If he gets the balancing act right, getting people into their own homes earlier, while not destroying the savings of the oldies... then he'll deserve to win in 2024.
It's almost as if he read your piece the other day about historic tory successes built on home ownership
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
The interesting thing about the Angela Rayner argument is that it’s overshadowed the fact that Starmer has had to change his shadow chancellor.
Funnily enough, Dodds was so anonymous that most people will barely notice that she’s been replaced!
It in the very nature of politics that the Govt ministers are more prominent than their shadows, but, Boris is so dominant, I struggle to think who the Government ministers are too.
The punters clearly have good grounds and recent evidence for confidence. And, as we've seen here, quite a few have already profited from betting for, and on, Boris Johnson and his Tory Party.
The Mr Mop and Goodyear Blimp of British Politics has scored an impressive political triumph at the 2021 election, no doubt about it.
PB, the world and it's significant other can analyze and debate the whys and wherefores, from COVID to wallpaper, from Hartlepool to Edinburgh to Cardiff to Kent - and back again to our heart's (and spleen's) delight. And will.
The fact of the Prime Minister's electoral achievement its historic nature and future impact is undeniable.
In even better shape is the Conservative and Unionist Party. If not the Union. B
Tories have proven, now twice, that they can win - and win big - with Boris Johnson at the helm. With a hat trick certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.
And IF the Boris stumbles, slackens or starts skydiving without a parachute - like he's done more than once (all three) his party retains the option of removing and replacing him in the twinkling of an eye - a fine old Tory tradition.
With likely more than a fighting chance of remaining atop the Greasy Pole of Thorney Island - another Conservative tradition.
What the Labour Party should and can and will do to counter and challenge Boris & Co. is an open question. Right now, it's looking about as open to or capable of solution as the Irish - or Palestinian - Question. For the party that 15 years ago that ruled the roost.
But then THAT was the position of the Conservatives 15 years before then (or close enough for government work.) Which goes to show that nothing is eternal. Even Tory hegemony.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
The fact of the Prime Minister's electoral achievement its historic nature and future impact is undeniable.
In even better shape is the Conservative and Unionist Party. If not the Union.
Tories have proven, now twice, that they can win - and win big - with Boris Johnson at the helm. With a hat trick certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.
[...] But then THAT was the position of the Conservatives 15 years before then (or close enough for government work.) Which goes to show that nothing is eternal. Even Tory hegemony.
Absolutely right. I think PB probably needs to get with the fact of this. Boris Johnson is a proven winner and a big winner at that.
Your final sentence is also true.
Putting the two together, the Conservatives will win the next General Election convincingly. They will then probably win the one after that if Boris wishes to fight it.
I think it very unlikely that the Labour Party would be contending for power for the next decade.
There's no point railing about it or pretending it's otherwise. Sit back and observe the spectacle that has happened: a seismic paradigm shift in our lifetime. A complete re-drawing of British politics. Thatcher did it. Blair did it. Boris has now done it.
If he gets the balancing act right, getting people into their own homes earlier, while not destroying the savings of the oldies... then he'll deserve to win in 2024.
Certainly was one of the keys to Harold Macmillan's political rise, and early success, one of the foundations for "You Never Had it So Good" in 1959 - the last time before 2021 the Tories won (The) Harlepoo(s).
Especially IF he and Conservatives can credibly argue that their housing program is environmentally responsible and a step in the correct (if not right in every sense) direction.
That may make the bowels of Blue Meanies steethe and rumble. But they'll hold their tongues (somewhat) and their horses (even more) IF it appears to be working politically.
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
During current pandemic most incumbent governments have gotten a clear COVID bump when seeking re-election. With Trumpsky''s GOP being a major exceptionk, and one tending to prove the rule.
As for spending, that can also be a plus, both politically and economically IF it is managed half-way properly AND money is spent on the right things. Such as ensuring that bridges don't fall down and energy grids don't crash.
I've witnessed 3 political paradigm shifts in my lifetime:
Margaret Thatcher 1979, Tony Blair 1997, Boris Johnson 2019
Enjoy the spectacle. It doesn't happen very often.
The jury's still on on BJ for me. BREXIT & COVID yes, but not BJ as a PM
There will always be political scandals and government screwups. And visa versa.
The X-factor with Boris, is that compared with both Maggie and Tony (all three incidentally instantly recognizable on first-name basis by 90% plus of the Great British Public) is his relative personal instability.
Which without going into the details is bloody obvious. And a Sword of Damocles dangling above the new decor at No. 10.
I've witnessed 3 political paradigm shifts in my lifetime:
Margaret Thatcher 1979, Tony Blair 1997, Boris Johnson 2019
Enjoy the spectacle. It doesn't happen very often.
The jury's still on on BJ for me. BREXIT & COVID yes, but not BJ as a PM
There will always be political scandals and government screwups. And visa versa.
The X-factor with Boris, is that compared with both Maggie and Tony (all three incidentally instantly recognizable on first-name basis by 90% plus of the Great British Public) is his relative personal instability.
Which without going into the details is bloody obvious. And a Sword of Damocles dangling above the new decor at No. 10.
True but Tony's problem was his massive egocentricity which is partly what fuelled the disastrous decision to go to war in Iraq.
Maggie's problem was not dissimilar: a huge arrogance which fuelled the disastrous poll tax.
I don't think Boris is that self-confident and I don't think he will go to war in a foreign land (apart from hopefully sinking the occasional French naval vessel)
Of the three types of hubris I actually think that of Boris is less electorally toxic.
Jim Naughtie R4 - making the point that the arrival of Angus Robertson in Holyrood who wants "a more nuanced presentation on independence" will make things more interesting....I'd also observe there is also an obvious potential replacement for Sturgeon should the Number 13 bus intervene....
I've witnessed 3 political paradigm shifts in my lifetime:
Margaret Thatcher 1979, Tony Blair 1997, Boris Johnson 2019
Enjoy the spectacle. It doesn't happen very often.
The jury's still on on BJ for me. BREXIT & COVID yes, but not BJ as a PM
There will always be political scandals and government screwups. And visa versa.
The X-factor with Boris, is that compared with both Maggie and Tony (all three incidentally instantly recognizable on first-name basis by 90% plus of the Great British Public) is his relative personal instability.
Which without going into the details is bloody obvious. And a Sword of Damocles dangling above the new decor at No. 10.
True but Tony's problem was his massive egocentricity which is partly what fuelled the disastrous decision to go to war in Iraq.
Maggie's problem was not dissimilar: a huge arrogance which fuelled the disastrous poll tax.
I don't think Boris is that self-confident and I don't think he will go to war in a foreign land (apart from hopefully sinking the occasional French naval vessel)
Of the three types of hubris I actually think that of Boris is less electorally toxic.
If he wishes to, he can be in power for a decade.
Good points re: both Thatcher & Blair.
Yet the miscalculations and mistakes you cite were largely related to much larger policy goals as part of a reasonably-thought out agenda. Whether you agreed with it or not.
Johnson has also shown focus in getting Brexit - and Jab It - done. However, his overall personal and political approach has been both chaotic and quixotic, more so than Thatcher & Blair, not always BUT for the most part.
I've witnessed 3 political paradigm shifts in my lifetime:
Margaret Thatcher 1979, Tony Blair 1997, Boris Johnson 2019
Enjoy the spectacle. It doesn't happen very often.
The jury's still on on BJ for me. BREXIT & COVID yes, but not BJ as a PM
There will always be political scandals and government screwups. And visa versa.
The X-factor with Boris, is that compared with both Maggie and Tony (all three incidentally instantly recognizable on first-name basis by 90% plus of the Great British Public) is his relative personal instability.
Which without going into the details is bloody obvious. And a Sword of Damocles dangling above the new decor at No. 10.
True but Tony's problem was his massive egocentricity which is partly what fuelled the disastrous decision to go to war in Iraq.
Maggie's problem was not dissimilar: a huge arrogance which fuelled the disastrous poll tax.
I don't think Boris is that self-confident and I don't think he will go to war in a foreign land (apart from hopefully sinking the occasional French naval vessel)
Of the three types of hubris I actually think that of Boris is less electorally toxic.
If he wishes to, he can be in power for a decade.
All PMs have that said about them at some point.... even Gordon Brown
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
The interesting thing about the Angela Rayner argument is that it’s overshadowed the fact that Starmer has had to change his shadow chancellor.
Funnily enough, Dodds was so anonymous that most people will barely notice that she’s been replaced!
She was anti anonymous, in that she was so anonymous it kept being brought up she was too anonymous. I can't remember who the Shadow Home Secretary was or is and I saw the list yesterday.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
You used the pub thing on a post in the last thread, commenting that Labour used to be the party of pint drinkers but is now the party of wine drinkers. It's common on here - most would rather have a pint with Boris rather than Keir.
But I think, as a generalisation, that the 'bloke in the pub' thing is mildly sexist, not consciously so of course, and neglects the fact that half of the voters are female, and most of these don't want to be blokeish and drink pints down the pub. Indeed, many women drink wine down the pub.
I expect now to be called 'woke' and that I'm the epitome of all that is wrong with the modern left and that's why we lost the red wall. But to me, women count (and vote).
By those standards “many women drink wine down the pub” is equally mildly sexist.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
1992-7 was unique. Black Wednesday ended the idea that the Conservatives were competent on the economy.
But the irony of that is that it was in fact the very same day which released the UK into prosperity: it was leaving the European Exchange Rate Mechanism which freed us to power ahead economically.
I think you are misreading this Robert. Not majorly. You and others are right that eventually Boris will come unstuck. But I think you're wrong to assume this is going to happen anytime soon. In fact, the opposite. At the next GE there's every chance the tories will increase their majority. Why? Because the seismic shift in British politics has only just begun. Aspirational former northern Labour voters are going to turn to the tories in their droves. I can see them sweeping the north.
They may lose a few woke studenty metropolitan seats in the south in the process but these will be piddling compared to the political paradigm shift which is unfolding.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
1992-7 was unique. Black Wednesday ended the idea that the Conservatives were competent on the economy.
But the irony of that is that it was in fact the very same day which released the UK into prosperity: it was leaving the European Exchange Rate Mechanism which freed us to power ahead economically.
I think you are misreading this Robert. Not majorly. You and others are right that eventually Boris will come unstuck. But I think you're wrong to assume this is going to happen anytime soon. In fact, the opposite. At the next GE there's every chance the tories will increase their majority. Why? Because the seismic shift in British politics has only just begun. Aspirational former northern Labour voters are going to turn to the tories in their droves. I can see them sweeping the north.
They may lose a few woke studenty metropolitan seats in the south in the process but these will be piddling compared to the political paradigm shift which is unfolding.
Whilst I think Tories are value for the next election, seats they are losing in the south are not wokey studenty metropolitan seats (not sure the Tories even have any of those at all?) but the nicer commuter towns that serve the cities.
If working from home is sustainable, how many commuter towns will become younger and more liberal, and how quickly that happens will have a big impact on our politics.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
1992-7 was unique. Black Wednesday ended the idea that the Conservatives were competent on the economy.
But the irony of that is that it was in fact the very same day which released the UK into prosperity: it was leaving the European Exchange Rate Mechanism which freed us to power ahead economically.
I think you are misreading this Robert. Not majorly. You and others are right that eventually Boris will come unstuck. But I think you're wrong to assume this is going to happen anytime soon. In fact, the opposite. At the next GE there's every chance the tories will increase their majority. Why? Because the seismic shift in British politics has only just begun. Aspirational former northern Labour voters are going to turn to the tories in their droves. I can see them sweeping the north.
They may lose a few woke studenty metropolitan seats in the south in the process but these will be piddling compared to the political paradigm shift which is unfolding.
If he implements, to use his own phrase, a substantial and successful leveling up policy to the North he has a good chance of harming Labour.
The LibDems really don't deserve another chance to replace Labour. Maybe the Greens will go there, although Johnstones tanks will be on their wild flower meadow too.
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
You have to be somewhat negative as you have to say those in power are not doing good enough and you could. Not overdoing the gloom may be important, if people in general dont agree things are as bad as you say
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Great post. And whilst not everything is by any means rosy in the UK on the race front, Meghan Markle was lying through her teeth, or simply utterly mistaken, in her comments about race here. The UK is nothing like the US on race issues.
I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks the odds on a Conservative majority are still far too skinny: I think the real chance is in the 65-75% range.
Agreed, laying Lab is probably the more attractive side of the bet for me. Essentially risk free, although opportunity cost, and risk of substantial inflation eats into it a bit.
Agree about Labour majority. A 13% chance is ludicrously high. It requires a black swan of a variety that no-one can describe even in outline. It not only needs a once in 20 year shift from the status quo but also for that shift not to benefit other centre left parties. The Tories will be busy maximising the potential to split votes between LD, Lab and Greens and these elections give lots of data as to how to do it. While the Tories (let's call them centre right but it needs a new term for their version of leftish Brexity Heseltine) have a vote that isn't split with other parties and a national spread.
The LDs were second in 91 seats, nearly all of them Tory held.
I don't think Labour majority is more than a 5% chance. As to Con v NOM I agree they are about level.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP.
And two Conservative list MSPs.
As The Economist observed, when the UK left the EU the diversity of the European Parliament significantly reduced, with the UK taking most of the parliament's BAME MEPs with them.
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Indeed, we have a lot to celebrate and be proud of on race in the UK.
Equally we should recognise there is much further to go, as SandyRentool pointed out last night, our council list system where you vote for multiple people from the same parties shows in an Islamic majority area the non Islamic "sounding" candidate from a party gets the least votes and vice versa.
Most people who are actively discussing race in the media seem to prefer to either be in one camp or the other; things are great here or there are a lot of problems. Whereas I think the correct place to be, and hopefully that of much of those who are quiet about it, is that both are true - the UK has made great progress compared to both its past and international peers, we should be proud of that and celebrate it, but there is still much more to do.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Excellent point. And very Rooseveltian - both Teddy & FDR - and Reaganesque.
Bill Clinton and George W. Bush were also pretty good at it too (Bush the Elder & Hillary not so much).
Trumpsky COULD have been very good. But he's too damn mean & ignorant for his own good - thank you Jesus!
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
It seems to have come on very quickly, as even a couple of decades ago there were very few BAME MPs. And it's not like its only seats which are heavily non white which are so represented. Encouraging.
I believe the UK still has the gayest parliament in the world too, IIR the Pink News press release correctly.
What an extraordinary interview with Diane Abbott. Is there a policy Boris Johnson would want Labour to adopt *more* than a return to free movement with the EU despite being outside the EU? Maybe a tax on babies?
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
You have to be somewhat negative as you have to say those in power are not doing good enough and you could. Not overdoing the gloom may be important, if people in general dont agree things are as bad as you say
It's hard though because it takes me back to that Ronald Reagan moment: 'there you go again.' When there's a surge in optimism and people are looking forward with hope it's not smart to be looking backwards in bitterness.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I have little interest in the wallpaper. And no one I know does either.
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
He risks seriously upsetting voters in the South who are fed up with huge estates being built .
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
He risks seriously upsetting voters in the South who are fed up with huge estates being built .
Undoubtedly. But he has a buffer of seats and a lot needs doing. If politicians are too scared to act even with a big majority what's the point of it? Have they forgotten govs are usually behind for a lot of their terms?
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Great post. And whilst not everything is by any means rosy in the UK on the race front, Meghan Markle was lying through her teeth, or simply utterly mistaken, in her comments about race here. The UK is nothing like the US on race issues.
True - meaning your observations NOT that my post is great!
Will say that USA has made some advances politically on this front. Democrats have nominated and elected Black president and VP. And New York City will almost certainly elect either an Asian OR a Black mayor in 2021.
And methinks the Republicans may not be too far behind; certainly Nikki Haley is presidential timber, and Tim Scott a prospect for VP. Note that both are from South Carolina, home of John C. Calhoun and Strom Thurmond, and the first state to secede from the Union in defense of slavery back in the day.
We've definitely got a LOOOOOOONG way to go. But we've come a long way, baby!
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
Maybe he'll get caught out if he goes on a holiday to Berlusconi's place.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He's a man who has somehow figured out how to drive nails in to his own coffin whilst inside it.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
It seems to have come on very quickly, as even a couple of decades ago there were very few BAME MPs. And it's not like its only seats which are heavily non white which are so represented. Encouraging.
I believe the UK still has the gayest parliament in the world too, IIR the Pink News press release correctly.
The Gayest Parliament sounds like a musical waiting to be written and choreographed!
Does anyone on this board know how to get in touch with Elton John & Andrew Lloyd Weber?
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Indeed, we have a lot to celebrate and be proud of on race in the UK.
Equally we should recognise there is much further to go
While the UK was still in the EU, Black Britons reported among the lowest levels of discrimination among member states:
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
That Boris could (and did) successfully spin a corruption and possibly bribery issue as being a mere disagreement over wallpaper shows the failure of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Nonetheless, it might yet end Boris's premiership.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes but not quite. Obvs in a sense betting on a GE due in 2024 is like betting in the National for 2024 - we have no idea where we shall be. But numerically there are only three broad outcomes possible, so only three broad runners: Con, Lab, NOM.
I don't think it is possible to distinguish at this moment between Con and NOM, there are too many unknowns. No black swan is required for either eventuality and there are lots of routes to both outcomes. For now 50/50 is the only rational approach. Lab OTOH have no obvious routes whatsoever to a majority, and should be at no more than 5%.
I think we're getting to the stage where X Factor politics means the Labour leader HAS to have a regional accent, regardless of what they're actually saying.
Burnham makes me sick, but I suspect he might have a better chance that Starmer
It really has come to this - cos he's got a scouse accent, he'll do better than anyone who has a London constituency
We may as well just toss a coin or settle things by Twitter 'likes'
Where is Dr Doolittle when we need him?
"I can turn a Mayfair Duchess into a Middlesbrough Dental Hygienist!"
Do you mean Professor Higgins? Dr Doolittle specialised in talking to animals… not quite the image Labour wants to create…
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Ignoring the obvious shambles of how it happened is the Labour shadow cabinet stronger or weaker than last week?
Reeves is a clear upgrade on Dodds. Hard to know the effectiveness of a chief whip from the outside but Nick Brown was sacked from the job by Blair after just a year before returning under Brown, Corbyn and Starmer, hardly a glowing record. His deputy is unlikely to be worse?
So it is an improvement but I think its also a missed opportunity. Too many anonymous in their first year, of which only Dodds was replaced. Any reason why he couldnt add Drakeford, Burnham, Khan and one more midlands/northern mayor to some kind of attend shadow cabinet/party spokesman type roles? Time to think outside the box and use what they do have.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
I've witnessed 3 political paradigm shifts in my lifetime:
Margaret Thatcher 1979, Tony Blair 1997, Boris Johnson 2019
Enjoy the spectacle. It doesn't happen very often.
The jury's still on on BJ for me. BREXIT & COVID yes, but not BJ as a PM
No, I think he is right. Ignore Covid and Brexit: turn on a broken record. Boris won in 2019 on Jeremy Corbyn's 2017 platform, or if you prefer, and Conservative partisans might, Harold Macmillan's. Boris explicitly turned his back on David Cameron and Theresa May in favour of an end to austerity and massive public sector investment and an interventionist industrial policy.
It is remarkable that many Labour partisans cannot applaud this, and Conservative partisans do not oppose it. And of course, that is the fear: that whoever succeeds Boris will slam on the brakes.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes but not quite. Obvs in a sense betting on a GE due in 2024 is like betting in the National for 2024 - we have no idea where we shall be. But numerically there are only three broad outcomes possible, so only three broad runners: Con, Lab, NOM.
I don't think it is possible to distinguish at this moment between Con and NOM, there are too many unknowns. No black swan is required for either eventuality and there are lots of routes to both outcomes. For now 50/50 is the only rational approach. Lab OTOH have no obvious routes whatsoever to a majority, and should be at no more than 5%.
That's definitely true, and only needs one to look at a map and notice the crinkly bit at the top shaded a different colour. The brilliance (or not) of Boris and Keir is irrelevant.
Due to the SNP dominance in Scotland, the space where the Conservatives lose and Labour don't win is huge.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
I dont think the issue has quite disappeared... I agree it mattered little to the voters of Hartlepool/Sunderland and Cornwall but anonymous benefactors gifting our PM 000s of pounds in holidays/ expenses etc is not going to disappear, esp among the PM's many Parliamentary Tory enemies
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
Boris's nemesis might already have appeared. Integrity. Wallpapergate and also the Prime Minister's endearing habit of saying things at the despatch box without due regard to veracity.
I've witnessed 3 political paradigm shifts in my lifetime:
Margaret Thatcher 1979, Tony Blair 1997, Boris Johnson 2019
Enjoy the spectacle. It doesn't happen very often.
The jury's still on on BJ for me. BREXIT & COVID yes, but not BJ as a PM
No, I think he is right. Ignore Covid and Brexit: turn on a broken record. Boris won in 2019 on Jeremy Corbyn's 2017 platform, or if you prefer, and Conservative partisans might, Harold Macmillan's. Boris explicitly turned his back on David Cameron and Theresa May in favour of an end to austerity and massive public sector investment and an interventionist industrial policy.
It is remarkable that many Labour partisans cannot applaud this, and Conservative partisans do not oppose it. And of course, that is the fear: that whoever succeeds Boris will slam on the brakes.
There are situations when slamming on the brakes is appropriate of course.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
So it'll be flatly denied for years even though everyone knows about it?
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
The Somalia-America comparison sounds the most interesting.
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
Sigh.... The media being lazy as ever and reaching for any analogy it can remember. In what way is their relationship to date anything like early Blair/Brown? Answer? It isn’t.
Labour are now extremely unlikely to win the next GE and today's minor reshuffle will make little difference. The mountain remains the mountain. Without Scotland they have to win in England. That seems very remote at the moment.
Time to lash themselves to a mast and wait out the Johnson years?
How much does an accent matter in UK politics?Are there voters who are privately irritated by Rachel Reeves actual accent or believe Angela Rayners's accent signals stupidity ? Or vice versa market research has shown consumers trust the Scottish accent as having authority more than any other?
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
The most depressing thing Ive heard over the weekend is Gordon Brown has decided he's going to save the Union. Its the first time Ive thought the UK will split up, the man is a fecal Midas.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
Blair and Brown were in different ways outstanding politicians. Today we are dealing with Mail front page spats between two Labour leaders with no record of decent election performance and a strategy/policy gap which means Labour at 13% to win next time is highly flattering.
Not great. And the LDs and Greens are gathering to attack the same younger wokish ground that is Labour's best prospect for now.
BTW, don't write off Labour for Batley and Spen. Tories need to lower expectations fast. And if Labour do well there, and LDs win the Hams it will change the picture a bit. Boris has yet to achieve an obvious and monumental fail (in public perception). The fall out when he does will be intriguing.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
That Boris could (and did) successfully spin a corruption and possibly bribery issue as being a mere disagreement over wallpaper shows the failure of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Nonetheless, it might yet end Boris's premiership.
The media interviewed voters in the red wall seats and they were united on saying the wallpaper issue was irrelevant, one of them saying that Keir Starmer was more interested in Boris Johnson's wallpaper than them
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
Blair and Brown were in different ways outstanding politicians. Today we are dealing with Mail front page spats between two Labour leaders with no record of decent election performance and a strategy/policy gap which means Labour at 13% to win next time is highly flattering.
Not great. And the LDs and Greens are gathering to attack the same younger wokish ground that is Labour's best prospect for now.
BTW, don't write off Labour for Batley and Spen. Tories need to lower expectations fast. And if Labour do well there, and LDs win the Hams it will change the picture a bit. Boris has yet to achieve an obvious and monumental fail (in public perception). The fall out when he does will be intriguing.
Part of the Blair/Brown drama was that they were mates, who had shared an office for years and plotted every inch of the rebuild of Labour post-Foot together in that office.
I doubt that Angela is round at Keir's for drinks of a Friday evening.
Ignoring the obvious shambles of how it happened is the Labour shadow cabinet stronger or weaker than last week?
Reeves is a clear upgrade on Dodds. Hard to know the effectiveness of a chief whip from the outside but Nick Brown was sacked from the job by Blair after just a year before returning under Brown, Corbyn and Starmer, hardly a glowing record. His deputy is unlikely to be worse?
So it is an improvement but I think its also a missed opportunity. Too many anonymous in their first year, of which only Dodds was replaced. Any reason why he couldnt add Drakeford, Burnham, Khan and one more midlands/northern mayor to some kind of attend shadow cabinet/party spokesman type roles? Time to think outside the box and use what they do have.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
The Blair/Brown split was about when Blair had agreed to step down. There was no substantial policy disagreement. Both were on the right of the party; both were founders of New Labour. Brown had no discernible interest in foreign policy so while he would probably not have embarked on so many foreign adventures as Blair, he did not try to block them.
Mrs Thatcher's rows with Nigel Lawson were more substantial.
It is remarkable that Keir Starmer has been so anonymous that we cannot say if there are underlying policy differences.
It is depressing that the media bang on about splits in the Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet as if they are something new or even undesirable. Surely the whole point of Cabinet and collective responsibility is that members do disagree around the table.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
Good morning
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
So it'll be flatly denied for years even though everyone knows about it?
How much does an accent matter in UK politics?Are there voters who are privately irritated by Rachel Reeves actual accent or believe Angela Rayners's accent signals stupidity ? Or vice versa market research has shown consumers trust the Scottish accent as having authority more than any other?
I think accent privilege is a thing. I dont know how much, and it is only a gut feeling, but certain accents really stand out in certain professions. Though I'll be pleased if there is a prominent QC or neurosurgeon with a thick west country accent.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Please forgive me my moment of wokeism, but as a foreign observer of the pointy-headed liberal persuasion, allow me to say that the rise of politicos of color - BAME if you perfer (and most of PBers do not! - in British politics, in virtually all parties except for the overtly racist - is pretty doggone impressive.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Was chatting to some people yesterday about Boris. One of the things which hit home was about his 'positivity.'
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
Its probably Carrie's "can do " attitude that caused the row about wall paper... at least its not as costly a blunder as Boris Island Airport.... (imagine if that had been started by now....)
Wow you're bitter.
I couldn't give a flying fuck about his wallpaper. And no one I know could either.
They did well politically to spin the issue as just about wallpaper. If Johnson had received the 50-100k in a brown envelope, you and others might have taken a different view.
That Boris could (and did) successfully spin a corruption and possibly bribery issue as being a mere disagreement over wallpaper shows the failure of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. Nonetheless, it might yet end Boris's premiership.
The media interviewed voters in the red wall seats and they were united on saying the wallpaper issue was irrelevant, one of them saying that Keir Starmer was more interested in Boris Johnson's wallpaper than them
Good to see that Village bollocks stories are starting to cut through negatively with the general public at a time of crisis. No-one cares unless either it’s public money or an obvious Ecclestone buying policy changes.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
The most depressing thing Ive heard over the weekend is Gordon Brown has decided he's going to save the Union. Its the first time Ive thought the UK will split up, the man is a fecal Midas.
Still well respected in Scotland, which is where the 'saving' has to be done.
Comments
Funnily enough, Dodds was so anonymous that most people will barely notice that she’s been replaced!
https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/1391457224539713537?s=20
Margaret Thatcher 1979, Tony Blair 1997, Boris Johnson 2019
Enjoy the spectacle. It doesn't happen very often.
The Mr Mop and Goodyear Blimp of British Politics has scored an impressive political triumph at the 2021 election, no doubt about it.
PB, the world and it's significant other can analyze and debate the whys and wherefores, from COVID to wallpaper, from Hartlepool to Edinburgh to Cardiff to Kent - and back again to our heart's (and spleen's) delight. And will.
The fact of the Prime Minister's electoral achievement its historic nature and future impact is undeniable.
In even better shape is the Conservative and Unionist Party. If not the Union. B
Tories have proven, now twice, that they can win - and win big - with Boris Johnson at the helm. With a hat trick certainly not beyond the realm of possibility.
And IF the Boris stumbles, slackens or starts skydiving without a parachute - like he's done more than once (all three) his party retains the option of removing and replacing him in the twinkling of an eye - a fine old Tory tradition.
With likely more than a fighting chance of remaining atop the Greasy Pole of Thorney Island - another Conservative tradition.
What the Labour Party should and can and will do to counter and challenge Boris & Co. is an open question. Right now, it's looking about as open to or capable of solution as the Irish - or Palestinian - Question. For the party that 15 years ago that ruled the roost.
But then THAT was the position of the Conservatives 15 years before then (or close enough for government work.) Which goes to show that nothing is eternal. Even Tory hegemony.
Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Your final sentence is also true.
Putting the two together, the Conservatives will win the next General Election convincingly. They will then probably win the one after that if Boris wishes to fight it.
I think it very unlikely that the Labour Party would be contending for power for the next decade.
There's no point railing about it or pretending it's otherwise. Sit back and observe the spectacle that has happened: a seismic paradigm shift in our lifetime. A complete re-drawing of British politics. Thatcher did it. Blair did it. Boris has now done it.
Especially IF he and Conservatives can credibly argue that their housing program is environmentally responsible and a step in the correct (if not right in every sense) direction.
That may make the bowels of Blue Meanies steethe and rumble. But they'll hold their tongues (somewhat) and their horses (even more) IF it appears to be working politically.
As for spending, that can also be a plus, both politically and economically IF it is managed half-way properly AND money is spent on the right things. Such as ensuring that bridges don't fall down and energy grids don't crash.
The X-factor with Boris, is that compared with both Maggie and Tony (all three incidentally instantly recognizable on first-name basis by 90% plus of the Great British Public) is his relative personal instability.
Which without going into the details is bloody obvious. And a Sword of Damocles dangling above the new decor at No. 10.
Maggie's problem was not dissimilar: a huge arrogance which fuelled the disastrous poll tax.
I don't think Boris is that self-confident and I don't think he will go to war in a foreign land (apart from hopefully sinking the occasional French naval vessel)
Of the three types of hubris I actually think that of Boris is less electorally toxic.
If he wishes to, he can be in power for a decade.
Yet the miscalculations and mistakes you cite were largely related to much larger policy goals as part of a reasonably-thought out agenda. Whether you agreed with it or not.
Johnson has also shown focus in getting Brexit - and Jab It - done. However, his overall personal and political approach has been both chaotic and quixotic, more so than Thatcher & Blair, not always BUT for the most part.
At least that's my thesis and I'm sticking to it!
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
But the irony of that is that it was in fact the very same day which released the UK into prosperity: it was leaving the European Exchange Rate Mechanism which freed us to power ahead economically.
I think you are misreading this Robert. Not majorly. You and others are right that eventually Boris will come unstuck. But I think you're wrong to assume this is going to happen anytime soon. In fact, the opposite. At the next GE there's every chance the tories will increase their majority. Why? Because the seismic shift in British politics has only just begun. Aspirational former northern Labour voters are going to turn to the tories in their droves. I can see them sweeping the north.
They may lose a few woke studenty metropolitan seats in the south in the process but these will be piddling compared to the political paradigm shift which is unfolding.
If working from home is sustainable, how many commuter towns will become younger and more liberal, and how quickly that happens will have a big impact on our politics.
The LibDems really don't deserve another chance to replace Labour. Maybe the Greens will go there, although Johnstones tanks will be on their wild flower meadow too.
Including Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and Home Secretary, Labour Mayor of London and SLAB Leader, and new Scottish Nationalist Party MSP. Just to name a few of the more notable.
You do NOT have to like or agree with any of the above, or other such examples, to see that a sea change has taken place in the UK that would surprise the likes of both Enoch Powell and Mahatma Gandhi, to name two shrewd (albeit divergent) observer participants of British politics.
Would also cite the fact that PBers of all crimes, creeds & colors not only mingle freely (if fiercely) and quite often testify to the character and contributions of ethnic MPs and other electeds - often ones of differing parties and views.
Not paradise on earth or even peace in our times.
But enough to make me think there IS something to the Whig Theory of History: onward & upward!
Contrast that with Keir Starmer, and Labour generally, who are miserable moaning minnies by comparison.
It was the 'can do' attitude of Boris which was praised. His galvanising effect which is emblematic of what the tories are doing in the former Red Wall. As someone commented yesterday, it's not these deprived towns which now feel left behind. It's the Labour Party.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-57022924
The LDs were second in 91 seats, nearly all of them Tory held.
I don't think Labour majority is more than a 5% chance. As to Con v NOM I agree they are about level.
As The Economist observed, when the UK left the EU the diversity of the European Parliament significantly reduced, with the UK taking most of the parliament's BAME MEPs with them.
Equally we should recognise there is much further to go, as SandyRentool pointed out last night, our council list system where you vote for multiple people from the same parties shows in an Islamic majority area the non Islamic "sounding" candidate from a party gets the least votes and vice versa.
Most people who are actively discussing race in the media seem to prefer to either be in one camp or the other; things are great here or there are a lot of problems. Whereas I think the correct place to be, and hopefully that of much of those who are quiet about it, is that both are true - the UK has made great progress compared to both its past and international peers, we should be proud of that and celebrate it, but there is still much more to do.
Bill Clinton and George W. Bush were also pretty good at it too (Bush the Elder & Hillary not so much).
Trumpsky COULD have been very good. But he's too damn mean & ignorant for his own good - thank you Jesus!
I believe the UK still has the gayest parliament in the world too, IIR the Pink News press release correctly.
https://twitter.com/TomMcTague/status/1391639748167471105?s=20
Thought not.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/lists/debatemoments/reagan_carter.html
I have little interest in the wallpaper. And no one I know does either.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco.
One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco.
One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Will say that USA has made some advances politically on this front. Democrats have nominated and elected Black president and VP. And New York City will almost certainly elect either an Asian OR a Black mayor in 2021.
And methinks the Republicans may not be too far behind; certainly Nikki Haley is presidential timber, and Tim Scott a prospect for VP. Note that both are from South Carolina, home of John C. Calhoun and Strom Thurmond, and the first state to secede from the Union in defense of slavery back in the day.
We've definitely got a LOOOOOOONG way to go. But we've come a long way, baby!
“Tell the Lord Privy Seal that I am sealed in the privy and can only deal with one shit at a time”
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
Does anyone on this board know how to get in touch with Elton John & Andrew Lloyd Weber?
https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2019-being-black-in-the-eu-summary_en.pdf
I don't think it is possible to distinguish at this moment between Con and NOM, there are too many unknowns. No black swan is required for either eventuality and there are lots of routes to both outcomes. For now 50/50 is the only rational approach. Lab OTOH have no obvious routes whatsoever to a majority, and should be at no more than 5%.
Please accept my apology. Had my reasons, but I regret having sprayed my spleen your direction.
Are the Tories doomed? (Something about Labour being set up well for the 2040s)
One on tribalism in America reminding the author of their native Somalia.
And one on how the Mongol Golden Horde was not barbarous and invented multiculturalism (feels like those aren't mutually exclusive)
Well played, those headlined did indeed grab my attention.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/feb/17/working-life-union-official-unison
Reeves is a clear upgrade on Dodds.
Hard to know the effectiveness of a chief whip from the outside but Nick Brown was sacked from the job by Blair after just a year before returning under Brown, Corbyn and Starmer, hardly a glowing record. His deputy is unlikely to be worse?
So it is an improvement but I think its also a missed opportunity. Too many anonymous in their first year, of which only Dodds was replaced. Any reason why he couldnt add Drakeford, Burnham, Khan and one more midlands/northern mayor to some kind of attend shadow cabinet/party spokesman type roles? Time to think outside the box and use what they do have.
It is remarkable that many Labour partisans cannot applaud this, and Conservative partisans do not oppose it. And of course, that is the fear: that whoever succeeds Boris will slam on the brakes.
Due to the SNP dominance in Scotland, the space where the Conservatives lose and Labour don't win is huge.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
5 live this morning was suggesting the chasm created by Starmer between himself and Angela Rayner has all the hallmarks of the Blair/ Brown spit
Mini umbrella firms costing UK taxpayer millions
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57021128
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/05/09/labour-left-wingers-threaten-leadership-challenge-against-sir/
Re: Mongols (is there direct connection between Red Hordes and Golden Horde?) check out this clip, great throat singing! Reminds me of Native American music.
In Praise of Genghis Khan - Mongolian Traditional Song
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qr0WT-3TiZ4&list=RDMM&index=5
Time to lash themselves to a mast and wait out the Johnson years?
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
Who do you mean ?
Not great. And the LDs and Greens are gathering to attack the same younger wokish ground that is Labour's best prospect for now.
BTW, don't write off Labour for Batley and Spen. Tories need to lower expectations fast. And if Labour do well there, and LDs win the Hams it will change the picture a bit. Boris has yet to achieve an obvious and monumental fail (in public perception). The fall out when he does will be intriguing.
Though Brendan Bracken for one gave it a pretty good go.
Ditto Lord Haw Haw and the Duke of Wellington. But not Oscar Wilde.
EDIT - reason I asked, was I remember someone saying you were a go-to guy re: Northern Ireland politics.
Labour reshuffle: Angela Rayner takes major role after Keir Starmer standoff
I doubt that Angela is round at Keir's for drinks of a Friday evening.
Mrs Thatcher's rows with Nigel Lawson were more substantial.
It is remarkable that Keir Starmer has been so anonymous that we cannot say if there are underlying policy differences.
It is depressing that the media bang on about splits in the Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet as if they are something new or even undesirable. Surely the whole point of Cabinet and collective responsibility is that members do disagree around the table.