes along.
Tory members are desperate for hope and will cling to him regardless of any logic.
How can the Tories elect Boris if he is not prepared to face the media? They should be asking why is he not facing them?
If elected he will have to at some time answer some questions that he would prefer not to be asked. An embarrassing revelation or confession once leader would be disaster for the party. Why are they taking the risk?
Probably why his price is drifting.
This contest is longer than 24 hrs. Gove at 26s is the current value.
It would be the most miserable election campaign in our lifetime. Millions of people to choose from and the pick is either Corbyn or Johnson. Would make even Americans feel sorry for our lack of talent. Probably a record low for the two-party vote.
Maybe. Perhaps even probably.
But OTOH it could have a polarizing effect driven by fear and intense dislike of the other side. Especially if the Tories offer Hard Brexit and Labour offer Ref/Remain.
The outcome could be a squeeze on LD and BP, therefore a high Lab/Con aggregate vote.
Yes that’s fair comment. Making it even more miserable to be forced to vote for the second most unsuitable candidate in the country in order to avoid getting lumbered with the worst.
I see PB Tories are already assuming the fading out of the Brexit Party and the inevitable supremacy of Boris.
But this doesn’t look the most likely outcome if an election were held in 2019. I would put my money on a Labour minority government, supported unto paralysis by the SNP and the Lib Dems, and a referendum on Brexit.
Perversely, and as May knew but could not execute against due to severe character flaws:
1. the Tories are doomed in any GE unless they Brexit. 2. Brexit cannot take place without: a) A Cross-House compromise, now likely to include a referendum, or: b) A GE.
I would argue that 2a is not even open to Boris due to his character defects (namely, complete dishonesty and unreliability).
Hunt needs to use his honeymoon to lay out the options to the country. If we want to Brexit, we likely need another referendum to do so - because of unwillingness to compromise on both sides.
I do not believe Hunt will get passed the membership though. The Tories are turkeys voting for Christmas and the debate is about the precise colour of trussing.
It would be the most miserable election campaign in our lifetime. Millions of people to choose from and the pick is either Corbyn or Johnson. Would make even Americans feel sorry for our lack of talent. Probably a record low for the two-party vote.
Did you miss the last election ?
Was hardly 1983 rerun.
Both May and Corbyn were better regarded then than now.
Suspect they would lose their majority at an absolute minimum (and then all bets are off). Also, what is the electoral narrative here for the Tory party? This also likely becomes existential as half their MPs are probably anti campaigning on a no deal platform. Having voted Tory forever, for example, I would also never vote for that.
Boris is more likely to win a GE than Hunt. Farage would siphon off far fewer voters. He might even do an electoral deal. For all that we sensible people think that Boris would be a disaster, he does have the charisma to win votes, so as of now I wouldn't bet against him winning a GE.
Supporting Hunt means buying into the idea that he can stave off a GE that he would lose because of Farage. But Hunt would be May mk 2, so success is excluded.
I think there would be queues round the block to kick Boris in the nads. You are confusing the Conservative membership with the general public.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
true - no one ever went broke, or perhaps failed to become PM, underestimating...
That and Boris wouldn't need to convince all 52%, 40% would be enough in a GE for a fairly large majority.
43% was not enough last time for a majority.
Personally I'd be astounded if Boris Johnson could get the Conservatives to 33%.
Boris could even win a majority with under 30%.
Yougov last week had a Boris led Tory Party on 29%, Labour and the LDs on 22% each and the Brexit Party on 13% giving a Tory majority of 16
You do know that:
1 - Opinion polls are imprecise tools with issues with trying to chase accuracy 2 - Hypothetical opinion polls have notoriously poor utility 3 - In any case, they are a snapshot and not a prediction?
Coupled with that, there are no ready algorithms for accurately translating opinion polls to FPTP seats under our system (without the massive data aggregation exercise carried out by Curtice et al on election day), and the approximations that people have designed over the years break down totally with divisions on this level?
Because it seems to the casual reader that you're claiming that they are precise, accurate, reliable, predictive, and correspond to specific seat outcomes.
I see PB Tories are already assuming the fading out of the Brexit Party and the inevitable supremacy of Boris.
But this doesn’t look the most likely outcome if an election were held in 2019. I would put my money on a Labour minority government, supported unto paralysis by the SNP and the Lib Dems, and a referendum on Brexit.
Perversely, and as May knew but could not execute against due to severe character flaws:
1. the Tories are doomed in any GE unless they Brexit. 2. Brexit cannot take place without: a) A Cross-House compromise, now likely to include a referendum, or: b) A GE.
I would argue that 2a is not even open to Boris due to his character defects (namely, complete dishonesty and unreliability).
Hunt needs to use his honeymoon to lay out the options to the country. If we want to Brexit, we likely need another referendum to do so - because of unwillingness to compromise on both sides.
I do not believe Hunt will get passed the membership though. The Tories are turkeys voting for Christmas and the debate is about the precise colour of trussing.
I reckon Hunt would be tougher to beat in a GE than Boris.
Reason I don't is that I think Johnson would make a bigger dent in Farage. And on top of that I fear that his appeal to people who are both shallow and apolitical (many millions) is quite strong.
"That Boris Johnson, he's a laugh though, innie."
Tough to go up against that armed only with things like a detailed plan for a decentralized state bank to boost wealth & opportunity in the regions.
I reckon Hunt would be tougher to beat in a GE than Boris.
Reason I don't is that I think Johnson would make a bigger dent in Farage. And on top of that I fear that his appeal to people who are both shallow and apolitical (many millions) is quite strong.
"That Boris Johnson, he's a laugh though, innie."
Tough to go up against that armed only with things like a detailed plan for a decentralized state bank to boost wealth & opportunity in the regions.
Hunt is very worthy and very competent I am sure but also very dull. May in a suit?
I don't see him winning back the 20% plus of voters currently backing the Brexit party - Boris on the other hand would at least initially. And to win a majority the Tories need them.
I see PB Tories are already assuming the fading out of the Brexit Party and the inevitable supremacy of Boris.
But this doesn’t look the most likely outcome if an election were held in 2019. I would put my money on a Labour minority government, supported unto paralysis by the SNP and the Lib Dems, and a referendum on Brexit.
Perversely, and as May knew but could not execute against due to severe character flaws:
1. the Tories are doomed in any GE unless they Brexit. 2. Brexit cannot take place without: a) A Cross-House compromise, now likely to include a referendum, or: b) A GE.
I would argue that 2a is not even open to Boris due to his character defects (namely, complete dishonesty and unreliability).
Hunt needs to use his honeymoon to lay out the options to the country. If we want to Brexit, we likely need another referendum to do so - because of unwillingness to compromise on both sides.
I do not believe Hunt will get passed the membership though. The Tories are turkeys voting for Christmas and the debate is about the precise colour of trussing.
3. The EU kick us out.
Boris increases the chances of 3.
The EU will not kick us out unless Boris goes full feral, and if he does so he will be VONCed.
It would be the most miserable election campaign in our lifetime. Millions of people to choose from and the pick is either Corbyn or Johnson. Would make even Americans feel sorry for our lack of talent. Probably a record low for the two-party vote.
Did you miss the last election ?
Was hardly 1983 rerun.
Both May and Corbyn were better regarded then than now.
Hunt has a powerful argument. Boris would have to GE to get No Deal and it would be lost.
Will members listen to this logic?
Would it be lost though?
.
.
.
I don't know about that, if he runs a campaign with £350m per week to the NHS on the side of a bus, I expect it would do very, very well.
.
.
His omnibus-based lies are now fully exposed. The man on the one to Clapham won’t be duped again.
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
It was a lie. You are dishonest, deluded, or mathematically inept, all of which are perfect qualifications for people who believe in a myth called Brexit, and the disease called English nationalism
I am not a supporter of Boris but in general political discourse the 350m is factual. In a world where one party failing to commit to spending of another is a ‘cut’ , where you can legitimately tell opposite stories from the same statistic dependent of definitions, or where GDP predictions years into the future are dealt with as fact rather than diminishing probability, then we hardly criticise Leave for using such a figure. I mean it should be £135mil which is still a big number, but come the next election all parties will be using the most beneficial number to their policies and not being even handed. - we get what we deserve
I see PB Tories are already assuming the fading out of the Brexit Party and the inevitable supremacy of Boris.
But this doesn’t look the most likely outcome if an election were held in 2019. I would put my money on a Labour minority government, supported unto paralysis by the SNP and the Lib Dems, and a referendum on Brexit.
Perversely, and as May knew but could not execute against due to severe character flaws:
1. the Tories are doomed in any GE unless they Brexit. 2. Brexit cannot take place without: a) A Cross-House compromise, now likely to include a referendum, or: b) A GE.
I would argue that 2a is not even open to Boris due to his character defects (namely, complete dishonesty and unreliability).
Hunt needs to use his honeymoon to lay out the options to the country. If we want to Brexit, we likely need another referendum to do so - because of unwillingness to compromise on both sides.
I do not believe Hunt will get passed the membership though. The Tories are turkeys voting for Christmas and the debate is about the precise colour of trussing.
3. The EU kick us out.
Boris increases the chances of 3.
The EU will not kick us out unless Boris goes full feral, and if he does so he will be VONCed.
So Hunt’s plan is to do whatever is necessary to avoid a general election.
It’s as clear as day to me that if he becomes PM, he will call a second referendum. Let’s not forget that he called for one immediately after the result of the first one.
Yes, and increased Defence spending off the back of revoke will be his huge chunk of red meat.
So Hunt’s plan is to do whatever is necessary to avoid a general election.
It’s as clear as day to me that if he becomes PM, he will call a second referendum. Let’s not forget that he called for one immediately after the result of the first one.
Yes, and increased Defence spending off the back of revoke will be his huge chunk of red meat.
Do you think Penny Mordaunt has changed her mind about leaving the EU?
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
Are we still going on about the bus? I agree its getting tedious now.
If they had put £250 million or £400 million or £200 million on the bus would it really have altered the impact on those - however many and we don't know - who apparently decided to vote leave because of it?
Because to most people - admittedly not rich remaininers living in London - £200 million a week is still a sh*t load of money which they might rather spend on the NHS than on subsidising Polish farmers or extending the Slovakian motorway network.
As for the wider debate ask people what they earn - is it their gross salary, their net salary after taxes and NI, do you include pension contributions which they are likely to get back in the future admittedly on terms and a a time someone else decides (e.g. the government of their employer). Do you also take into account the tax free personal allowance, tax credits (a rebate of sorts), pension contributions paid outside your pay which you get a rebate on later, charitable donations and other welfare payments.
Like most people's wage packet every month what we pay into the EU can be calculated in many ways! Whether its £150 million, £250 million or £350 million a week its still still a lot of money to the majority of people - and it is only likely to keep going up as unlike ordinary people in Europe the EU doesn't seem to have to experience the effects of austerity.
Thank you, perfectly encapsulating why most leavers have zero understanding of economics. Which is why the lie worked, and similar lies about the EU continue to be perpetrated by people like Boris Johnson. Oh, how he laughs at you, but you fail to see it.
Thanks for the insult - even though you miss the point entirely.
Remainers were the dumb ones in this instance - as soon as they started whining and fussing about the number (£250 million or £350 million or whatever sum per week which sounds like a shedload of cash to most voters) they reinforced the overall message (i.e. we are a net contributor to the EU to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds a week and in theory we could spend that contribution on the NHS).
We are talking about campaigning messages here - and remain fell for it hook line and sinker!
Anyone who changed their vote over £350 million a week - who know how many did - would presumably also have done so had it said £150 million a week or £250 million.
We are talking about a campaign slogan which to their error the opposing side kept going on about even though it undermined their case.
Maybe you can be too intelligent for your own good!
If there is scope for tax cuts then the old Coalition policy priority of raising the tax threshold should be implemented. £15k should be the initial target.
I disagree. It’s important that people see tax going out of their pay cheque.
There are other more damaging taxes that could be reduced
It would be the most miserable election campaign in our lifetime. Millions of people to choose from and the pick is either Corbyn or Johnson. Would make even Americans feel sorry for our lack of talent. Probably a record low for the two-party vote.
Did you miss the last election ?
Was hardly 1983 rerun.
Both May and Corbyn were better regarded then than now.
Faint praise.
Not really. At the start of the campaign, Tories were sufficiently confident in their leader to make the whole campaign based around her strong and stable personality. And Corbyn emerged from the campaign with his credibility and popularity enhanced.
Both of them are in an entirely different position now.
I see PB Tories are already assuming the fading out of the Brexit Party and the inevitable supremacy of Boris.
But this doesn’t look the most likely outcome if an election were held in 2019. I would put my money on a Labour minority government, supported unto paralysis by the SNP and the Lib Dems, and a referendum on Brexit.
Perversely, and as May knew but could not execute against due to severe character flaws:
1. the Tories are doomed in any GE unless they Brexit. 2. Brexit cannot take place without: a) A Cross-House compromise, now likely to include a referendum, or: b) A GE.
I would argue that 2a is not even open to Boris due to his character defects (namely, complete dishonesty and unreliability).
Hunt needs to use his honeymoon to lay out the options to the country. If we want to Brexit, we likely need another referendum to do so - because of unwillingness to compromise on both sides.
I do not believe Hunt will get passed the membership though. The Tories are turkeys voting for Christmas and the debate is about the precise colour of trussing.
The MPs are clearly already weighing up whether and how they can cut their members out of the equation. The challenge is that this only really works for Boris, unless and until some serious dirt emerges on him. There must be some (that is new); the question is who has it? And how good is their sense of timing?
What a slew of rubbish from every candidate this weekend. Frankly depressing.
Johnson has decided my bank account is his priority.
Hunt wants to slash abortions, whilst simultaneously confirming he has no plans to actually do that
Gove wants to replace VAT, for no real reason, with an inferior alternative (probably at the cost of billions).
Each of them called out the other on their idiocy.
Did anyone actually say anything coherent???
None of it would pass let alone with Brexit still to deal with, but still.
Theory: None of them actually wants the job. Not really. They have to go for it, because political careers work on an "up or out" basis. But the next PM will face the same Brexit hell that TM did, only worse. So there's a reverse Catch-22; anyone wanting to the PM hasn't enough grip on reality to be allowed to.
So what's a boy or girl to do? Campaign seriously and hope that one's unsuitability comes to light.
It's probably a wrong theory, but how can you distinguish it from the current reality?
Campaign seriously and demonstrate your ability to reach out to non-Tories and unify the country.
Of course Roryyou won’t have a chance but you can set yourself up as a healer and go to guy for when the other approach us tested to destructive
Not lies, £350 million was the gross amount. And the EU still wants to eliminate the rebate.
Are we still going on about the bus? I agree its getting tedious now.
If they had put £250 million or £400 million or £200 million on the bus would it really have altered the impact on those - however many and we don't know - who apparently decided to vote leave because of it?
Because to most people - admittedly not rich remaininers living in London - £200 million a week is still a sh*t load of money which they might rather spend on the NHS than on subsidising Polish farmers or extending the Slovakian motorway network.
Like most people's wage packet every month what we pay into the EU can be calculated in many ways! Whether its £150 million, £250 million or £350 million a week its still still a lot of money to the majority of people - and it is only likely to keep going up as unlike ordinary people in Europe the EU doesn't seem to have to experience the effects of austerity.
Thank you, perfectly encapsulating why most leavers have zero understanding of economics. Which is why the lie worked, and similar lies about the EU continue to be perpetrated by people like Boris Johnson. Oh, how he laughs at you, but you fail to see it.
Thanks for the insult - even though you miss the point entirely.
Remainers were the dumb ones in this instance - as soon as they started whining and fussing about the number (£250 million or £350 million or whatever sum per week which sounds like a shedload of cash to most voters) they reinforced the overall message (i.e. we are a net contributor to the EU to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds a week and in theory we could spend that contribution on the NHS).
We are talking about campaigning messages here - and remain fell for it hook line and sinker!
Anyone who changed their vote over £350 million a week - who know how many did - would presumably also have done so had it said £150 million a week or £250 million.
We are talking about a campaign slogan which to their error the opposing side kept going on about even though it undermined their case.
Maybe you can be too intelligent for your own good!
As a firm and committed Remainer, I agree. We should have banged on about the grants places like Wales and the SW ......... and even a plant nursery in Essex ...... got.
If there is scope for tax cuts then the old Coalition policy priority of raising the tax threshold should be implemented. £15k should be the initial target.
I disagree. It’s important that people see tax going out of their pay cheque.
There are other more damaging taxes that could be reduced
Plenty of National Insurance going out of most pay cheques -not mine I am too old to pay NI.
Comments
If the Tories want an electable non Boris pick Javid, Stewart or even Raab
The C fell off
In fact, given I am Labour, let's rephrase - who, with my Labour hat on, as opposed to my betting book, or the rigorously objective persona that I adopt for political debate on this forum, do I want to win?
It's obvious. I want the one who -
(i) is easier to beat in a GE - AND - (ii) is the more likely to be forced into one.
Trouble is, in my view the answer to (i) is Hunt, and to (ii) is Johnson.
So, all in all, on balance, all things considered - Come on Dom!
If they had put £250 million or £400 million or £200 million on the bus would it really have altered the impact on those - however many and we don't know - who apparently decided to vote leave because of it?
Because to most people - admittedly not rich remaininers living in London - £200 million a week is still a sh*t load of money which they might rather spend on the NHS than on subsidising Polish farmers or extending the Slovakian motorway network.
As for the wider debate ask people what they earn - is it their gross salary, their net salary after taxes and NI, do you include pension contributions which they are likely to get back in the future admittedly on terms and a a time someone else decides (e.g. the government of their employer). Do you also take into account the tax free personal allowance, tax credits (a rebate of sorts), pension contributions paid outside your pay which you get a rebate on later, charitable donations and other welfare payments.
Like most people's wage packet every month what we pay into the EU can be calculated in many ways! Whether its £150 million, £250 million or £350 million a week its still still a lot of money to the majority of people - and it is only likely to keep going up as unlike ordinary people in Europe the EU doesn't seem to have to experience the effects of austerity.
Boris' tax cut is targeted at southern and London ABs who dislike Corbyn but are less keen on Brexit
1 - Opinion polls are imprecise tools with issues with trying to chase accuracy
2 - Hypothetical opinion polls have notoriously poor utility
3 - In any case, they are a snapshot and not a prediction?
Coupled with that, there are no ready algorithms for accurately translating opinion polls to FPTP seats under our system (without the massive data aggregation exercise carried out by Curtice et al on election day), and the approximations that people have designed over the years break down totally with divisions on this level?
Because it seems to the casual reader that you're claiming that they are precise, accurate, reliable, predictive, and correspond to specific seat outcomes.
As I said earlier, this is like being a supplier of fresh produce and saying; "hey we do slightly more business with Budgens, Spar shops and several hundred independent shops than we do to Tesco, Waitrose and Aldi. Let's tell the big guys to fuck themselves. They need us more than we need them." MMM GOOD BUSINESS SENSE!!
Was hardly 1983 rerun.
But OTOH it could have a polarizing effect driven by fear and intense dislike of the other side. Especially if the Tories offer Hard Brexit and Labour offer Ref/Remain.
The outcome could be a squeeze on LD and BP, therefore a high Lab/Con aggregate vote.
If elected he will have to at some time answer some questions that he would prefer not to be asked. An embarrassing revelation or confession once leader would be disaster for the party. Why are they taking the risk?
"Let's send £171 million a week* to Brussels, instead of spending it on our NHS!"
[* net, 2017!]
Tory members are desperate for hope and will cling to him regardless of any logic.
This contest is longer than 24 hrs. Gove at 26s is the current value.
But this doesn’t look the most likely outcome if an election were held in 2019. I would put my money on a Labour minority government, supported unto paralysis by the SNP and the Lib Dems, and a referendum on Brexit.
Perversely, and as May knew but could not execute against due to severe character flaws:
1. the Tories are doomed in any GE unless they Brexit.
2. Brexit cannot take place without:
a) A Cross-House compromise, now likely to include a referendum, or:
b) A GE.
I would argue that 2a is not even open to Boris due to his character defects (namely, complete dishonesty and unreliability).
Hunt needs to use his honeymoon to lay out the options to the country. If we want to Brexit, we likely need another referendum to do so - because of unwillingness to compromise on both sides.
I do not believe Hunt will get passed the membership though. The Tories are turkeys voting for Christmas and the debate is about the precise colour of trussing.
Both May and Corbyn were better regarded then than now.
Boris increases the chances of 3.
"That Boris Johnson, he's a laugh though, innie."
Tough to go up against that armed only with things like a detailed plan for a decentralized state bank to boost wealth & opportunity in the regions.
I don't see him winning back the 20% plus of voters currently backing the Brexit party - Boris on the other hand would at least initially. And to win a majority the Tories need them.
Remainers were the dumb ones in this instance - as soon as they started whining and fussing about the number (£250 million or £350 million or whatever sum per week which sounds like a shedload of cash to most voters) they reinforced the overall message (i.e. we are a net contributor to the EU to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds a week and in theory we could spend that contribution on the NHS).
We are talking about campaigning messages here - and remain fell for it hook line and sinker!
Anyone who changed their vote over £350 million a week - who know how many did - would presumably also have done so had it said £150 million a week or £250 million.
We are talking about a campaign slogan which to their error the opposing side kept going on about even though it undermined their case.
Maybe you can be too intelligent for your own good!
There are other more damaging taxes that could be reduced
Both of them are in an entirely different position now.
The MPs are clearly already weighing up whether and how they can cut their members out of the equation. The challenge is that this only really works for Boris, unless and until some serious dirt emerges on him. There must be some (that is new); the question is who has it? And how good is their sense of timing?
Of course Roryyou won’t have a chance but you can set yourself up as a healer and go to guy for when the other approach us tested to destructive
New thread