politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why Starmer is unlikely to be the next PM

Can't be first, surely....?

There is a problem somewhere

I think David is right on this. The problem is who takes over. Sunak seems the obvious choice, but will he be once the tough decisions start to be made? The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold. No wonder Sajid and Hunt are already on manouevres.

MarqueeMark said:

"combined with an NHS struggling from the usual winter pressures in addition to the lingering Covid-19 outbreak"

It is possible that the huge awareness of public health issues might result in far less winter pressures on the NHS than we have grown to expect. Hopefully we have seen an end to people being far less inclined/expected/allowed to soldier on into the office with snotty-coughy-sneezy ailments. I also wonder whether the fall in A&E numbers might continue on to an extent, as we have now broken the habit of people just turning up there with every minor ailment.

You may well be right, although if you are then the biggest contributory factor will surely be the sick elderly not arriving in A&E in the usual numbers? So many of them will be so terrified of catching Covid-19 that they'll end up trying to tough it out at home (and, in many cases, sadly dying as a result.) If I'm also right in my suspicion that an awful lot more people will die as a consequence of the measures taken to control the virus than from the disease itself, then the stay-home-and-die massacre - which is already well underway - will only make the situation even worse.

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

I have never been a Boris fan. He has always looked the bumbling amateur public school boy who bullshits his way through life. Many English voters clearly quite like that sort of crap still. I would prefer that we moved on from that, and am not the only Roundhead in the country.

Historically he has always outpolled his party, and replacing him is no surefire route back to popularity. Particularly so when he has populated the front bench with low talent culture warriors.

Sunak is the obvious exception, but it is easy to be popular when spending like a drunken sailor. How popular will he be when he is raising taxes, or delivering a diet of austerity gruel?

However if a vaccine is found, and particularly if it is a UK developed one, that changes everything.

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this.

He isn't. It's ridiculous wishful-thinking and an example of what happens if people bet with their heart not their head.

Keep this article for one reason only. To look back and smile fondly at the folly of it.

Boris Johnson will only step down before the 2024 election for one of two reasons 1. His health or 2. Boredom. Otherwise, the leadership is his for at least 8 more years.

Mysticrose said:

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this.

He isn't. It's ridiculous wishful-thinking and an example of what happens if people bet with their heart not their head.

Keep this article for one reason only. To look back and smile fondly at the folly of it.

Boris Johnson will only step down before the 2024 election for one of two reasons 1. His health or 2. Boredom. Otherwise, the leadership is his for at least 8 more years.

But the longer he stays, the more likely his replacement is the Labour leader, rather than another Tory, surely? The bet is on next PM, without any time limit.

Foxy said:

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

One of the arguments against an act of tory faticide is that they have already seen Johnson's boundless capacity for disruptive treachery on the backbenches and may not feel like putting him back there.

@david_herdson is right in the header. We can throw in that most Conservative MPs probably do not support Boris's policies, since Conservative policy was pro-Europe, or at least anti-Brexit, for the past several decades; economically, Boris lifted Labour's platform in direct opposition to Cameron and May's governments. Backbenchers who swallowed Osborne's austerity Kool Ade might struggle with Boris's unashamed, although economically pretty orthodox, expansionism and interventionism.

Boris is leader because he had a large poll lead over the others. It is the same reason Tony Blair was tolerated by Labour's left. He was a winner. But Rishi Sunak now shares that, and there may be others to come. This means, along with the 80-seat majority @david_herdson alludes to, it will be safe to ditch Boris.

But I expect, or half-expect since I've bet only a small amount, Boris to step down. Since his Covid-19 illness, he has looked unfit, has trouble breathing, and seemed mentally off his game at PMQs. Current reports are that he (and presumably his doctors) blame this on obesity but Boris's weight has been on a public roller-coaster for years which suggests maintaining a slim figure might be beyond him. And if his health does pick up, what of politics? Will 2021 see an end to Brexit and Covid-19 so Boris can reshape Britain as planned, or will the hard times continue?

So based on the chances of Boris retiring or being ousted, I'd agree the next occupant of Number 10 will wear a blue rosette. Sorry, SKS.

Dura_Ace said:

Foxy said:

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

One of the arguments against an act of tory faticide is that they have already seen Johnson's boundless capacity for disruptive treachery on the backbenches and may not feel like putting him back there.

I would expect him to step down if given the boot from number 10, and go back to writing and after dinner speaking. He has never been very keen on being an MP, just PM.

People expecting (hoping) Boris steps down are underestimating the ego of politicians especially at the highest level. Has it ever happened before?

OK they stand down rsather than be sacked or sometimes over a point of principle but boredom? No chance

https://twitter.com/JamesAALongman/status/1261542481562304512

coach said:

When people talk about talented politicians what does it mean?

I assume it means they agree with them

Not really. I can recognise Farage as talented and effective (in many but not all aspects) politically, without agreeing with him on very much at all.

coach said:

When people talk about talented politicians what does it mean?

I assume it means they agree with them

Not at all. Mrs Thatcher was exceptionally talented. She was incredibly effective and on top of her brief. In this Cabinet I think you can only say that of Gove, though Sunak offers promise. Osborne, too, from previous times.

coach said:

People expecting (hoping) Boris steps down are underestimating the ego of politicians especially at the highest level. Has it ever happened before?

OK they stand down rsather than be sacked or sometimes over a point of principle but boredom? No chance

Keep an eye on Boris's pulse, or rather his breathing. Several Prime Ministers retired on health grounds, including Eden, Macmillan and Wilson.

noneoftheabove said:

Socky said:

SouthamObserver said:

The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold.

Presumably you believe "talent" includes being left-wing?

I think more generally we have a flawed belief that politicians of any flavour can and should run departments of state. I would prefer a system where the pols to take a chairing role, and appoint non-civil-service professional managers to run things day to day.

My solution is to be qualified for a cabinet position you need to have served two years on the relevant sub-committee beforehand.

Would limit the people available for each post but in turn allow politicians to get a much better grasp of their brief and stop the pointless musical chairs PMs like to play with their cabinets.

There is a danger of that keeping the status quo . Fresh ideas needed all the time and some managed disruption.

noneoftheabove said:

My solution is to be qualified for a cabinet position you need to have served two years on the relevant sub-committee beforehand.

We have had enough of experts...

Yes. If Boris goes it will be because he is medically not up to the job. I have backed him to exit from now until Sep 2021.

He is evidently still not recovered fully and we shall see if his health improves but this might be as far as he goes (@foxy?).

The danger for the country is that he will try to hang on and also, creating the right narrative for him to step down will be tricky.

noneoftheabove said:

Scott_xP said:

Shortly before the lockdown was introduced the prime minister announced four “implementation committees” to deal with the response covering healthcare, the economy, the public sector and international matters.

Michael Gove, who is minister for the Cabinet Office and chairs the public sector committee, is becoming increasingly powerful, colleagues say. “He is empire-building,” one cabinet minister said. “He has put himself at the heart of every major decision in government.” Another cabinet minister joked: “Did Boris really win the election so he could make Michael Gove prime minister?”

A third asked rhetorically: “Who is the spider in the middle of this web? Michael Gove.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-michael-gove-makes-himself-the-spider-in-a-changing-government-web-j7g0gpb99

The only minister with any experience and the one who finished higher than the others bar the PM in the leadership contest, who is also without his own department is the most influential in cross department committees shocker.

If he wasnt the most powerful on those he may as well be sacked.

The creepy slimeball Gove would make Brown look like a Titan of a PM. There can be no-one in the UK who could be a worse choice than this arse.

Scott_xP said:

noneoftheabove said:

My solution is to be qualified for a cabinet position you need to have served two years on the relevant sub-committee beforehand.

We have had enough of experts...

+1

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

malcolmg said:

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this. The problem is who takes over. Sunak seems the obvious choice, but will he be once the tough decisions start to be made? The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold. No wonder Sajid and Hunt are already on manouevres.

Sajid is a talentless no hoper, if he is the one then Starmer is a dead cert. Sunak looks the part at this point and if he continues as he is now he will be the top Tory by a mile. Hunt is about the only other one that sounds half competent.
Going to be tough for Tories to hang on once Brexit piles the crap on top of the virus expenditure , I would not bet someone else's money on Tories at this point.

I'd go further than that and say that speculating about 2024 is essentially pointless. Not only have we no idea what the economic situation will look like by that point, we don't even know if the country as presently constituted will still exist.

I for one hope it is not, the sooner we are independent the better.

I'll second that, a vote in England would ensure Scottish independence

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/JamesAALongman/status/1261542481562304512

Whether you agree with it or not that is a brilliant analogy.

coach said:

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

malcolmg said:

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this. The problem is who takes over. Sunak seems the obvious choice, but will he be once the tough decisions start to be made? The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold. No wonder Sajid and Hunt are already on manouevres.

Sajid is a talentless no hoper, if he is the one then Starmer is a dead cert. Sunak looks the part at this point and if he continues as he is now he will be the top Tory by a mile. Hunt is about the only other one that sounds half competent.
Going to be tough for Tories to hang on once Brexit piles the crap on top of the virus expenditure , I would not bet someone else's money on Tories at this point.

I'd go further than that and say that speculating about 2024 is essentially pointless. Not only have we no idea what the economic situation will look like by that point, we don't even know if the country as presently constituted will still exist.

I for one hope it is not, the sooner we are independent the better.

I'll second that, a vote in England would ensure Scottish independence

Scotland I'm indifferent about. But Northern Ireland is an expensive pain and the sooner the Irish take it over, the better.

Reasons leaders have departed early before facing an election....

1) Total political failure (Eden, Cameron)
2) An obvious electoral liability (May, IDS)
3) Outstayed their welcome after a long stint (Thatcher, Blair)
4) Health (Macmillan, Wilson, Churchill, Gaitskill, Smith)

The others leaders left after defeat (some after hanging on too long). So where does that leave Boris going before 2024? Most like 4, then 2, then 1. I suspect if defeat become likely he will not hang around to take the humiliation.

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Scott_xP said:

Shortly before the lockdown was introduced the prime minister announced four “implementation committees” to deal with the response covering healthcare, the economy, the public sector and international matters.

Michael Gove, who is minister for the Cabinet Office and chairs the public sector committee, is becoming increasingly powerful, colleagues say. “He is empire-building,” one cabinet minister said. “He has put himself at the heart of every major decision in government.” Another cabinet minister joked: “Did Boris really win the election so he could make Michael Gove prime minister?”

A third asked rhetorically: “Who is the spider in the middle of this web? Michael Gove.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/coronavirus-michael-gove-makes-himself-the-spider-in-a-changing-government-web-j7g0gpb99

Gove is the only experienced minister in the Cabinet and in the past has been allied with both Boris and Dominic Cummings, who were inconveniently sidelined by covid-19. I suspect the conspirator-in-chief is Cummings and Gove the beneficiary.

Well if thats true , then good! Gove could not be PM as he does not have the voter pull but he has energy to do stuff and was effective in change at Education and DEFRA and the MOJ. All successful organisations have a competent person behind the scenes.

coach said:

When people talk about talented politicians what does it mean?

I assume it means they agree with them

Not always. Mrs Thatcher was certainly talented, but not to my political taste. Peter Mandleson would be another example.

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

I have never been a Boris fan. He has always looked the bumbling amateur public school boy who bullshits his way through life.

It got Blair three election victories, didn't it?

And being thoughtful oiks got Brown and May precisely nowhere, after some initial successes.

You could easily make a case that the country likes being led by people who make them feel more optimistic, especially when the circumstances don't justify it. For my money, we've had two leaders like that in the past two decades (Blair and Johnson), and two who clearly weren't (Brown and May). Cameron is somewhere between, hence his mediocre but not disastrous electoral record.

?
Perhaps my antennae aren't as developed as those of the class obsessed English, but to me Blair always gave the impression of suppressing his public school background, appeared anything but bumbling and his adoption of estuarine tones was the opposite of Johnson's Classical pretensions.

Jonathan said:

Reasons leaders have departed early before facing an election....

1) Total political failure (Eden, Cameron)
2) An obvious electoral liability (May, IDS)
3) Outstayed their welcome after a long stint (Thatcher, Blair)
4) Health (Macmillan, Wilson, Churchill, Gaitskill, Smith)

The others leaders left after defeat (some after hanging on too long). So where does that leave Boris going before 2024? Most like 4, then 2, then 1. I suspect if defeat become likely he will not hang around to take the humiliation.

I think May was more 1) but was probably a bit of 2) as well. Not sure Blair so much outstayed his welcome but maybe thought he was like Alexandra The Great having no more worlds to conquer . If there is an argument for somebody stepping down semi- voluntarily it was probably Blair.
I would say Thatcher was also a bit of 4) .As it was mental illness it probably manifested itself under 3 ) in the decisions she made late n her office and her personality becoming more extreme and odd. This was a great pity as I think the public and tory party knew it but because she was so effective in her early years it was thought a huge tragedy for her followers.

state_go_away said:

coach said:

SouthamObserver said:

coach said:

When people talk about talented politicians what does it mean?

I assume it means they agree with them

Not at all. Mrs Thatcher was exceptionally talented. She was incredibly effective and on top of her brief. In this Cabinet I think you can only say that of Gove, though Sunak offers promise. Osborne, too, from previous times.

According to the dictionary

talent: natural aptitude or skill.

I don't think being a politician is down to natural aptitude, that's being a musician, artist or athlete. Politicians have an unswerving belief that they can make life better for people, and very few can or do

I do cringe when the word talented is applied to politicians or business leaders . It was a bit cringeworthy when it only was used in relation to showbusiness . Frankly it is a word that should be restricted to people who can juggle or do tumble turns imho.
Grown up people should be talked about in terms of genuine achievement or character not talked about as talented (whatever that means in fact)

There are skillful politicians. Bill Clinton for example. Tony Blair for another. If it's a natural skill, you could call them talented.

Theuniondivvie said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

I have never been a Boris fan. He has always looked the bumbling amateur public school boy who bullshits his way through life.

It got Blair three election victories, didn't it?

And being thoughtful oiks got Brown and May precisely nowhere, after some initial successes.

You could easily make a case that the country likes being led by people who make them feel more optimistic, especially when the circumstances don't justify it. For my money, we've had two leaders like that in the past two decades (Blair and Johnson), and two who clearly weren't (Brown and May). Cameron is somewhere between, hence his mediocre but not disastrous electoral record.

?
Perhaps my antennae aren't as developed as those of the class obsessed English, but to me Blair always gave the impression of suppressing his public school background, appeared anything but bumbling and his adoption of estuarine tones was the opposite of Johnson's Classical pretensions.

I think Jeremy Clarkson was quite perceptive when he stated to Boris Johnson (when Mayor)

Most politicians, as far as I can work out, are pretty incompetent, and then have a veneer of competence, you do seem to do it the other way around.

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

malcolmg said:

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this. The problem is who takes over. Sunak seems the obvious choice, but will he be once the tough decisions start to be made? The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold. No wonder Sajid and Hunt are already on manouevres.

Sajid is a talentless no hoper, if he is the one then Starmer is a dead cert. Sunak looks the part at this point and if he continues as he is now he will be the top Tory by a mile. Hunt is about the only other one that sounds half competent.
Going to be tough for Tories to hang on once Brexit piles the crap on top of the virus expenditure , I would not bet someone else's money on Tories at this point.

I'd go further than that and say that speculating about 2024 is essentially pointless. Not only have we no idea what the economic situation will look like by that point, we don't even know if the country as presently constituted will still exist.

I for one hope it is not, the sooner we are independent the better.

On this day in 1964 I married my beloved at St Gerardine's Church in Lossiemouth

state_go_away said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

I have never been a Boris fan. He has always looked the bumbling amateur public school boy who bullshits his way through life.

It got Blair three election victories, didn't it?

And being thoughtful oiks got Brown and May precisely nowhere, after some initial successes.

You could easily make a case that the country likes being led by people who make them feel more optimistic, especially when the circumstances don't justify it. For my money, we've had two leaders like that in the past two decades (Blair and Johnson), and two who clearly weren't (Brown and May). Cameron is somewhere between, hence his mediocre but not disastrous electoral record.

?
Perhaps my antennae aren't as developed as those of the class obsessed English, but to me Blair always gave the impression of suppressing his public school background, appeared anything but bumbling and his adoption of estuarine tones was the opposite of Johnson's Classical pretensions.

I think Jeremy Clarkson was quite perceptive when he stated to Boris Johnson (when Major)

Most politicians, as far as I can work out, are pretty incompetent, and then have a veneer of competence, you do seem to do it the other way around.

Three layers with Boris.

1) His buffoon persona
2) A ruthless, narcissistic and effective political campaigner
3) An incompetent administrator lacking judgement on the key decisions.

Barnesian said:

Socky said:

However if a vaccine is found, and particularly if it is a UK developed one, that changes everything.

The other possibility is the discovery that very many people have a natural immunity to the virus, perhaps a genetic thing. Perhaps over half the population.

It would explain why the epidemic fizzled out in China and Iran and perhaps London which can't be explained by herd immunity from infection. It would also explain the anecdotes of couples where one dies of the virus and the other apparently doesn't catch it in spite of their extreme closeness.

If true, and it fizzled out over the summer, it would be a game changer. Trump would be vindicated and re-elected. All countries would have massive financial hang-overs. Scientists would be discredited.

Another scenario to be filed away under "too good to be true," I fear.

MikeSmithson said:

Mysticrose said:

"If Johnson looks like a loser"

There is so much that is right in this article that it's a pity the underlying premise renders it null and void.

Johnson won the Tories their biggest victory since Margaret Thatcher. She was given free rein in three General Elections (1979, 1983, 1987) and no one would touch her. We tend to filter what we think we know through the prism of recent experience and I'm afraid David you have fallen foul of this. You're thinking Boris is Cameron. He isn't. Cameron did win but only just and his coalition victory followed by 12 seat majority gave the plotters the oxygen they needed.

Boris has one single undeniable firewall. He won handsomely. The party won't touch him.

So what. He was against Corbyn.

You have to beat what's in front of you. He not only did that he won by a country mile. Yes the weakness of Corbyn must be taken into account but given Boris is not without weaknesses I dont understand the viewpoint that the scale of his victory should just be discounted as if nothing to do with him. Its extremely churlish.

I remain broadly of the view that Boris could not have achieved the victory Cameron did in 2015 and Cameron could not have achieved the victory Boris did on 2019. The flaws and talents of each, against what they faced, are critical.

Scott_xP said:

Wishful thinking...

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1261569311619022848

You expected him to say 'we're in the shit lads'?

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

malcolmg said:

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this. The problem is who takes over. Sunak seems the obvious choice, but will he be once the tough decisions start to be made? The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold. No wonder Sajid and Hunt are already on manouevres.

Sajid is a talentless no hoper, if he is the one then Starmer is a dead cert. Sunak looks the part at this point and if he continues as he is now he will be the top Tory by a mile. Hunt is about the only other one that sounds half competent.
Going to be tough for Tories to hang on once Brexit piles the crap on top of the virus expenditure , I would not bet someone else's money on Tories at this point.

I'd go further than that and say that speculating about 2024 is essentially pointless. Not only have we no idea what the economic situation will look like by that point, we don't even know if the country as presently constituted will still exist.

I for one hope it is not, the sooner we are independent the better.

On this day in 1964 I married my beloved at St Gerardine's Church in Lossiemouth

56 years G, congratulations, hope you have many more happy anniversaries together.

state_go_away said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

I have never been a Boris fan. He has always looked the bumbling amateur public school boy who bullshits his way through life.

It got Blair three election victories, didn't it?

And being thoughtful oiks got Brown and May precisely nowhere, after some initial successes.

You could easily make a case that the country likes being led by people who make them feel more optimistic, especially when the circumstances don't justify it. For my money, we've had two leaders like that in the past two decades (Blair and Johnson), and two who clearly weren't (Brown and May). Cameron is somewhere between, hence his mediocre but not disastrous electoral record.

?
Perhaps my antennae aren't as developed as those of the class obsessed English, but to me Blair always gave the impression of suppressing his public school background, appeared anything but bumbling and his adoption of estuarine tones was the opposite of Johnson's Classical pretensions.

I think Jeremy Clarkson was quite perceptive when he stated to Boris Johnson (when Mayor)

Most politicians, as far as I can work out, are pretty incompetent, and then have a veneer of competence, you do seem to do it the other way around.

Loony, it was sarcasm, he knew well Boris was an incompetent lying toerag.

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Wishful thinking...

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1261569311619022848

You expected him to say 'we're in the shit lads'?

The Hungarian PM did a few years back.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5354972.stm

Admittedly, it was a factor in fuelling the return of Viktor Orban.

Scott_xP said:

Those betting on BoZo's departure date would do well to factor in the timing of the inevitable public inquiry

What was the last enquiry that generated more heat than light I wonder?

It surely must have happened, but I can already see the usual public flappery over who's on it, who leads it and what's its scope is, which is usually led by groups who've already made up their minds who is to blame (and thus implicitly arent truly focusing on seeing what emerges) which will delay it months. I look forward to whichever person leading it is attacked for being establishment and people being furious that relatives of the deceased are not involved in every single aspect of its planning or operation.

And itll be so complex and huge there'll probably be half a dozen different ones to magnify those issues.

It has to happen of course, but I expect it'll be an absolute nightmare even to get going.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

I know you have a bitter take on Boris but you may find that the public enquiries have a lot more to say about the public health bodies and the scientific advisors

Advisors advise, ministers decide...

https://twitter.com/StefSimanowitz/status/1260665437790130177

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

malcolmg said:

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this. The problem is who takes over. Sunak seems the obvious choice, but will he be once the tough decisions start to be made? The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold. No wonder Sajid and Hunt are already on manouevres.

Sajid is a talentless no hoper, if he is the one then Starmer is a dead cert. Sunak looks the part at this point and if he continues as he is now he will be the top Tory by a mile. Hunt is about the only other one that sounds half competent.
Going to be tough for Tories to hang on once Brexit piles the crap on top of the virus expenditure , I would not bet someone else's money on Tories at this point.

I'd go further than that and say that speculating about 2024 is essentially pointless. Not only have we no idea what the economic situation will look like by that point, we don't even know if the country as presently constituted will still exist.

I for one hope it is not, the sooner we are independent the better.

On this day in 1964 I married my beloved at St Gerardine's Church in Lossiemouth

Many congratulations to you and your wife Big_G. Here's to many more years.

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Those betting on BoZo's departure date would do well to factor in the timing of the inevitable public inquiry

I expect any public enquiry will expose PHE as unfit for purpose and will have serious criticism of the NHS as an organisation. Furthermore Sage may well have questions to answer

It is quite clear listening to Nicola that she has acted exactly as Boris until this last couple of weeks, especially in respect of care homes. She continually repeats she will only follow the advice so it is fair to assume in the Cobra meetings, both Boris and Nicola acted on that advise.

Boris is reported to have said in the 1922 meeting yesterday that PHE have questions to answer.

I know you have a bitter take on Boris but you may find that the public enquiries have a lot more to say about the public health bodies and the scientific advisors

Boris deflecting his responsibility and any blame onto civil servants. 🤷‍♂️

Silly twat.

A golden opportunity like this to deflect blame onto an erratic and dishonest chancer with the intellect of a dead stoat, and he takes aim at civil servants instead?

ydoethur said:

kle4 said:

Scott_xP said:

Wishful thinking...

https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1261569311619022848

You expected him to say 'we're in the shit lads'?

The Hungarian PM did a few years back.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5354972.stm

Admittedly, it was a factor in fuelling the return of Viktor Orban.

That sort of thing being leaked is why politicians stay on message even in private I suspect. I wonder if maintaining spin at all times like that damages MP relations as they simply cannot be frank with each other at any point.

rottenborough said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

malcolmg said:

Black_Rook said:

malcolmg said:

SouthamObserver said:

I think David is right on this. The problem is who takes over. Sunak seems the obvious choice, but will he be once the tough decisions start to be made? The lack of talent in the Cabinet is truly something to behold. No wonder Sajid and Hunt are already on manouevres.

Sajid is a talentless no hoper, if he is the one then Starmer is a dead cert. Sunak looks the part at this point and if he continues as he is now he will be the top Tory by a mile. Hunt is about the only other one that sounds half competent.
Going to be tough for Tories to hang on once Brexit piles the crap on top of the virus expenditure , I would not bet someone else's money on Tories at this point.

I'd go further than that and say that speculating about 2024 is essentially pointless. Not only have we no idea what the economic situation will look like by that point, we don't even know if the country as presently constituted will still exist.

I for one hope it is not, the sooner we are independent the better.

On this day in 1964 I married my beloved at St Gerardine's Church in Lossiemouth

Many congratulations to you and your wife Big_G. Here's to many more years.

Thank you

SouthamObserver said:

coach said:

SouthamObserver said:

coach said:

When people talk about talented politicians what does it mean?

I assume it means they agree with them

Not at all. Mrs Thatcher was exceptionally talented. She was incredibly effective and on top of her brief.
In this Cabinet I
think you can only say that of Gove, though Sunak offers promise. Osborne, too, from previous times.

According to the dictionary

talent: natural aptitude or skill.

I don't think being a politician
is down to natural aptitude, that's being a musician, artist or athlete.
Politicians have an unswerving
belief that they can make life better for people, and very few can or do.

I disagree. I think talented politicians can, for example, seize a moment and make it theirs. They can also give the appearance of thinking one thing while doing another. They are also very good at avoiding booby traps. Of course, talent only gets you so far and it can also wane. That latter point may apply to Johnson.

I agree completely.

Jonathan said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Scott_xP said:

Those betting on BoZo's departure date would do well to factor in the timing of the inevitable public inquiry

I expect any public enquiry will expose PHE as unfit for purpose and will have serious criticism of the NHS as an organisation. Furthermore Sage may well have questions to answer

It is quite clear listening to Nicola that she has acted exactly as Boris until this last couple of weeks, especially in respect of care homes. She continually repeats she will only follow the advice so it is fair to assume in the Cobra meetings, both Boris and Nicola acted on that advise.

Boris is reported to have said in the 1922 meeting yesterday that PHE have questions to answer.

I know you have a bitter take on Boris but you may find that the public enquiries have a lot more to say about the public health bodies and the scientific advisors

Boris deflecting his responsibility and any blame onto civil servants. 🤷‍♂️

It will not be Boris heading his own enquiry

The key on actions taken here will be sage advice and the decisions by Cobra

Theuniondivvie said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

DH is right that the Tory party is pretty swift to defenestrate a leader looking likely to lose an election.

I have never been a Boris fan. He has always looked the bumbling amateur public school boy who bullshits his way through life.

It got Blair three election victories, didn't it?

And being thoughtful oiks got Brown and May precisely nowhere, after some initial successes.

You could easily make a case that the country likes being led by people who make them feel more optimistic, especially when the circumstances don't justify it. For my money, we've had two leaders like that in the past two decades (Blair and Johnson), and two who clearly weren't (Brown and May). Cameron is somewhere between, hence his mediocre but not disastrous electoral record.

?
Perhaps my antennae aren't as developed as those of the class obsessed English, but to me Blair always gave the impression of suppressing his public school background, appeared anything but bumbling and his adoption of estuarine tones was the opposite of Johnson's Classical pretensions.

Is that the same Tony Blair that went to public school in... Scotland?