Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The idea that BoJo has some magical means of reaching LAB or p
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The idea that BoJo has some magical means of reaching LAB or pro-Brexit voters isn’t backed up by his record
Let's not forget that LAB secured a 6.5% swing against Boris at GE2017. That hardly suggests he can reach voters that others can't pic.twitter.com/DpsvZahKoN
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
So the farmer decides to continue to trade with Tesco's but exercises a clause to get out of the exclusivity deal with them. Now they can sign favourable deals with Waitrose, Aldi, Spar and yes hundreds of independents too.
He also successfully led 2016 too.
But 2016 was 3 years ago and he was up against David Cameron then, the most successful UK leader post-Blair.
Demographic changes mean Uxbridge won't be a Tory seat much longer - in common with many parts of London - and he will no doubt be subject to a tactical voting campaign. It may depend on whether the Brexit party runs and who the Greens and LDs endorse. Had he not felt the need to commit to a London seat as outgoing Mayor in 2015 he probably would have picked somewhere safer ideally?
I am enjoying Rory's campaign - but is he actually meeting members of the electorate (i.e. Tory MPs) much?
Yet Boris won, defeating Cameron, Obama etc - that surely is more evidence that he can win than in one constituency a swing of 6.5 vs a swing of 6.2
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.
You could have made it briefer: the Tories are screwed.
But if we're choosing I will go for a sugar pink and lime green one please.
1. Before the 31st October. I'm not entirely convinced that this is a practical scenario, but let's assume it is. What would the pitch of Boris be in this case? If it's 'back me and we'll leave willy-nilly, deal or no deal', then presumably he'd be hoping to win back voters from the Brexit Party, in the hope that these would outnumber those lost from the sane wing of the party. That looks to me a pretty forlorn hope: do people really think that Farage is going to go away just because Boris is PM? Of course not - he'd be out there saying that Boris was planning to betray the country and that a vote for the Brexit Party was the only way to keep the Tories honest. Meanwhile Boris would have the problem that any attempt to keep No Deal as a viable option would split the party; the likes of David Gauke, Amber Rudd, Greg Clark, Phil Hammond and a hundred to so other MPs are not going to suddenly decide that No Deal is anything other than a complete disaster. Boris would have to equivocate, which would feed Farage's betrayal myth.
2. In the months following the 31st October. This scenario is easy to dispose of; either we'd have left in chaos, in which case the Conservative Party would be destroyed by the fallout, or Boris would have reneged on his brain-dead 31st October commitment, in which case the anger and shouts of 'Betrayal!' would be deafening.
3. Much later, having successfully left the EU on time. Well, if you can a way to get there, there's a dozen of so wannabe leaders who would love to hear what it is.
In other words, the electoral appeal or otherwise of Boris is actually pretty irrelevant, since the logic of Boris' position is such that any election is highly likely to be under catastrophic conditions for the Conservative Party
4. Much later, having cancelled Brexit in accordance with the referendum
I think (3) is very good for him, and (4) is bad, but there's plenty of time between now and 2022 to change the narrative.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1feCjt98HJcY9tlc5Zx78ZoSOC2fN-j0vRVFD5eUTbUE/edit#gid=0
Johnson 61, Gove 35, Hunt 35, Raab 24, Javid 19, Hancock 14, Harper 7, McVey 6, Stewart 6, Leadsom 5, Gyimah 4.
None of this is any use because on any rational analysis - like Richard Nabavi's - the Tories are stuffed in every direction. Only a weather changing, charisma laden candidate holds out any chance - and that a small one of avoiding disaster. As to how - that's like asking Thatcher in 1978 or Churchill in 1939. Boris will still win, unless he absolutely blows up. Stewart and Hunt and could be in a tremendous battle to be the last conventional candidate standing
"Glyn Davies told BBC Radio Wales Breakfast With Claire Summers that he would be nominating Andrea Leadsom to ensure she can be on the ballot paper.
He said he could be supporting Jeremy Hunt, but has a "tremendous respect" for Michael Gove and wouldn't be completely against Boris Johnson."
Yes it's wishful thinking but as with the WA everything else is impossible. Then again, once you have a taste of unicorn soup it's difficult to go back to mulligatawny.
Asked how she would ensure her plan for a no-deal Brexit happened when MPs had previously opposed the idea, McVey – who has refused to rule out proroguing the chamber – said she would deny them any votes on the issue:
"The prime minister kept bringing motions back to the floor, and that allowed people to put amendment to it, that allowed what precipitated going forwards. And that’s when you saw the antics of Yvette Cooper and Oliver Letwin, turning parliament on its head.
But that only happened because the prime minister kept bringing back motions to the floor of the house. So really we need to stop bringing things to the floor of the house, and the default position is to leave through article 50."
A novel programme for government, to be sure! Quite how it fits in with no-deal preparations is a question I'll leave for others.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2019/jun/10/tory-leadership-boris-johnsons-tax-cut-plan-would-never-get-through-commons-says-leadsom-live-news
I would say that Hillingdon is a very different story to Chingford, which is very much a diminishing island of blue surrounded by red East London.
Realistically probably start off with the EU's baseline but then drop to 0% anything we don't produce ourselves [like olives etc]
Thatcher didn't run from Finchley and her majority was smaller after Oct 1974 than Boris's is now.
In fact anything that annoys Jack is a good thing.
I thought they might extend it at least to pensioners in receipt of council tax benefit who just miss out on pension credit. And I presume those on pension credit aged below 75 still have to pay.
Probably going to lead to more scrutiny - poor pensioner has to give up watching telly as she can't afford her £160 licence fee while Graham Norton and Gary Lineker get a £200k pay rise!
Could some people here make themselves any more absurd if they tried?
Contrarywise, the poor performance in Uxbridge was due to demographic change which is affecting formerly white outer London particularly. But Mike is right that it is hard to discern any Boris upside.
Chance of
winning
CON
15%
LAB
23%
LIB
17%
UKIP
0%
Green
3%
Brexit
42%
I'd say Boris' chances were better than 15%, and the Greens worse than 3% - but that's as far as I'd go at the moment.
I don't think any of the children I know actually watch any TV nowadays. It's all Youtube, Movies and Podcasts.
When I went to Uni, one thing you had to sort out was a TV licence, nowadays why would you when you don't see any point in owning a TV....
https://twitter.com/tom_watson/status/1138071398440669184
We have yet to be treated by any Candidate to an explanation of how Brexit is to proceed without inflicting heavy damage on the Party, or even the Country. The explanation for this is that there isn't one, regardless of who the new Guv is.
According to Guido Fawkes: Johnson currently has 63 backers while 149 have opted for other candidates and 118 are undeclared. If we assume that the “undeclareds” are likely to be on the government payroll and unlikely to back Johnson, how does he get to 111?
If he took all 25 Raab backers (unlikely) this still only gets him to 88.
I accept that he will pick up some support from other candidates when they are eliminated, but Johnson`s price looks way too short to me.
You are inconsistent.
Or a troll.
When you were at university did have your own telly in your halls or shared student flat and if so did you buy your own tv licence? I expect many students assumed they could rely on their parents licence or the college licence - do we have more potential law breakers?
https://twitter.com/matthewchampion/status/1138003648125030401
1. Can't see Boris becoming leader. Nothing rational or logical, just a feeling that he will prove too risky for a lot of Tories.
2. Do the stories about Gove make it more likely fringe candidates like Leadsom get through as MPs worry about culling the field too much at this stage if one of the other candidates implodes?
3. The most obvious pairing of candidates in the contest would seem to be Raab/McVey. They both resigned at the same time and seem to hold the same views on how to Brexit. Raab has taken more of a tax cutting line but his comments this morning on lifting lower-paid workers out of the tax bracket brings it closer to McVey's blue-collar conservatism. Depending on the number of McVey's backers, Raab might have a chunky block (but obviously other candidates exiting would help others).
Johnson is so short because the assumption is he will win the member vote whoever he faces
For example, if Hunt mopped up most support and the final tally was, say, Hunt 230 Johnson 100 think of the pressure there would be on members to mirror the MPs choice.
Think it's a mistake to view the referendum result as indicative of approval for or against a given candidate. It went the way it did because the Leave campaign was bad and the Remain campaign was even worse.