Hunt has as much chance of becoming the next Tory leader as Romney does of being the GOP nominee in 2024 ie zero.
Hunt got just 24% of the votes of Tory MPs last year and 33% of the votes from Tory members, he was a Remainer so still untouchable from the party base unlike the Leave voting Sunak and his approval ratings from the public are not only lower than Sunak's but even lower than Boris'. If Boris goes, for example after terrible local election results next year, then it will only be for the now more electable Sunak who can take a pragmatic stance on Brexit while still showing loyalty to the cause and be a fresh face to work with the Biden administration.
Personally I think Boris will still survive for the time being and the locals next year will not be that bad but if he does go then Sunak will be the alternative not Hunt, indeed I highly doubt Hunt would even get to the final 2 now amongst MPs let alone win, much of his 2019 support will have shifted to Sunak who is now the main candidate for Tory moderates and much of the Boris support would shift to Sunak too, the hard right of the party meanwhile would get behind Patel or Raab or an anti lockdown figure like McVey and Hunt would be squeezed out and not even get to the final round to contest the membership vote
Brexit will be over next year. It's then irrelevant and about the challenges of the future on which Hunt is very well placed.
I think you're too hung up on the mistake you made in backing Boris and have a blind spot for Hunt because you think his election would somehow be a vindication of those who've criticised you for it all along.
Except I did not make a mistake backing Boris last year, Boris got an 80 seat majority landslide Hunt would not have done and then beat Corbyn and delivered Brexit
He was a tool purely for winning an election and enabling Brexit, and nothing more. He's been utterly diabolical in office.
So now what?
Boris no longer serves a purpose and is now a millstone around the neck of the country, and the Conservatives for that matter.
Whoever is briefing that Joe Biden will go to Brussels is having a bad day. There's no better way to piss off all of the European allies at once. A trip to Berlin makes much more sense, or do something war related in Paris where Merkel, Macron and Boris are all there. Going to Brussels won't just piss us off, Paris and Berlin will start sounding he alarms as well if the US intends to conduct diplomacy via the EU instead of directly with the nations as it has been done until now. It dilutes German and French power significantly.
If Biden really wants to annoy the UK then a visit to Ireland and Berlin would do it.
Biden going to Dublin, then Berlin, then Paris, then Brussels and only then London would certainly be a Biden putdown of Boris
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
One thing that will help that is Biden will be the first incoming President since Bush Snr in 1990 not to have majorities for his party in both chambers of Congress and that will force him to compromise with the GOP Senate (though the GOP lost the Senate 6 months into Dubya's Presidency when Vermont Senator Jeffords defected to the Democrats).
Reagan in 1980 and Nixon in 1968 also found themselves in a similar position but managed to get things done and because they could not be too radical in their first 2 years did not see as big a backlash in their first midterms as Clinton and Obama did in 1994 and 2010 or Trump did in 2018.
Bush Jr faced a Dem senate in 2001 except for three months when there was an equal split (and Bush Sr was elected in 1988, not 1990).
Is the USA heading quickly for herd immunity to covid ? Doesn't take much of an increase in cases to get there bearing in mind they'll be udnderreported
Hunt has as much chance of becoming the next Tory leader as Romney does of being the GOP nominee in 2024 ie zero.
Hunt got just 24% of the votes of Tory MPs last year and 33% of the votes from Tory members, he was a Remainer so still untouchable from the party base unlike the Leave voting Sunak and his approval ratings from the public are not only lower than Sunak's but even lower than Boris'. If Boris goes, for example after terrible local election results next year, then it will only be for the now more electable Sunak who can take a pragmatic stance on Brexit while still showing loyalty to the cause and be a fresh face to work with the Biden administration.
Personally I think Boris will still survive for the time being and the locals next year will not be that bad but if he does go then Sunak will be the alternative not Hunt, indeed I highly doubt Hunt would even get to the final 2 now amongst MPs let alone win, much of his 2019 support will have shifted to Sunak who is now the main candidate for Tory moderates and much of the Boris support would shift to Sunak too, the hard right of the party meanwhile would get behind Patel or Raab or an anti lockdown figure like McVey and Hunt would be squeezed out and not even get to the final round to contest the membership vote
Brexit will be over next year. It's then irrelevant and about the challenges of the future on which Hunt is very well placed.
I think you're too hung up on the mistake you made in backing Boris and have a blind spot for Hunt because you think his election would somehow be a vindication of those who've criticised you for it all along.
Except I did not make a mistake backing Boris last year, Boris got an 80 seat majority landslide Hunt would not have done and then beat Corbyn and delivered Brexit
He was a tool purely for winning an election and enabling Brexit, and nothing more. He's been utterly diabolical in office.
A tool for winning. A much bigger tool, having won.
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
Good article and the party could do worse than Hunt but to be fair I cannot see past Rishi at present
The more I think about Sunak the more doubts I have about him.
Please explain?
He's established a good brand but he's made several rookie errors over Treasury support and bailouts over the last couple of months and, so far, all we've seen of him has been to dish out the goodies.
How will he stand up once he has to make difficult choices? I'm not sure his antenna or experience stand up to scrutiny.
He works hard, has a personality and listens to his Treasury officials. At present I'm finding it harder and harder to find much more to credit to him than that.
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
One thing that will help that is Biden will be the first incoming President since Bush Snr in 1990 not to have majorities for his party in both chambers of Congress and that will force him to compromise with the GOP Senate (though the GOP lost the Senate 6 months into Dubya's Presidency when Vermont Senator Jeffords defected to the Democrats).
Reagan in 1980 and Nixon in 1968 also found themselves in a similar position but managed to get things done and because they could not be too radical in their first 2 years did not see as big a backlash in their first midterms as Clinton and Obama did in 1994 and 2010 or Trump did in 2018.
The issue is not going to be Biden being too radical. It will be the GOP Senate tacking clauses on Abortion or Creationism onto sensible bills aimed at helping Main Street America.
Whoever is briefing that Joe Biden will go to Brussels is having a bad day. There's no better way to piss off all of the European allies at once. A trip to Berlin makes much more sense, or do something war related in Paris where Merkel, Macron and Boris are all there. Going to Brussels won't just piss us off, Paris and Berlin will start sounding he alarms as well if the US intends to conduct diplomacy via the EU instead of directly with the nations as it has been done until now. It dilutes German and French power significantly.
If Biden really wants to annoy the UK then a visit to Ireland and Berlin would do it.
Biden going to Dublin, then Berlin, then Paris, then Brussels and only then London would certainly be a Biden putdown of Boris
I would hope Biden is told that he can then repeat that order when he wants support for any warmongering he engages in.
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Its good that you're admitting that the 'circuit breaker' concept has failed.
Hopefully Vallance and Whitty will have the integrity to do so as well.
Trying different ideas in an unknown situation should not be criticised but refusing to acknowledge their failure should be.
I'm not acknowledging it has failed, I supported a UK wide lockdown for as long as necessary, I said if we'd locked down earlier it would have needed to be shorter than it is going to be (which I think is going to be to the New Year and beyond).
What has failed is the UK taking a divided approach to it, we should have all locked down at the same time. Drakeford was right to act when he did but he's wrong to open up now, he should stay locked down to align with England.
So, Google Surveys will do a 1 question poll for me at 11 pence per response.
Who would like some private polling for the Georgia Run Off elections?
Will it be a 100% return for the 'mind your own business you nosey bastard' party?
I was going to use it to do some comedy Scottish independence polling (open with a leading question) but to get a 2 question survey targetted down to Scotland cost a pound per response!
If you just want a question asked over the whole USA it is a mere 8 pence per response.
One question for Scotland please: Salmond or Sturgeon?
I'm surprised you want to waste money on that question.
Edit: not your money, of course.
This (did the Sturgeon faction conspire to royally stitch up Salmond over the sex claims?) is perhaps the most contentious and potentially explosive matter in Scottish Politics right now. And it's not my money.
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Yes - frustrating that there's not more alignment between the UK nations. All leaders equally at fault.
I have a feeling that in a few weeks the English lockdown is going to be proven to be a big mistake. I think it may actually lead to a worsening of the situation when there were signs that the Tiers were having an effect (of course in practice a worsening will now be taken of "evidence" of the necessity of the lockdown). Under the "lockdown" (which isn't actually remotely close to a real lockdown) the incentives for the public to comply have been destroyed. When we had the Tier system there was some evidence of communities in general pulling together to avoid being pushed into higher Tiers. What was missing was a route-map to lower Tiers but that could have come. Now there are no incentives. Nobody believes any of these messages about "saving Christmas".
The evidence in London yesterday was that people were completely ignoring the new rules. The parks and open spaces were packed. Far, far busier than in recent weeks. Rules on households clearly being ignored. The pubs were doing a roaring takeaway trade. Someone told me there was a 20 minute queue outside Pret to get a free coffee offer!!! I believe all of this is a direct response to the new Government lockdown. And this is what people are doing in public. It doesn't include what people are doing in private. The Government will blame the public (who claim in polls to support it...) But the behavioural scientists must have been dropped from SAGE or bloody useless because it was all absolutely predictable.
A UK wide lockdown from when it started in Wales, I believe could have been over in time for Christmas. Divided lockdowns simply do not work effectively, the only one that has worked was UK wide and that should be repeated.
The problem with speculation on a new Tory leader is that there is no vacancy and I don’t see Johnson going any time soon. Yes, I don’t think he likes the job and I don’t believe he has the skill to do it well. But his MPs will not move against him with him having just won an election and he will not go because he has only just got the job. I expect he will stay until 2023 when the Tories will take a view n his chances in May 2024. If they think he stands a chance of winning he will be allowed to stay, if not they will drop him then. For the Tories winning elections and gaining power is more important than anything else so I do not expect the decision to be ideological, but practical. At that point they will choose based on the answer most likely to deliver victory in 2024.
Giuliani is 76 so younger than Biden, could be a longshot for 2024, has huge name recognition after 9/11, is charismatic, certainly more so than say Pence, has clearly stayed loyal enough to Trump for the Republican base to consider him and yet is also slicker and more intelligent than Trump is and certainly more so than Trump Jnr.
If Biden did not run again in 2024 and Harris won the Democratic nomination Giuliani could have a shot of winning and beating her
Don’t be daft. He’s more of a laughingstock than Trump.
Yes, what on earth has happened to Rudy Giuliani? He used to be a serious and respected figure yet now seems content to be a comedy flunky for Donald Trump. It makes you squirm to see it. Why is he doing it? Is Trump paying him a stupid salary that's too big to refuse? Is he being blackmailed over something deeply shameful? Or has he simply gone soft in the head? Whatever, it's a sad sad spectacle.
I think it's a combination of factors. It's very widely rumoured that he spends an alarming amount of his time being "tired and emotional", and that his personality changed a fair bit a few years ago, which could be related to that problem or could be something else. He's also always been a "punchy" type - he was free-wheeling rather than a measured statesman.
He may also be one of those who doesn't care about what his obituary says that much, and is having a laugh in the late autumn of his years. Certainly, he could have had a dignified retirement supporting worthy causes and it would've been "America's Mayor Dies at 90" or whatever... but where's the fun in that? He'll be dead then anyway and may well not give two sh1ts about it.
I simply do not understand how someone who made his name fighting the Mafia in NY should end his career working with members of the Ukrainian Mafia - by which I mean Dmitry Firtash, the bagman for Semion Mogilevich, a Mafioso so repellent that he was for years on the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted List and now living in Moscow.
That’s not having a laugh. That’s someone who has taken his moral compass and buried it at sea. And, incidentally, put himself at risk of legal action. And for what? To be humiliated by the Trumps as he was yesterday? He could have made plenty of money on the lecture circuit as an ex-NY Mayor. Baffling.
His career as a prosecutor was about the aggrandisement of Giuliani as much as anything else. He was an extremely aggressive and effective prosecutor, but a not uncontroversial one, either.
The Lib Dems seem to be more invisible than before, somehow.
As others have pointed out before, the Labour rise has been mostly - but not entirely - due to Lib Dem voters folding into Labour.
This raises an interesting point, that is it possible that Labour doesn't really need to convert many more Tory voters to deny the Tories a majority in the worst case?
On current polling Labour does not need any more Tory voters to deny the Tories another majority, however they still need significantly more Tory voters to get a Labour majority, especially if they do not regain large numbers of seats from the SNP in Scotland
Is the USA heading quickly for herd immunity to covid ? Doesn't take much of an increase in cases to get there bearing in mind they'll be udnderreported
Whoever is briefing that Joe Biden will go to Brussels is having a bad day. There's no better way to piss off all of the European allies at once. A trip to Berlin makes much more sense, or do something war related in Paris where Merkel, Macron and Boris are all there. Going to Brussels won't just piss us off, Paris and Berlin will start sounding he alarms as well if the US intends to conduct diplomacy via the EU instead of directly with the nations as it has been done until now. It dilutes German and French power significantly.
If Biden really wants to annoy the UK then a visit to Ireland and Berlin would do it.
Biden going to Dublin, then Berlin, then Paris, then Brussels and only then London would certainly be a Biden putdown of Boris
I would hope Biden is told that he can then repeat that order when he wants support for any warmongering he engages in.
Actually, the one positive for Trump was that he never started any wars anywhere or flexed the US's military muscle abroad.
We can always hope that Biden copies him in that respect...
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
Good article and the party could do worse than Hunt but to be fair I cannot see past Rishi at present
The more I think about Sunak the more doubts I have about him.
Please explain?
He's established a good brand but he's made several rookie errors over Treasury support and bailouts over the last couple of months and, so far, all we've seen of him has been to dish out the goodies.
How will he stand up once he has to make difficult choices? I'm not sure his antenna or experience stand up to scrutiny.
He works hard, has a personality and listens to his Treasury officials. At present I'm finding it harder and harder to find much more to credit to him than that.
The Lib Dems seem to be more invisible than before, somehow.
As others have pointed out before, the Labour rise has been mostly - but not entirely - due to Lib Dem voters folding into Labour.
This raises an interesting point, that is it possible that Labour doesn't really need to convert many more Tory voters to deny the Tories a majority in the worst case?
On current polling Labour does not need any more Tory voters to deny the Tories another majority, however they still need significantly more Tory voters to get a Labour majority, especially if they do not regain large numbers of seats from the SNP in Scotland
I think realistically Labour isn't going to win a majority in any scenario, unless the Tories truly torpedo, the Lib Dems steal their support and/or Farage steals their support. The trifecta if you will.
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
Those who voted Trump do not have "as much right to be heard" as those who voted against him. They lost and decisively so. They have a right not to be ignored, yes, but not an equal right to influence policy.
And we'll see if the Republicans are prepared to work with Biden. I hope so but I'm less optimistic on that score. Obama post 2010 found little but obstruction.
I hope the Dems can take both GA senate seats and thus boost their prospects for enacting meaningful change.
I take the opposite view to you re the Georgia senate seats. Trump RIP is enough for me.
We seem to be thinking that the two seats will go either R or D - is it worth entertaining the possibility that one goes R and the other D?
Trump gone is by miles the main thing, no question. But I would also like to see Biden/Harris being able to get most of their priorities through.
Yes, so GA senate is the next big US betting thing and not long to wait. I don't know to what extent the 2 seats are logically coupled. Need to look into it. I expect the likes of Alistair, Nigel, Pulpstar etc are onto it.
The GOP need to do a rapidly reverse ferret on Trump/Guiliani's ridiculous claims about voting fraud and millions of votes being added to the Biden votes. They are in danger of creating permanent disillusionment about their supporters about the integrity of their democracy and this will feed into a belief that voting is pointless. And will create massive damage to them in future at the ballot box.
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
Good article and the party could do worse than Hunt but to be fair I cannot see past Rishi at present
The more I think about Sunak the more doubts I have about him.
You are right to have doubts about him. He keeps getting it wrong and he keeps having to change his strategy - but not before he has inflicted significant damage to businesses, cost people their jobs and damaged the government's credibility.
We laid off over 40 people in September in anticipation of the furlough scheme ending in October. It turns out we did not have to do that.
Whoever is briefing that Joe Biden will go to Brussels is having a bad day. There's no better way to piss off all of the European allies at once. A trip to Berlin makes much more sense, or do something war related in Paris where Merkel, Macron and Boris are all there. Going to Brussels won't just piss us off, Paris and Berlin will start sounding he alarms as well if the US intends to conduct diplomacy via the EU instead of directly with the nations as it has been done until now. It dilutes German and French power significantly.
If Biden really wants to annoy the UK then a visit to Ireland and Berlin would do it.
Biden going to Dublin, then Berlin, then Paris, then Brussels and only then London would certainly be a Biden putdown of Boris
I would hope Biden is told that he can then repeat that order when he wants support for any warmongering he engages in.
Actually, the one positive for Trump was that he never started any wars anywhere or flexed the US's military muscle abroad.
We can always hope that Biden copies him in that respect...
Biden is likely to better than Hilary would have been on that issue.
It really is. I know you find it impossible in your core to accept Boris as a Winner. Get over it.
I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong but I believe Trump is only President in the modern era to have never won the popular vote, Lost both times he ran
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
One thing that will help that is Biden will be the first incoming President since Bush Snr in 1990 not to have majorities for his party in both chambers of Congress and that will force him to compromise with the GOP Senate (though the GOP lost the Senate 6 months into Dubya's Presidency when Vermont Senator Jeffords defected to the Democrats).
Reagan in 1980 and Nixon in 1968 also found themselves in a similar position but managed to get things done and because they could not be too radical in their first 2 years did not see as big a backlash in their first midterms as Clinton and Obama did in 1994 and 2010 or Trump did in 2018.
The issue is not going to be Biden being too radical. It will be the GOP Senate tacking clauses on Abortion or Creationism onto sensible bills aimed at helping Main Street America.
I'd previously assumed the Georgia races were going GOP because they'd be angry and riled up but I think the Dems might win them. They seem to have great organization there, and they've got everyone used to postal voting. It should be *way* easier for an organized campaign to turn out its vote again if they just have to return a form over three weeks rather than show up somewhere on the day.
So, Google Surveys will do a 1 question poll for me at 11 pence per response.
Who would like some private polling for the Georgia Run Off elections?
Will it be a 100% return for the 'mind your own business you nosey bastard' party?
I was going to use it to do some comedy Scottish independence polling (open with a leading question) but to get a 2 question survey targetted down to Scotland cost a pound per response!
If you just want a question asked over the whole USA it is a mere 8 pence per response.
One question for Scotland please: Salmond or Sturgeon?
I'm surprised you want to waste money on that question.
Edit: not your money, of course.
This (did the Sturgeon faction conspire to royally stitch up Salmond over the sex claims?) is perhaps the most contentious and potentially explosive matter in Scottish Politics right now. And it's not my money.
I thought you meant whom people would vote for in an election!
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
First challenge is going to be getting his cabinet picks approved. The chances of Warren at Treasury, for example, are now exceedingly slim.
Wouldnt it lead to another Republican senator and one less Democratic senator? Surely its zero chance on that alone
It might well. But Warren is just an outside case to illustrate the point. With a likely Republican majority in the Senate, the new President is going to have to balance getting a functional administration up and running quickly against getting all his first choices for cabinet posts approved. McConnell has been an obstructive nihilist up until now; I don’t much expect that to change.
I am not convinced Biden would want Warren is his cabinet anyway. If he chose her it would have been based on political expediency based on the results, not his alignment with her beliefs and policies. So him not being able to choose her, or many of her allies, also out of political expediency isnt a big problem for him at all, and possibly a blessing.
I don’t think that true at all. Biden needs to carry both wings of the Democratic party into government. Having a likely obstructive Senate is not going to make that easier. And he needs a cooperative Senate to govern effectively.
If would be massively easier if the Democrats were to win both Georgia runoffs, but that seems unlikely.
On the horizon is the new US administration wanting another Referendum before a Trade Deal. I haver to say with everything that is going on Brexit is just a waste of time worrying about. Put it on the back burner. I suspect the world will now go back to Centerist policies and commonsense. 2016 is already out of date.
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
Good article and the party could do worse than Hunt but to be fair I cannot see past Rishi at present
The more I think about Sunak the more doubts I have about him.
You are right to have doubts about him. He keeps getting it wrong and he keeps having to change his strategy - but not before he has inflicted significant damage to businesses, cost people their jobs and damaged the government's credibility.
We laid off over 40 people in September in anticipation of the furlough scheme ending in October. It turns out we did not have to do that.
He's very inexperienced and finds himself in a crisis situation. Similar to Osborne in 2010 (sort of). What do we expect?
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Its good that you're admitting that the 'circuit breaker' concept has failed.
Hopefully Vallance and Whitty will have the integrity to do so as well.
Trying different ideas in an unknown situation should not be criticised but refusing to acknowledge their failure should be.
I'm not acknowledging it has failed, I supported a UK wide lockdown for as long as necessary, I said if we'd locked down earlier it would have needed to be shorter than it is going to be (which I think is going to be to the New Year and beyond).
What has failed is the UK taking a divided approach to it, we should have all locked down at the same time. Drakeford was right to act when he did but he's wrong to open up now, he should stay locked down to align with England.
Drakeford and Sturgeon are going to use any excuse to be different, that's the consequence of devolution.
But you say lockdown 'as long as necessary' - what level of infection, hospitalisations and deaths does that equate to ?
Credit to Johnson for doing this but I will say again, he really looks unwell and I worry for his health?
Long covid
If he really has then he should be making a big deal about his low level of health and fitness affected him.
The government really should have been encouraging a general health and fitness campaign this year.
Mr Johnson did begin to make a noise about obesity - at the relevant time, and there was some publicity about him getting a personal trainer. I've no idea if the promised campaign came to anything but I certainly didn't notice anything. Possibly because I don't live in England, so perhaps you would be a better judge.
The Lib Dems seem to be more invisible than before, somehow.
As others have pointed out before, the Labour rise has been mostly - but not entirely - due to Lib Dem voters folding into Labour.
This raises an interesting point, that is it possible that Labour doesn't really need to convert many more Tory voters to deny the Tories a majority in the worst case?
On current polling Labour does not need any more Tory voters to deny the Tories another majority, however they still need significantly more Tory voters to get a Labour majority, especially if they do not regain large numbers of seats from the SNP in Scotland
I think you've got this the wrong way round.
It starts with adminstrative and governmental competence. Without that Starmer will win by default (despite his faults) because people won't exercise other choices until they know they've got a candidate who can at least do the job.
In fact, that was a big part of why Boris won last year when put next to Corbyn - even though some people were crying whilst doing it.
Next time the tables will be turned which is why the Tories need someone who's demonstrably effective so they can turn the "safe pair of hands" back on Starmer again, which could include common-sense on cultural issues rather than pursuing left-wing identity politics, where Starmer will continue to struggle.
On the horizon is the new US administration wanting another Referendum before a Trade Deal. I haver to say with everything that is going on Brexit is just a waste of time worrying about. Put it on the back burner. I suspect the world will now go back to Centerist policies and commonsense. 2016 is already out of date.
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
First challenge is going to be getting his cabinet picks approved. The chances of Warren at Treasury, for example, are now exceedingly slim.
Wouldnt it lead to another Republican senator and one less Democratic senator? Surely its zero chance on that alone
It might well. But Warren is just an outside case to illustrate the point. With a likely Republican majority in the Senate, the new President is going to have to balance getting a functional administration up and running quickly against getting all his first choices for cabinet posts approved. McConnell has been an obstructive nihilist up until now; I don’t much expect that to change.
I am not convinced Biden would want Warren is his cabinet anyway. If he chose her it would have been based on political expediency based on the results, not his alignment with her beliefs and policies. So him not being able to choose her, or many of her allies, also out of political expediency isnt a big problem for him at all, and possibly a blessing.
I don’t think that true at all. Biden needs to carry both wings of the Democratic party into government. Having a likely obstructive Senate is not going to make that easier. And he needs a cooperative Senate to govern effectively.
If would be massively easier if the Democrats were to win both Georgia runoffs, but that seems unlikely.
Are we assuming that absolutely none and I mean none of the Republican senators would be in any way co-operative? He only needs a couple of them.
What Labour would need to do to govern without the SNP.
Certainly not impossible. It's only on a minority of occasions over the last century, IIRC, that Scottish seats h ave mader any difference to the overall winner (admittedly not the majority).
I`ve just noticed a recent bf change to rules regarding settlement of the Georgia Senate races. I have a very small bet on Purdue winning.
The rules say "Which candidate will win the popular vote in the regular Georgia Senate Election 2020?"
I therefore expected this to settle accordingly (i.e. for Purdue).
But nine days ago there was an addendum:
"If no candidate receives a majority of the popular vote, and a runoff election is required, this market will be settled on the winner of the runoff election".
I placed my bet well ahead of the addendum, and haven`t got sufficient cash riding on this to be particularly bothered either way, but as a point of principle this seems out of order to me. Opinions?
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
One thing that will help that is Biden will be the first incoming President since Bush Snr in 1990 not to have majorities for his party in both chambers of Congress and that will force him to compromise with the GOP Senate (though the GOP lost the Senate 6 months into Dubya's Presidency when Vermont Senator Jeffords defected to the Democrats).
Reagan in 1980 and Nixon in 1968 also found themselves in a similar position but managed to get things done and because they could not be too radical in their first 2 years did not see as big a backlash in their first midterms as Clinton and Obama did in 1994 and 2010 or Trump did in 2018.
Bush Jr faced a Dem senate in 2001 except for three months when there was an equal split (and Bush Sr was elected in 1988, not 1990).
Bush Jnr had Republican control of the House and Senate when he was first elected (as Cheney had the casting voting in the Senate), he did lose it 6 months later when Jeffords defected but I said that anyway (and it was June 2001 he defected not March 2001).
You are correct Bush Snr was elected in 1988 but that does not change the point he faced Democratic control of both chambers when he was elected and Biden is the first President since Bush Snr to enter office without his party controlling both chambers of Congress
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
Those who voted Trump do not have "as much right to be heard" as those who voted against him. They lost and decisively so. They have a right not to be ignored, yes, but not an equal right to influence policy.
And we'll see if the Republicans are prepared to work with Biden. I hope so but I'm less optimistic on that score. Obama post 2010 found little but obstruction.
I hope the Dems can take both GA senate seats and thus boost their prospects for enacting meaningful change.
I take the opposite view to you re the Georgia senate seats. Trump RIP is enough for me.
We seem to be thinking that the two seats will go either R or D - is it worth entertaining the possibility that one goes R and the other D?
Trump gone is by miles the main thing, no question. But I would also like to see Biden/Harris being able to get most of their priorities through.
Yes, so GA senate is the next big US betting thing and not long to wait. I don't know to what extent the 2 seats are logically coupled. Need to look into it. I expect the likes of Alistair, Nigel, Pulpstar etc are onto it.
I hope he has plans for some quick early wins he can manage even if he doesn't either of the Georgia runoffs, there has to be several issues there.
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
Good article and the party could do worse than Hunt but to be fair I cannot see past Rishi at present
The more I think about Sunak the more doubts I have about him.
You are right to have doubts about him. He keeps getting it wrong and he keeps having to change his strategy - but not before he has inflicted significant damage to businesses, cost people their jobs and damaged the government's credibility.
We laid off over 40 people in September in anticipation of the furlough scheme ending in October. It turns out we did not have to do that.
He's very inexperienced and finds himself in a crisis situation. Similar to Osborne in 2010 (sort of). What do we expect?
He is being steamrollered (possibly by flattery ) by others in the cabinet who want a lockdown - As the lead finance guy in any organisation will know this happens and you need to be strong enough to say no (especially when you are on the edge of a borrowing cliff)
Hunt has as much chance of becoming the next Tory leader as Romney does of being the GOP nominee in 2024 ie zero.
Hunt got just 24% of the votes of Tory MPs last year and 33% of the votes from Tory members, he was a Remainer so still untouchable from the party base unlike the Leave voting Sunak and his approval ratings from the public are not only lower than Sunak's but even lower than Boris'. If Boris goes, for example after terrible local election results next year, then it will only be for the now more electable Sunak who can take a pragmatic stance on Brexit while still showing loyalty to the cause and be a fresh face to work with the Biden administration.
Personally I think Boris will still survive for the time being and the locals next year will not be that bad but if he does go then Sunak will be the alternative not Hunt, indeed I highly doubt Hunt would even get to the final 2 now amongst MPs let alone win, much of his 2019 support will have shifted to Sunak who is now the main candidate for Tory moderates and much of the Boris support would shift to Sunak too, the hard right of the party meanwhile would get behind Patel or Raab or an anti lockdown figure like McVey and Hunt would be squeezed out and not even get to the final round to contest the membership vote
Brexit will be over next year. It's then irrelevant and about the challenges of the future on which Hunt is very well placed.
I think you're too hung up on the mistake you made in backing Boris and have a blind spot for Hunt because you think his election would somehow be a vindication of those who've criticised you for it all along.
Except I did not make a mistake backing Boris last year, Boris got an 80 seat majority landslide Hunt would not have done and then beat Corbyn and delivered Brexit
He was a tool purely for winning an election and enabling Brexit, and nothing more. He's been utterly diabolical in office.
So now what?
Boris no longer serves a purpose and is now a millstone around the neck of the country, and the Conservatives for that matter.
No room for sentimentality in politics.
And here I was thinking that loyalty and gratitude were conservative values. As the US election just demonstrated, winning landslides isn't easy, and I'm inclined to give ample latitude to Boris for achieving what no Conservative had done for 32 years - not to mention nailing the coffin shut on the far left for a generation in the process - rather than stabbing him in the back in the middle of a global pandemic in which he almost died.
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
One thing that will help that is Biden will be the first incoming President since Bush Snr in 1990 not to have majorities for his party in both chambers of Congress and that will force him to compromise with the GOP Senate (though the GOP lost the Senate 6 months into Dubya's Presidency when Vermont Senator Jeffords defected to the Democrats).
Reagan in 1980 and Nixon in 1968 also found themselves in a similar position but managed to get things done and because they could not be too radical in their first 2 years did not see as big a backlash in their first midterms as Clinton and Obama did in 1994 and 2010 or Trump did in 2018.
Bush Jr faced a Dem senate in 2001 except for three months when there was an equal split (and Bush Sr was elected in 1988, not 1990).
Bush Jnr had Republican control of the House and Senate when he was first elected (as Cheney had the casting voting in the Senate), he did lose it 6 months later when Jeffords defected but I said that anyway (and it was June 2001 he defected not March 2001).
You are correct Bush Snr was elected in 1988 but that does not change the point he faced Democratic control of both chambers when he was elected and Biden is the first President since Bush Snr to enter office without his party controlling both chambers of Congress
You said ‘majority.’ A casting vote isn’t a majority.
However, the point is I think moot. Biden is no radical. He’s a boring, unimaginative, overly-tactile but otherwise amiable sort of person who will go around being nice to people and not terrifying the living shit out of anyone.
Truthfully, that is what America needs right now. Yes, it also has major problems which will require pretty radical solutions in the end. But the prerequisite for getting those through is rebuilding the demos. Obama never really tried to. Trump and Clinton made it much worse. Biden might just do it.
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Its good that you're admitting that the 'circuit breaker' concept has failed.
Hopefully Vallance and Whitty will have the integrity to do so as well.
Trying different ideas in an unknown situation should not be criticised but refusing to acknowledge their failure should be.
I'm not acknowledging it has failed, I supported a UK wide lockdown for as long as necessary, I said if we'd locked down earlier it would have needed to be shorter than it is going to be (which I think is going to be to the New Year and beyond).
What has failed is the UK taking a divided approach to it, we should have all locked down at the same time. Drakeford was right to act when he did but he's wrong to open up now, he should stay locked down to align with England.
Drakeford and Sturgeon are going to use any excuse to be different, that's the consequence of devolution.
But you say lockdown 'as long as necessary' - what level of infection, hospitalisations and deaths does that equate to ?
And what happens if they start increasing again ?
It is utterly irresponsible for Drakeford to open the Welsh economy tomorrow, when parts of Wales still have the highest infection rates in the whole of the UK
He has created his own problem by relying entirely on the 14 day circuit breaker recommended by Sage without any thought to Sage's caveat that further circuit breakers may well be needed
His mantra is that as long as everyone in Wales does what they should do then Wales will be able to contain the virus. However, that is either naïve, dangerous or more likely the consequence of him boxing himself into a corner
I fully expect Wales to be in a similar lockdown to England fairly quickly
What Labour would need to do to govern without the SNP.
So Labour would need a 10% lead even to just get to a majority excluding SF, little chance of that happening without Farage making significant inroads into the Tory vote, otherwise Starmer will need SNP and LD support to govern or else to make big gains from the SNP in Scotland
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
Good article and the party could do worse than Hunt but to be fair I cannot see past Rishi at present
The more I think about Sunak the more doubts I have about him.
Sunak could beat Starmer, Hunt I think would not and would lose votes in droves to Farage, especially in the Red Wall
I would be interested to see some analysis on the extent of Farage support around the Red Wall constituencies.
I am not clear that Red Wall voters are particularly on the "free markets / free enterprise" track on economic policy, and may lean towards a more-interventionist view.
I have not noticed, for example, swathes of Red Wall MPs willing to die in the anti-lockdown ditch, compared to Tory MPs with a libertarian tinge.
Hunt has as much chance of becoming the next Tory leader as Romney does of being the GOP nominee in 2024 ie zero.
Hunt got just 24% of the votes of Tory MPs last year and 33% of the votes from Tory members, he was a Remainer so still untouchable from the party base unlike the Leave voting Sunak and his approval ratings from the public are not only lower than Sunak's but even lower than Boris'. If Boris goes, for example after terrible local election results next year, then it will only be for the now more electable Sunak who can take a pragmatic stance on Brexit while still showing loyalty to the cause and be a fresh face to work with the Biden administration.
Personally I think Boris will still survive for the time being and the locals next year will not be that bad but if he does go then Sunak will be the alternative not Hunt, indeed I highly doubt Hunt would even get to the final 2 now amongst MPs let alone win, much of his 2019 support will have shifted to Sunak who is now the main candidate for Tory moderates and much of the Boris support would shift to Sunak too, the hard right of the party meanwhile would get behind Patel or Raab or an anti lockdown figure like McVey and Hunt would be squeezed out and not even get to the final round to contest the membership vote
Brexit will be over next year. It's then irrelevant and about the challenges of the future on which Hunt is very well placed.
I think you're too hung up on the mistake you made in backing Boris and have a blind spot for Hunt because you think his election would somehow be a vindication of those who've criticised you for it all along.
Except I did not make a mistake backing Boris last year, Boris got an 80 seat majority landslide Hunt would not have done and then beat Corbyn and delivered Brexit
He was a tool purely for winning an election and enabling Brexit, and nothing more. He's been utterly diabolical in office.
So now what?
Boris no longer serves a purpose and is now a millstone around the neck of the country, and the Conservatives for that matter.
No room for sentimentality in politics.
And here I was thinking that loyalty and gratitude were conservative values. As the US election just demonstrated, winning landslides isn't easy, and I'm inclined to give ample latitude to Boris for achieving what no Conservative had done for 32 years - not to mention nailing the coffin shut on the far left for a generation in the process - rather than stabbing him in the back in the middle of a global pandemic in which he almost died.
But that's just me. Old-fashioned.
Maragaret Thatcher just spun in her grave at that first sentence.
Hunt has as much chance of becoming the next Tory leader as Romney does of being the GOP nominee in 2024 ie zero.
Hunt got just 24% of the votes of Tory MPs last year and 33% of the votes from Tory members, he was a Remainer so still untouchable from the party base unlike the Leave voting Sunak and his approval ratings from the public are not only lower than Sunak's but even lower than Boris'. If Boris goes, for example after terrible local election results next year, then it will only be for the now more electable Sunak who can take a pragmatic stance on Brexit while still showing loyalty to the cause and be a fresh face to work with the Biden administration.
Personally I think Boris will still survive for the time being and the locals next year will not be that bad but if he does go then Sunak will be the alternative not Hunt, indeed I highly doubt Hunt would even get to the final 2 now amongst MPs let alone win, much of his 2019 support will have shifted to Sunak who is now the main candidate for Tory moderates and much of the Boris support would shift to Sunak too, the hard right of the party meanwhile would get behind Patel or Raab or an anti lockdown figure like McVey and Hunt would be squeezed out and not even get to the final round to contest the membership vote
Brexit will be over next year. It's then irrelevant and about the challenges of the future on which Hunt is very well placed.
I think you're too hung up on the mistake you made in backing Boris and have a blind spot for Hunt because you think his election would somehow be a vindication of those who've criticised you for it all along.
Re Mr Hunt, has anyone raised the question of what happens if there is an inquiry into the pox which looks at his track record on related matters and decides he messed up big time while in charge of the NHS? Exercise Cygnus, and so on. Not saying he did, just that IIRC the question was raised some months back, or am I being unfair?
Not unfair at all, and the lack of PPE stocks is probably the single strongest criticism. But the running down of public health capacity, for example, goes back a long way. Previous Labour governments included.
To Hunt’s credit, he appears to have learned something from his mistakes. I don’t think that will help him in the leadership stakes, though.
speaking of PPE, my wife is part way through her return to practise nursing course. She is working on a non-covid ward but they've had to take covid+ patients as the hospital has I think over 20% more cases than the spring peak. The qualified nurse told her she only needed basic PPE and she was in the bay 2 hours before somebody told her she needed the full kit (which she hasnt even been measured for). She is fuming, as am I. The nurse she worked with on Thursday has tested +ve. This only happened this morning so just keeping fingers crossed.
The Lib Dems seem to be more invisible than before, somehow.
As others have pointed out before, the Labour rise has been mostly - but not entirely - due to Lib Dem voters folding into Labour.
This raises an interesting point, that is it possible that Labour doesn't really need to convert many more Tory voters to deny the Tories a majority in the worst case?
On current polling Labour does not need any more Tory voters to deny the Tories another majority, however they still need significantly more Tory voters to get a Labour majority, especially if they do not regain large numbers of seats from the SNP in Scotland
I think you've got this the wrong way round.
It starts with adminstrative and governmental competence. Without that Starmer will win by default (despite his faults) because people won't exercise other choices until they know they've got a candidate who can at least do the job.
In fact, that was a big part of why Boris won last year when put next to Corbyn - even though some people were crying whilst doing it.
Next time the tables will be turned which is why the Tories need someone who's demonstrably effective so they can turn the "safe pair of hands" back on Starmer again, which could include common-sense on cultural issues rather than pursuing left-wing identity politics, where Starmer will continue to struggle.
Which means Sunak, Hunt would lose so many voters to Farage he is the only potential Tory leader who could enable a Labour majority next time
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Its good that you're admitting that the 'circuit breaker' concept has failed.
Hopefully Vallance and Whitty will have the integrity to do so as well.
Trying different ideas in an unknown situation should not be criticised but refusing to acknowledge their failure should be.
I'm not acknowledging it has failed, I supported a UK wide lockdown for as long as necessary, I said if we'd locked down earlier it would have needed to be shorter than it is going to be (which I think is going to be to the New Year and beyond).
What has failed is the UK taking a divided approach to it, we should have all locked down at the same time. Drakeford was right to act when he did but he's wrong to open up now, he should stay locked down to align with England.
Drakeford and Sturgeon are going to use any excuse to be different, that's the consequence of devolution.
But you say lockdown 'as long as necessary' - what level of infection, hospitalisations and deaths does that equate to ?
And what happens if they start increasing again ?
It is utterly irresponsible for Drakeford to open the Welsh economy tomorrow, when parts of Wales still have the highest infection rates in the whole of the UK
He has created his own problem by relying entirely on the 14 day circuit breaker recommended by Sage without any thought to Sage's caveat that further circuit breakers may well be needed
His mantra is that as long as everyone in Wales does what they should do then Wales will be able to contain the virus. However, that is either naïve, dangerous or more likely the consequence of him boxing himself into a corner
I fully expect Wales to be in a similar lockdown to England fairly quickly
If we’re stuck with this bastard through the winter, we need to be planning right now for six weeks on, two weeks off for the next six months. That would make life easier (not easy) and more secure, and might just still keep the virus under control.
But nobody will plan for that because they’ve literally bet the house on a vaccine.
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
First challenge is going to be getting his cabinet picks approved. The chances of Warren at Treasury, for example, are now exceedingly slim.
Wouldnt it lead to another Republican senator and one less Democratic senator? Surely its zero chance on that alone
It might well. But Warren is just an outside case to illustrate the point. With a likely Republican majority in the Senate, the new President is going to have to balance getting a functional administration up and running quickly against getting all his first choices for cabinet posts approved. McConnell has been an obstructive nihilist up until now; I don’t much expect that to change.
I am not convinced Biden would want Warren is his cabinet anyway. If he chose her it would have been based on political expediency based on the results, not his alignment with her beliefs and policies. So him not being able to choose her, or many of her allies, also out of political expediency isnt a big problem for him at all, and possibly a blessing.
I don’t think that true at all. Biden needs to carry both wings of the Democratic party into government. Having a likely obstructive Senate is not going to make that easier. And he needs a cooperative Senate to govern effectively.
If would be massively easier if the Democrats were to win both Georgia runoffs, but that seems unlikely.
Are we assuming that absolutely none and I mean none of the Republican senators would be in any way co-operative? He only needs a couple of them.
Yes, but not all the Democrat senators would be up for anything radical. It would clearly be very helpful procedurally to have a 50-50 split with Kamala having the casting vote, though - avoids McConnell preventing business from reaching the floor for discussion.
I'd think there's a chance that they could take the seats, on the "Give them a chance" basis and the general honeymoon effect. Purdue has the incumbency bonus, but he already had that this time. The GOP argument will be "checks and balances are good, don't give the Democrats a blank check". Quite hard to predict - we need some reliable polling...oh...
The Lib Dems seem to be more invisible than before, somehow.
As others have pointed out before, the Labour rise has been mostly - but not entirely - due to Lib Dem voters folding into Labour.
This raises an interesting point, that is it possible that Labour doesn't really need to convert many more Tory voters to deny the Tories a majority in the worst case?
On current polling Labour does not need any more Tory voters to deny the Tories another majority, however they still need significantly more Tory voters to get a Labour majority, especially if they do not regain large numbers of seats from the SNP in Scotland
I think more than 280-290 seats and 38-40% would be truly miraculous for Labour TBH. Still very difficult for Labour to win the popular vote due to structural weaknesses in the Midlands and Scotland.
Starmer led Labour probably has a much more solid floor of 35% unlike Miliband because most of the anti Tory LD switchers are probably locked down.
I can see Starmer led Labour getting 38% and 260 seats in 2024 on current trends TBH although his chances of becoming PM are probably only about 50/50 against Johnson or any replacement as he will struggle to gain more than 50 Tory seats without switchers and the lib dem performance will also be key in the south even if they only gain 10 seats or so.
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Yes - frustrating that there's not more alignment between the UK nations. All leaders equally at fault.
I have a feeling that in a few weeks the English lockdown is going to be proven to be a big mistake. I think it may actually lead to a worsening of the situation when there were signs that the Tiers were having an effect (of course in practice a worsening will now be taken of "evidence" of the necessity of the lockdown). Under the "lockdown" (which isn't actually remotely close to a real lockdown) the incentives for the public to comply have been destroyed. When we had the Tier system there was some evidence of communities in general pulling together to avoid being pushed into higher Tiers. What was missing was a route-map to lower Tiers but that could have come. Now there are no incentives. Nobody believes any of these messages about "saving Christmas".
The evidence in London yesterday was that people were completely ignoring the new rules. The parks and open spaces were packed. Far, far busier than in recent weeks. Rules on households clearly being ignored. The pubs were doing a roaring takeaway trade. Someone told me there was a 20 minute queue outside Pret to get a free coffee offer!!! I believe all of this is a direct response to the new Government lockdown. And this is what people are doing in public. It doesn't include what people are doing in private. The Government will blame the public (who claim in polls to support it...) But the behavioural scientists must have been dropped from SAGE or bloody useless because it was all absolutely predictable.
Yeah. My anecdotal experience in the NE is that there is less compliance now than under Tier 2. Probably for the reasons you outline.
I`ve just noticed a recent bf change to rules regarding settlement of the Georgia Senate races. I have a very small bet on Purdue winning.
The rules say "Which candidate will win the popular vote in the regular Georgia Senate Election 2020?"
I therefore expected this to settle accordingly (i.e. for Purdue).
But nine days ago there was an addendum:
"If no candidate receives a majority of the popular vote, and a runoff election is required, this market will be settled on the winner of the runoff election".
I placed my bet well ahead of the addendum, and haven`t got sufficient cash riding on this to be particularly bothered either way, but as a point of principle this seems out of order to me. Opinions?
That's completely out of order.
It is out of order especially as it's not something that could not have been foreseen. The GA runoffs are going to be very interesting, although I would expect a GOP hold in both cases. They will add pressure on the Republicans to ensure that Trump goes quietly and also perhaps to agree another bailout in the lame duck session. And on Biden to assemble a moderate team, I would guess.
The Vallance criticism is fairly minor stuff in comparison. Yes he ought to have disclosed the shareholding, but Vallance doesn’t have a role in vaccine procurement decisions - and I don’t think GSK will see much gain from the pandemic, related to the size of their business.
On topic I am not convinced. I am not a member of the Conservative party. Had I been I would probably have voted for Hunt but clearly that was not the view of the majority of the members. I also do not think that Hunt would have got a majority of 80 as Boris did.
In the next week we will get a deal with the EU. It won't be perfect but it will do. We can then get on to more important things like trying to work out how we get our economy working in a time of Covid. It seems likely that by Christmas we will have a vaccine of sorts. Again it won't be perfect but it will help to reduce the R level markedly. We will have more rapid testing which will also help reduce the spread of the disease. We will, hopefully be able to start work on the backlog of untreated illness piling up in the NHS.
In short, I expect by Christmas things will be looking better for Boris, not worse. That doesn't mean that they will be good. Public finances are going to be in a horrendous state. Unemployment will be higher although not as much higher as some are forecasting. No doubt the wailing and rending of garments about the EU will not have stopped. But they will be better and Hunt's moment will be gone. Don't get me wrong. I would like to see him back in the government. Possibly as a supremo for testing/vaccination. But he will not be leader. There isn't a vacancy.
Good Christmas wish David if a bit optimistic.
It's being so cheerful that keeps me going Malc. What do you think of Robertson getting Edinburgh Central? Probable replacement for Nicola? The SNP could do worse.
Fact that it was gerry mandered spoils it David, they were scared to let Cherry in so for me it puts him among the clique that are causing lots of troubles , very incestuous both him and his partner are entwined with the Ceaușescu's. Previously to the Salmond stitch up I would have said Robertson was perfect but not impressed now. Sure you will know more than me of the shenanigans.
I know its predicated on the situation being different, but for the same reason I thought Boris would win if he got past the MPs, I can't see Hunt winning unless it's a coronation or moderate (or at least more standard) fix. Granted, the labour membership went for the sensible option right after Corbyn, but Corbyn lost and left, Boris going would be before a GE defeat and clearly forced on him, his supporters would be livid.
I think hes going nowhere.
I don't agree with this because his supporters are no longer his supporters - I've been speaking to a few recently; Boris is rapidly running out of road.
I think everyone is still focussed on fighting the last war and, like my header points out, assuming Boris's successor must be someone suitably tub-thumping and hardcore.
Sensible Tories will see the need for competent stable Government after Boris and all the drama and uncertainty of recent years - it'll be their only chance to win in GE2024 - and remember the membership elected Cameron over Davis and (as WilliamGlenn reminded me) were more tempted by May than Johnson in 2016.
Good article and the party could do worse than Hunt but to be fair I cannot see past Rishi at present
The more I think about Sunak the more doubts I have about him.
Please explain?
He's established a good brand but he's made several rookie errors over Treasury support and bailouts over the last couple of months and, so far, all we've seen of him has been to dish out the goodies.
How will he stand up once he has to make difficult choices? I'm not sure his antenna or experience stand up to scrutiny.
He works hard, has a personality and listens to his Treasury officials. At present I'm finding it harder and harder to find much more to credit to him than that.
There's an odd tendency of people to personalize what he does. So it's "Rishi dishes out the billlions" as if it were his money being spent and thus his generosity on display. Cue a brand on the up.
But by the same same token, when the time comes to stop the largesse and take some of it back, we'll get "Scrooge Sunak tightens the screw" and his instagram following will take a hit. He'll lose fans. There will be nasty comments. The brand will suffer.
So this, I think, is his problem. His rep is built on nothing substantial. It's fluff. Therefore it can be blown away very very easily.
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
One thing that will help that is Biden will be the first incoming President since Bush Snr in 1990 not to have majorities for his party in both chambers of Congress and that will force him to compromise with the GOP Senate (though the GOP lost the Senate 6 months into Dubya's Presidency when Vermont Senator Jeffords defected to the Democrats).
Reagan in 1980 and Nixon in 1968 also found themselves in a similar position but managed to get things done and because they could not be too radical in their first 2 years did not see as big a backlash in their first midterms as Clinton and Obama did in 1994 and 2010 or Trump did in 2018.
Bush Jr faced a Dem senate in 2001 except for three months when there was an equal split (and Bush Sr was elected in 1988, not 1990).
Bush Jnr had Republican control of the House and Senate when he was first elected (as Cheney had the casting voting in the Senate), he did lose it 6 months later when Jeffords defected but I said that anyway (and it was June 2001 he defected not March 2001).
You are correct Bush Snr was elected in 1988 but that does not change the point he faced Democratic control of both chambers when he was elected and Biden is the first President since Bush Snr to enter office without his party controlling both chambers of Congress
You said ‘majority.’ A casting vote isn’t a majority.
However, the point is I think moot. Biden is no radical. He’s a boring, unimaginative, overly-tactile but otherwise amiable sort of person who will go around being nice to people and not terrifying the living shit out of anyone.
Truthfully, that is what America needs right now. Yes, it also has major problems which will require pretty radical solutions in the end. But the prerequisite for getting those through is rebuilding the demos. Obama never really tried to. Trump and Clinton made it much worse. Biden might just do it.
Of course it is a majority on the key Senate votes, as it was Cheney who ensured the GOP always won them and the Senate therefore passed the legislation Bush wanted during that timeframe. If your party is not in control of the White House you need at least 51 seats for a Senate majority as the VP has the casting vote.
I do agree Biden is a moderate old hand who can work with a divided Congress and do the necessary compromises to get things done without dividing the nation too much
On the horizon is the new US administration wanting another Referendum before a Trade Deal. I haver to say with everything that is going on Brexit is just a waste of time worrying about. Put it on the back burner. I suspect the world will now go back to Centerist policies and commonsense. 2016 is already out of date.
Giuliani is 76 so younger than Biden, could be a longshot for 2024, has huge name recognition after 9/11, is charismatic, certainly more so than say Pence, has clearly stayed loyal enough to Trump for the Republican base to consider him and yet is also slicker and more intelligent than Trump is and certainly more so than Trump Jnr.
If Biden did not run again in 2024 and Harris won the Democratic nomination Giuliani could have a shot of winning and beating her
Don’t be daft. He’s more of a laughingstock than Trump.
Yes, what on earth has happened to Rudy Giuliani? He used to be a serious and respected figure yet now seems content to be a comedy flunky for Donald Trump. It makes you squirm to see it. Why is he doing it? Is Trump paying him a stupid salary that's too big to refuse? Is he being blackmailed over something deeply shameful? Or has he simply gone soft in the head? Whatever, it's a sad sad spectacle.
I commented last evening on the enormity of Biden's task trying to re-unite a deeply divided country. It's not 1865 by any stretch and I wouldn't want any kind of parallel with that dreadful time but the fact remains America's divisions, which have always existed (as they do in every other country), have been laid bare in the past few years.
There's no point being triumphalist or throwing blame around or throwing in pejorative terms like "woke" and all the rest of it - none of that helps.
Those who supported Trump, for whatever reason, have as much right to be heard and have a voice and stake in the future as those who supported Remain in 2016.
Biden therefore has to be about reconciliation and nothing else - fortunately it seems unlikely the Democrats will enjoy the "clean sweep" for which they were hoping and it's my experience a little sensible "co-habitation" as the French call it does no one any harm.
There are enough moderate Republicans and Democrats in both Senate and the House to work with a moderate Biden administration and marginalise the extremists n both sides of the aisle.
That doesn't mean there aren't significant challenges for an incoming Biden administration both domestically and globally. Relations with China, Israel and Russia (in that order) will be needing particular care and it will be interesting to see who replaces Pompeo at State.
First challenge is going to be getting his cabinet picks approved. The chances of Warren at Treasury, for example, are now exceedingly slim.
Wouldnt it lead to another Republican senator and one less Democratic senator? Surely its zero chance on that alone
It might well. But Warren is just an outside case to illustrate the point. With a likely Republican majority in the Senate, the new President is going to have to balance getting a functional administration up and running quickly against getting all his first choices for cabinet posts approved. McConnell has been an obstructive nihilist up until now; I don’t much expect that to change.
I am not convinced Biden would want Warren is his cabinet anyway. If he chose her it would have been based on political expediency based on the results, not his alignment with her beliefs and policies. So him not being able to choose her, or many of her allies, also out of political expediency isnt a big problem for him at all, and possibly a blessing.
I don’t think that true at all. Biden needs to carry both wings of the Democratic party into government. Having a likely obstructive Senate is not going to make that easier. And he needs a cooperative Senate to govern effectively.
If would be massively easier if the Democrats were to win both Georgia runoffs, but that seems unlikely.
Are we assuming that absolutely none and I mean none of the Republican senators would be in any way co-operative? He only needs a couple of them.
Conditionally cooperative, probably, though McConnell will be twisting arms to prevent it.
But it will mean striking deals - which narrows the room to strike deals with the left of the party. I think Biden is up to the task, but the lack of a Senate majority makes it more difficult.
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Yes - frustrating that there's not more alignment between the UK nations. All leaders equally at fault.
I have a feeling that in a few weeks the English lockdown is going to be proven to be a big mistake. I think it may actually lead to a worsening of the situation when there were signs that the Tiers were having an effect (of course in practice a worsening will now be taken of "evidence" of the necessity of the lockdown). Under the "lockdown" (which isn't actually remotely close to a real lockdown) the incentives for the public to comply have been destroyed. When we had the Tier system there was some evidence of communities in general pulling together to avoid being pushed into higher Tiers. What was missing was a route-map to lower Tiers but that could have come. Now there are no incentives. Nobody believes any of these messages about "saving Christmas".
The evidence in London yesterday was that people were completely ignoring the new rules. The parks and open spaces were packed. Far, far busier than in recent weeks. Rules on households clearly being ignored. The pubs were doing a roaring takeaway trade. Someone told me there was a 20 minute queue outside Pret to get a free coffee offer!!! I believe all of this is a direct response to the new Government lockdown. And this is what people are doing in public. It doesn't include what people are doing in private. The Government will blame the public (who claim in polls to support it...) But the behavioural scientists must have been dropped from SAGE or bloody useless because it was all absolutely predictable.
Not all parks are packed. The two square kilometers of parkland at my golf club was no doubt absolutely deserted yesterday save for 5 greens staff maintaining the course in the lovely Autumn weather. So because I couldn't exercise there in splendid isolation instead I added to the numbers taking their exercise down the local disused railway track and nature reserve which was absolutely heaving. Must have walked past 200 others in the space of an hour.
On Monday I'm going to say sod it and wander down to the local playing fields to hit some practice balls around. My mate was doing so yesterday. If anyone objects to balls flying past them I'll suggest that they should social distance at 100+ yards like we do away from other twoballs on the course. If a couple of people are hitting tennis balls across the tarmaced car park next to the closed tennis courts I'll fully understand.
My support for the lockdown is waning simply because of the cack handed sense of priorities. Banning socially distanced outside sport while relaxing the rules to encouraging people to congregate outside pubs serving takeaway beer is an utterly absurd situation. I imagine that Homebase is today going to be heaving from people who have absolutely nothing to do but to go shopping indoors for leisure, and unlike me don't care about the risk to others as well as themselves.
Best PM ratings - among their 2019 voters (current VI)
Johnson: 54 (75) Starmer: 71 (82)
Johnson is well behind Starmer (28 vs 38, OA) and among ABC1 (-17), all age ranges except the 65+ and all geographical areas - even the South (-5), the only area the Tories are ahead of Labour.
"It's only one poll" - but are his fans convinced Johnson is still an asset and not a liability?
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Its good that you're admitting that the 'circuit breaker' concept has failed.
Hopefully Vallance and Whitty will have the integrity to do so as well.
Trying different ideas in an unknown situation should not be criticised but refusing to acknowledge their failure should be.
I'm not acknowledging it has failed, I supported a UK wide lockdown for as long as necessary, I said if we'd locked down earlier it would have needed to be shorter than it is going to be (which I think is going to be to the New Year and beyond).
What has failed is the UK taking a divided approach to it, we should have all locked down at the same time. Drakeford was right to act when he did but he's wrong to open up now, he should stay locked down to align with England.
Drakeford and Sturgeon are going to use any excuse to be different, that's the consequence of devolution.
But you say lockdown 'as long as necessary' - what level of infection, hospitalisations and deaths does that equate to ?
And what happens if they start increasing again ?
It is utterly irresponsible for Drakeford to open the Welsh economy tomorrow, when parts of Wales still have the highest infection rates in the whole of the UK
He has created his own problem by relying entirely on the 14 day circuit breaker recommended by Sage without any thought to Sage's caveat that further circuit breakers may well be needed
His mantra is that as long as everyone in Wales does what they should do then Wales will be able to contain the virus. However, that is either naïve, dangerous or more likely the consequence of him boxing himself into a corner
I fully expect Wales to be in a similar lockdown to England fairly quickly
If we’re stuck with this bastard through the winter, we need to be planning right now for six weeks on, two weeks off for the next six months. That would make life easier (not easy) and more secure, and might just still keep the virus under control.
But nobody will plan for that because they’ve literally bet the house on a vaccine.
To be honest with the rates of infection in Wales six weeks on two weeks off will see the country overwhelmed with covid
On topic - I agree with CR. Hunt looks head and shoulders better than the shower of shit currently sat around the cabinet table. For the good of the country I'd like to see him take over from Bozo asap.
On the Labour side, we need to study Biden's victory very, very carefully. Focus on what matters to the lost voters in our own rust belt - secure, well paid jobs, a good school for their kids, an NHS you can rely on when you need it and a social care system that treats the elderly with respect and comfort. Everything else is frippery, and those whose concerns are of the woke, handwringer or Middle Eastern variety will stay on board, in the main.
Hunt has as much chance of becoming the next Tory leader as Romney does of being the GOP nominee in 2024 ie zero.
Hunt got just 24% of the votes of Tory MPs last year and 33% of the votes from Tory members, he was a Remainer so still untouchable from the party base unlike the Leave voting Sunak and his approval ratings from the public are not only lower than Sunak's but even lower than Boris'. If Boris goes, for example after terrible local election results next year, then it will only be for the now more electable Sunak who can take a pragmatic stance on Brexit while still showing loyalty to the cause and be a fresh face to work with the Biden administration.
Personally I think Boris will still survive for the time being and the locals next year will not be that bad but if he does go then Sunak will be the alternative not Hunt, indeed I highly doubt Hunt would even get to the final 2 now amongst MPs let alone win, much of his 2019 support will have shifted to Sunak who is now the main candidate for Tory moderates and much of the Boris support would shift to Sunak too, the hard right of the party meanwhile would get behind Patel or Raab or an anti lockdown figure like McVey and Hunt would be squeezed out and not even get to the final round to contest the membership vote
Brexit will be over next year. It's then irrelevant and about the challenges of the future on which Hunt is very well placed.
I think you're too hung up on the mistake you made in backing Boris and have a blind spot for Hunt because you think his election would somehow be a vindication of those who've criticised you for it all along.
Re Mr Hunt, has anyone raised the question of what happens if there is an inquiry into the pox which looks at his track record on related matters and decides he messed up big time while in charge of the NHS? Exercise Cygnus, and so on. Not saying he did, just that IIRC the question was raised some months back, or am I being unfair?
Not unfair at all, and the lack of PPE stocks is probably the single strongest criticism. But the running down of public health capacity, for example, goes back a long way. Previous Labour governments included.
To Hunt’s credit, he appears to have learned something from his mistakes. I don’t think that will help him in the leadership stakes, though.
speaking of PPE, my wife is part way through her return to practise nursing course. She is working on a non-covid ward but they've had to take covid+ patients as the hospital has I think over 20% more cases than the spring peak. The qualified nurse told her she only needed basic PPE and she was in the bay 2 hours before somebody told her she needed the full kit (which she hasnt even been measured for). She is fuming, as am I. The nurse she worked with on Thursday has tested +ve. This only happened this morning so just keeping fingers crossed.
That’s alarming indeed. I hope it goes OK for you.
There is perfectly decent logic in not getting drawn into the outcome of foreign litigation about which no facts are known except that the current POTUS plans to start some.
Best PM ratings - among their 2019 voters (current VI)
Johnson: 54 (75) Starmer: 71 (82)
Johnson is well behind Starmer (28 vs 38, OA) and among ABC1 (-17), all age ranges except the 65+ and all geographical areas - even the South (-5), the only area the Tories are ahead of Labour.
"It's only one poll" - but are his fans convinced Johnson is still an asset and not a liability?
On that poll the Brexit Party are on 6%, add their voteshare back to the Tories and it would be Tories 41% and Labour 40% without the Tories winning back a single voter from Labour, therefore Boris cannot continue with everlasting lockdowns if he wants to win the next general election, that is more a policy issue not a personality issue as Hunt and Sunak have also backed the lockdown, in fact the greater opposition to Boris on that at the moment is coming from McVey, Brady and IDS and even May, not Hunt and Sunak
On Hunt - he would be my choice* experienced, intelligent, generally quite reasonable but Brexit remains tricky. The route to an acceptable deal still seems fraught and no deal would be messy to say the least. Biden is a bit of a red herring but the issue is by no means out of the way.
*make of that what you will coming from someone unlikely ever to vote Tory.
We seem to be thinking that the two seats will go either R or D - is it worth entertaining the possibility that one goes R and the other D?
It's possible, of course, but depends on the personal vote for one of them outweighing party sympathy. The USA is so divided that I can't see a lot of that. In Britain, if we had a council by-election with 2 seats up, how many would vote one Con one Lab?
Hunt has as much chance of becoming the next Tory leader as Romney does of being the GOP nominee in 2024 ie zero.
Hunt got just 24% of the votes of Tory MPs last year and 33% of the votes from Tory members, he was a Remainer so still untouchable from the party base unlike the Leave voting Sunak and his approval ratings from the public are not only lower than Sunak's but even lower than Boris'. If Boris goes, for example after terrible local election results next year, then it will only be for the now more electable Sunak who can take a pragmatic stance on Brexit while still showing loyalty to the cause and be a fresh face to work with the Biden administration.
Personally I think Boris will still survive for the time being and the locals next year will not be that bad but if he does go then Sunak will be the alternative not Hunt, indeed I highly doubt Hunt would even get to the final 2 now amongst MPs let alone win, much of his 2019 support will have shifted to Sunak who is now the main candidate for Tory moderates and much of the Boris support would shift to Sunak too, the hard right of the party meanwhile would get behind Patel or Raab or an anti lockdown figure like McVey and Hunt would be squeezed out and not even get to the final round to contest the membership vote
I agree. Sunak's window is closing quickly, the economy is cratering (not his fault, but he is holding the parcel of ordure when the music stops).
Raab, Patel and Gove are making all the right noises for the faithful.
So what of Hunt? Something of a political chameleon who has finally become very effective through the pandemic. People like me wouldn't vote for him, but would be comfortable with him as PM. That is probably a good reason why he won't succeed in the Conservative leadership battle against the likes of Sunak, Raab, Patel or Gove.
Hunt's chances surely depend quite strongly on how swiftly the EU negotiations produce something that'll work in the long term. The right of the Tory party is mostly coalesced around Brexit issues - once that's actually in the past then there's sufficient divergences that I don't see a strong right vs left split as being certain. Continuing difficulties would very likely mean Hunt couldn't win.
I've personally backed Patel as I think that assuming she steers clear of the many reefs in the Home Office then she'll have a pretty good track record to point to in early 2024 (or in my view more likely 2025).
Sunak is too short to back.
Good post. I think the hard right of the Tory party amount to about 50-60 MPs (tops) and about 35% of the membership.
People extrapolate that out to the majority because of things like Brexit but I think everyone underestimates the degree to which the vast majority of the Tory party want to move on from that and heal the wounds.
My advice would be if you're betting solely on this you're possibly letting your prejudices and perceptions of internal Tory party politics cloud your judgement.
The Labour party and Democrats moved on to win and I see no reason why the Tories won't to win again.
Are there any numbers (or even anecdotes) on whats happened to the Kipper entrants to the Tories, are they still there? Perhaps they dont turn up to meetings and are not in the same social circles but still have a lot of votes.
I haven't actually met very many of these. The active members are generally the same ones who've been there for an age.
Nevertheless this is the difficult choice some ex-members face: if they want sanity back they need to be paying subs now so they can get a vote on the leader when the time comes, which might be rather soon. Yes, you'll be giving Boris some money to play with but he won't be able to have fun with it for long and it'll mostly be for the English locals and Scottish Parliament elections next year.
I'd recommend that some of those who quit last year over Boris consider rejoining no later than February/March next year.
Good morning everyone.
Interesting header by Casino - thanks for writing it.
The Lib Dems seem to be more invisible than before, somehow.
As others have pointed out before, the Labour rise has been mostly - but not entirely - due to Lib Dem voters folding into Labour.
This raises an interesting point, that is it possible that Labour doesn't really need to convert many more Tory voters to deny the Tories a majority in the worst case?
On current polling Labour does not need any more Tory voters to deny the Tories another majority, however they still need significantly more Tory voters to get a Labour majority, especially if they do not regain large numbers of seats from the SNP in Scotland
I think realistically Labour isn't going to win a majority in any scenario, unless the Tories truly torpedo, the Lib Dems steal their support and/or Farage steals their support. The trifecta if you will.
The last one is potentially a dream GE scenario for Labour. A Farage vehicle takes off and attracts many of the Hard Brexit crowd. Same time Starmer hoovers up the centrist remainer vote AND hangs on to the authentic left. That would be like a US election Rep v Dem with a rampant Trump Jnr as a 3rd party independent. Dem landslide in the EC.
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Yes - frustrating that there's not more alignment between the UK nations. All leaders equally at fault.
I have a feeling that in a few weeks the English lockdown is going to be proven to be a big mistake. I think it may actually lead to a worsening of the situation when there were signs that the Tiers were having an effect (of course in practice a worsening will now be taken of "evidence" of the necessity of the lockdown). Under the "lockdown" (which isn't actually remotely close to a real lockdown) the incentives for the public to comply have been destroyed. When we had the Tier system there was some evidence of communities in general pulling together to avoid being pushed into higher Tiers. What was missing was a route-map to lower Tiers but that could have come. Now there are no incentives. Nobody believes any of these messages about "saving Christmas".
The evidence in London yesterday was that people were completely ignoring the new rules. The parks and open spaces were packed. Far, far busier than in recent weeks. Rules on households clearly being ignored. The pubs were doing a roaring takeaway trade. Someone told me there was a 20 minute queue outside Pret to get a free coffee offer!!! I believe all of this is a direct response to the new Government lockdown. And this is what people are doing in public. It doesn't include what people are doing in private. The Government will blame the public (who claim in polls to support it...) But the behavioural scientists must have been dropped from SAGE or bloody useless because it was all absolutely predictable.
Not all parks are packed. The two square kilometers of parkland at my golf club was no doubt absolutely deserted yesterday save for 5 greens staff maintaining the course in the lovely Autumn weather. So because I couldn't exercise there in splendid isolation instead I added to the numbers taking their exercise down the local disused railway track and nature reserve which was absolutely heaving. Must have walked past 200 others in the space of an hour.
On Monday I'm going to say sod it and wander down to the local playing fields to hit some practice balls around. My mate was doing so yesterday. If anyone objects to balls flying past them I'll suggest that they should social distance at 100+ yards like we do away from other twoballs on the course. If a couple of people are hitting tennis balls across the tarmaced car park next to the closed tennis courts I'll fully understand.
My support for the lockdown is waning simply because of the cack handed sense of priorities. Banning socially distanced outside sport while relaxing the rules to encouraging people to congregate outside pubs serving takeaway beer is an utterly absurd situation. I imagine that Homebase is today going to be heaving from people who have absolutely nothing to do but to go shopping indoors for leisure, and unlike me don't care about the risk to others as well as themselves.
I hope you have adequate public liability insurance if you intend driving random golf balls in an area not designated for golf
Some years ago my playing partner was hit on the left forehead by a drive from another hole that felled him like a log. I rushed over to him and accompanied him to hospital in the ambulance
Sadly he was never the same after this incident and died a couple of years later
Hitting golf balls is not something to be done irresponsibly
Giuliani is 76 so younger than Biden, could be a longshot for 2024, has huge name recognition after 9/11, is charismatic, certainly more so than say Pence, has clearly stayed loyal enough to Trump for the Republican base to consider him and yet is also slicker and more intelligent than Trump is and certainly more so than Trump Jnr.
If Biden did not run again in 2024 and Harris won the Democratic nomination Giuliani could have a shot of winning and beating her
Don’t be daft. He’s more of a laughingstock than Trump.
Yes, what on earth has happened to Rudy Giuliani? He used to be a serious and respected figure yet now seems content to be a comedy flunky for Donald Trump. It makes you squirm to see it. Why is he doing it? Is Trump paying him a stupid salary that's too big to refuse? Is he being blackmailed over something deeply shameful? Or has he simply gone soft in the head? Whatever, it's a sad sad spectacle.
will be money for sure.
Yes money corrupts and can turn us into sad creatures like Giuliani. If anyone feels they have too much and are worried about how their future selves turn out, I will selflessly volunteer to take on your burden. Please send the cash to......
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
The trouble is that it is hard to separate the Trump character cult from any sense of what Trumpism means in policy terms. Low taxes for corporations, scrapping public-supported healthcare, denying climate change, supporting fracking and locking up illegal migrants seems to be about it.
On topic - I agree with CR. Hunt looks head and shoulders better than the shower of shit currently sat around the cabinet table. For the good of the country I'd like to see him take over from Bozo asap.
On the Labour side, we need to study Biden's victory very, very carefully. Focus on what matters to the lost voters in our own rust belt - secure, well paid jobs, a good school for their kids, an NHS you can rely on when you need it and a social care system that treats the elderly with respect and comfort. Everything else is frippery, and those whose concerns are of the woke, handwringer or Middle Eastern variety will stay on board, in the main.
Arguably it seems that states that have been Democrat for a long time and flipped under Trump found it quite easy to pop back over to Biden when he acknowledged them and offered them something, as you say. Trump also pissed off a lot of those voters with his attacks on people from those states, Johnson seems to be doing that in general.
I think the grounds are set for Starmer to re-build the Red Wall, as long as he follows the Biden/Blair approach, don't have the culture wars, you cannot win.
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
Biden is going to win the popular vote by a greater margin than the Brexit referendum, probably by over 4% once all the votes in California are counted. It was still a popular rejection of Trump, if not by as decisive margin as had been expected. The way the electoral college frustrates Democrats should not be allowed to mask that.
Best PM ratings - among their 2019 voters (current VI)
Johnson: 54 (75) Starmer: 71 (82)
Johnson is well behind Starmer (28 vs 38, OA) and among ABC1 (-17), all age ranges except the 65+ and all geographical areas - even the South (-5), the only area the Tories are ahead of Labour.
"It's only one poll" - but are his fans convinced Johnson is still an asset and not a liability?
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Yes - frustrating that there's not more alignment between the UK nations. All leaders equally at fault.
I have a feeling that in a few weeks the English lockdown is going to be proven to be a big mistake. I think it may actually lead to a worsening of the situation when there were signs that the Tiers were having an effect (of course in practice a worsening will now be taken of "evidence" of the necessity of the lockdown). Under the "lockdown" (which isn't actually remotely close to a real lockdown) the incentives for the public to comply have been destroyed. When we had the Tier system there was some evidence of communities in general pulling together to avoid being pushed into higher Tiers. What was missing was a route-map to lower Tiers but that could have come. Now there are no incentives. Nobody believes any of these messages about "saving Christmas".
The evidence in London yesterday was that people were completely ignoring the new rules. The parks and open spaces were packed. Far, far busier than in recent weeks. Rules on households clearly being ignored. The pubs were doing a roaring takeaway trade. Someone told me there was a 20 minute queue outside Pret to get a free coffee offer!!! I believe all of this is a direct response to the new Government lockdown. And this is what people are doing in public. It doesn't include what people are doing in private. The Government will blame the public (who claim in polls to support it...) But the behavioural scientists must have been dropped from SAGE or bloody useless because it was all absolutely predictable.
Not all parks are packed. The two square kilometers of parkland at my golf club was no doubt absolutely deserted yesterday save for 5 greens staff maintaining the course in the lovely Autumn weather. So because I couldn't exercise there in splendid isolation instead I added to the numbers taking their exercise down the local disused railway track and nature reserve which was absolutely heaving. Must have walked past 200 others in the space of an hour.
On Monday I'm going to say sod it and wander down to the local playing fields to hit some practice balls around. My mate was doing so yesterday. If anyone objects to balls flying past them I'll suggest that they should social distance at 100+ yards like we do away from other twoballs on the course. If a couple of people are hitting tennis balls across the tarmaced car park next to the closed tennis courts I'll fully understand.
My support for the lockdown is waning simply because of the cack handed sense of priorities. Banning socially distanced outside sport while relaxing the rules to encouraging people to congregate outside pubs serving takeaway beer is an utterly absurd situation. I imagine that Homebase is today going to be heaving from people who have absolutely nothing to do but to go shopping indoors for leisure, and unlike me don't care about the risk to others as well as themselves.
Everyone’s just desperate to (legally) leave the house, and all the Govt restrictions have done is massively reduce the areas where everyone can go. Whether inside (non essential shops - never busy but now shut - pushing larger numbers into the shops now open) or outside (shutting perfectly safe outdoor leisure sites - golf, zoos, theme parks) and pushing larger numbers into the parks.
So simultaneously killing business and economic activity whilst increasing likelihood of killing people!
I think this is a mistake and the lockdown should be extended.
Yes - frustrating that there's not more alignment between the UK nations. All leaders equally at fault.
I have a feeling that in a few weeks the English lockdown is going to be proven to be a big mistake. I think it may actually lead to a worsening of the situation when there were signs that the Tiers were having an effect (of course in practice a worsening will now be taken of "evidence" of the necessity of the lockdown). Under the "lockdown" (which isn't actually remotely close to a real lockdown) the incentives for the public to comply have been destroyed. When we had the Tier system there was some evidence of communities in general pulling together to avoid being pushed into higher Tiers. What was missing was a route-map to lower Tiers but that could have come. Now there are no incentives. Nobody believes any of these messages about "saving Christmas".
The evidence in London yesterday was that people were completely ignoring the new rules. The parks and open spaces were packed. Far, far busier than in recent weeks. Rules on households clearly being ignored. The pubs were doing a roaring takeaway trade. Someone told me there was a 20 minute queue outside Pret to get a free coffee offer!!! I believe all of this is a direct response to the new Government lockdown. And this is what people are doing in public. It doesn't include what people are doing in private. The Government will blame the public (who claim in polls to support it...) But the behavioural scientists must have been dropped from SAGE or bloody useless because it was all absolutely predictable.
Not all parks are packed. The two square kilometers of parkland at my golf club was no doubt absolutely deserted yesterday save for 5 greens staff maintaining the course in the lovely Autumn weather. So because I couldn't exercise there in splendid isolation instead I added to the numbers taking their exercise down the local disused railway track and nature reserve which was absolutely heaving. Must have walked past 200 others in the space of an hour.
On Monday I'm going to say sod it and wander down to the local playing fields to hit some practice balls around. My mate was doing so yesterday. If anyone objects to balls flying past them I'll suggest that they should social distance at 100+ yards like we do away from other twoballs on the course. If a couple of people are hitting tennis balls across the tarmaced car park next to the closed tennis courts I'll fully understand.
My support for the lockdown is waning simply because of the cack handed sense of priorities. Banning socially distanced outside sport while relaxing the rules to encouraging people to congregate outside pubs serving takeaway beer is an utterly absurd situation. I imagine that Homebase is today going to be heaving from people who have absolutely nothing to do but to go shopping indoors for leisure, and unlike me don't care about the risk to others as well as themselves.
Indeed.
Whoever decided on the rules seems to have no understanding about risk or of the concept of activity displacement.
Best PM ratings - among their 2019 voters (current VI)
Johnson: 54 (75) Starmer: 71 (82)
Johnson is well behind Starmer (28 vs 38, OA) and among ABC1 (-17), all age ranges except the 65+ and all geographical areas - even the South (-5), the only area the Tories are ahead of Labour.
"It's only one poll" - but are his fans convinced Johnson is still an asset and not a liability?
On that poll the Brexit Party are on 6%, add their voteshare back to the Tories and it would be Tories 41% and Labour 40%
Doesn't work like that.......
Of course it does, what an absurd comment, you cannot win a general election if 6% of your base is voting third party, as Kinabulu points out while Trump lost this time he still got it close, in 2024 if say Romney won the nomination for the GOP again somehow but Trump Jnr ran as a third party candidate either Biden or Harris would win a landslide as a result. See also the damage the Referendum Party did to Major's Tories in 1997 or Perot did to Bush Snr and Dole in 1992 and 1996.
Trump lost this time but he at least kept it close
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
Biden is going to win the popular vote by a greater margin than the Brexit referendum, probably by over 4% once all the votes in California are counted. It was still a popular rejection of Trump, if not by as decisive margin as had been expected. The way the electoral college frustrates Democrats should not be allowed to mask that.
Have to remember the starting point was Trump -2.2% though, not a Trump lead
The Lib Dems seem to be more invisible than before, somehow.
As others have pointed out before, the Labour rise has been mostly - but not entirely - due to Lib Dem voters folding into Labour.
This raises an interesting point, that is it possible that Labour doesn't really need to convert many more Tory voters to deny the Tories a majority in the worst case?
On current polling Labour does not need any more Tory voters to deny the Tories another majority, however they still need significantly more Tory voters to get a Labour majority, especially if they do not regain large numbers of seats from the SNP in Scotland
I think you've got this the wrong way round.
It starts with adminstrative and governmental competence. Without that Starmer will win by default (despite his faults) because people won't exercise other choices until they know they've got a candidate who can at least do the job.
In fact, that was a big part of why Boris won last year when put next to Corbyn - even though some people were crying whilst doing it.
Next time the tables will be turned which is why the Tories need someone who's demonstrably effective so they can turn the "safe pair of hands" back on Starmer again, which could include common-sense on cultural issues rather than pursuing left-wing identity politics, where Starmer will continue to struggle.
Which means Sunak, Hunt would lose so many voters to Farage he is the only potential Tory leader who could enable a Labour majority next time
I don't think that's true. Hunt could do a Macron.
It's policy and effectiveness that will determine whether he'll lose voters to Farage. May only started to shed to him because she'd failed to get Brexit done, and we had to suffer the farce of another round of EU Parliament elections as a result.
Comments
So now what?
Boris no longer serves a purpose and is now a millstone around the neck of the country, and the Conservatives for that matter.
No room for sentimentality in politics.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8925369/DAN-HODGES-Nigel-Farage-Boris-Johnson-scared.html
Credit to Johnson for doing this but I will say again, he really looks unwell and I worry for his health?
Hopefully Vallance and Whitty will have the integrity to do so as well.
Trying different ideas in an unknown situation should not be criticised but refusing to acknowledge their failure should be.
How will he stand up once he has to make difficult choices? I'm not sure his antenna or experience stand up to scrutiny.
He works hard, has a personality and listens to his Treasury officials. At present I'm finding it harder and harder to find much more to credit to him than that.
What a man!
It will be the GOP Senate tacking clauses on Abortion or Creationism onto sensible bills aimed at helping Main Street America.
What has failed is the UK taking a divided approach to it, we should have all locked down at the same time. Drakeford was right to act when he did but he's wrong to open up now, he should stay locked down to align with England.
The evidence in London yesterday was that people were completely ignoring the new rules. The parks and open spaces were packed. Far, far busier than in recent weeks. Rules on households clearly being ignored. The pubs were doing a roaring takeaway trade. Someone told me there was a 20 minute queue outside Pret to get a free coffee offer!!! I believe all of this is a direct response to the new Government lockdown. And this is what people are doing in public. It doesn't include what people are doing in private. The Government will blame the public (who claim in polls to support it...) But the behavioural scientists must have been dropped from SAGE or bloody useless because it was all absolutely predictable.
Parts of Belgium must be pretty close already.
We can always hope that Biden copies him in that respect...
The government really should have been encouraging a general health and fitness campaign this year.
Yes, so GA senate is the next big US betting thing and not long to wait. I don't know to what extent the 2 seats are logically coupled. Need to look into it. I expect the likes of Alistair, Nigel, Pulpstar etc are onto it.
We laid off over 40 people in September in anticipation of the furlough scheme ending in October. It turns out we did not have to do that.
Biden needs to carry both wings of the Democratic party into government. Having a likely obstructive Senate is not going to make that easier.
And he needs a cooperative Senate to govern effectively.
If would be massively easier if the Democrats were to win both Georgia runoffs, but that seems unlikely.
What Labour would need to do to govern without the SNP.
I haver to say with everything that is going on Brexit is just a waste of time worrying about. Put it on the back burner.
I suspect the world will now go back to Centerist policies and commonsense. 2016 is already out of date.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/nov/08/uks-coronavirus-vaccine-taskforce-chief-faces-questions-over-biotech-fund
But you say lockdown 'as long as necessary' - what level of infection, hospitalisations and deaths does that equate to ?
And what happens if they start increasing again ?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/25/boris-johnson-to-unveil-10m-ad-campaign-to-cut-obesity-in-england
It starts with adminstrative and governmental competence. Without that Starmer will win by default (despite his faults) because people won't exercise other choices until they know they've got a candidate who can at least do the job.
In fact, that was a big part of why Boris won last year when put next to Corbyn - even though some people were crying whilst doing it.
Next time the tables will be turned which is why the Tories need someone who's demonstrably effective so they can turn the "safe pair of hands" back on Starmer again, which could include common-sense on cultural issues rather than pursuing left-wing identity politics, where Starmer will continue to struggle.
You are correct Bush Snr was elected in 1988 but that does not change the point he faced Democratic control of both chambers when he was elected and Biden is the first President since Bush Snr to enter office without his party controlling both chambers of Congress
But that's just me. Old-fashioned.
However, the point is I think moot. Biden is no radical. He’s a boring, unimaginative, overly-tactile but otherwise amiable sort of person who will go around being nice to people and not terrifying the living shit out of anyone.
Truthfully, that is what America needs right now. Yes, it also has major problems which will require pretty radical solutions in the end. But the prerequisite for getting those through is rebuilding the demos. Obama never really tried to. Trump and Clinton made it much worse. Biden might just do it.
He has created his own problem by relying entirely on the 14 day circuit breaker recommended by Sage without any thought to Sage's caveat that further circuit breakers may well be needed
His mantra is that as long as everyone in Wales does what they should do then Wales will be able to contain the virus. However, that is either naïve, dangerous or more likely the consequence of him boxing himself into a corner
I fully expect Wales to be in a similar lockdown to England fairly quickly
I am not clear that Red Wall voters are particularly on the "free markets / free enterprise" track on economic policy, and may lean towards a more-interventionist view.
I have not noticed, for example, swathes of Red Wall MPs willing to die in the anti-lockdown ditch, compared to Tory MPs with a libertarian tinge.
But I have not researched it.
But nobody will plan for that because they’ve literally bet the house on a vaccine.
I'd think there's a chance that they could take the seats, on the "Give them a chance" basis and the general honeymoon effect. Purdue has the incumbency bonus, but he already had that this time. The GOP argument will be "checks and balances are good, don't give the Democrats a blank check". Quite hard to predict - we need some reliable polling...oh...
Starmer led Labour probably has a much more solid floor of 35% unlike Miliband because most of the anti Tory LD switchers are probably locked down.
I can see Starmer led Labour getting 38% and 260 seats in 2024 on current trends TBH although his chances of becoming PM are probably only about 50/50 against Johnson or any replacement as he will struggle to gain more than 50 Tory seats without switchers and the lib dem performance will also be key in the south even if they only gain 10 seats or so.
Probably for the reasons you outline.
The GA runoffs are going to be very interesting, although I would expect a GOP hold in both cases. They will add pressure on the Republicans to ensure that Trump goes quietly and also perhaps to agree another bailout in the lame duck session. And on Biden to assemble a moderate team, I would guess.
Yes he ought to have disclosed the shareholding, but Vallance doesn’t have a role in vaccine procurement decisions - and I don’t think GSK will see much gain from the pandemic, related to the size of their business.
Previously to the Salmond stitch up I would have said Robertson was perfect but not impressed now. Sure you will know more than me of the shenanigans.
But by the same same token, when the time comes to stop the largesse and take some of it back, we'll get "Scrooge Sunak tightens the screw" and his instagram following will take a hit. He'll lose fans. There will be nasty comments. The brand will suffer.
So this, I think, is his problem. His rep is built on nothing substantial. It's fluff. Therefore it can be blown away very very easily.
I do agree Biden is a moderate old hand who can work with a divided Congress and do the necessary compromises to get things done without dividing the nation too much
Hmm, interesting this is a close result but Brexit was decisive isn't it Darren?
Why do people listen to this guy, he's evidently a partisan moron who gives Tories a bad name
But it will mean striking deals - which narrows the room to strike deals with the left of the party.
I think Biden is up to the task, but the lack of a Senate majority makes it more difficult.
On Monday I'm going to say sod it and wander down to the local playing fields to hit some practice balls around. My mate was doing so yesterday. If anyone objects to balls flying past them I'll suggest that they should social distance at 100+ yards like we do away from other twoballs on the course. If a couple of people are hitting tennis balls across the tarmaced car park next to the closed tennis courts I'll fully understand.
My support for the lockdown is waning simply because of the cack handed sense of priorities. Banning socially distanced outside sport while relaxing the rules to encouraging people to congregate outside pubs serving takeaway beer is an utterly absurd situation. I imagine that Homebase is today going to be heaving from people who have absolutely nothing to do but to go shopping indoors for leisure, and unlike me don't care about the risk to others as well as themselves.
Johnson: 54 (75)
Starmer: 71 (82)
Johnson is well behind Starmer (28 vs 38, OA) and among ABC1 (-17), all age ranges except the 65+ and all geographical areas - even the South (-5), the only area the Tories are ahead of Labour.
"It's only one poll" - but are his fans convinced Johnson is still an asset and not a liability?
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/w35fkmlez4/TheTimes_VI_Tracker_201105_W1.pdf
On the Labour side, we need to study Biden's victory very, very carefully. Focus on what matters to the lost voters in our own rust belt - secure, well paid jobs, a good school for their kids, an NHS you can rely on when you need it and a social care system that treats the elderly with respect and comfort. Everything else is frippery, and those whose concerns are of the woke, handwringer or Middle Eastern variety will stay on board, in the main.
*make of that what you will coming from someone unlikely ever to vote Tory.
Interesting header by Casino - thanks for writing it.
Some years ago my playing partner was hit on the left forehead by a drive from another hole that felled him like a log. I rushed over to him and accompanied him to hospital in the ambulance
Sadly he was never the same after this incident and died a couple of years later
Hitting golf balls is not something to be done irresponsibly
I think the grounds are set for Starmer to re-build the Red Wall, as long as he follows the Biden/Blair approach, don't have the culture wars, you cannot win.
So simultaneously killing business and economic activity whilst increasing likelihood of killing people!
Trebles all round!
Whoever decided on the rules seems to have no understanding about risk or of the concept of activity displacement.
Trump lost this time but he at least kept it close
It's policy and effectiveness that will determine whether he'll lose voters to Farage. May only started to shed to him because she'd failed to get Brexit done, and we had to suffer the farce of another round of EU Parliament elections as a result.