So Scotland's new restrictions are officially in place to "target spread of omicron whilst booster vaccinations continue to be rolled out". To be reviewed after 3 weeks.
Noting: - to date there is not much, if any, evidence that booster vaccinations offer much additional protection (over those already vaccinated) against serious outcomes (albeit there may be some limited effect to the extent that boosters might prevent infection in some people) - the booster programme is increasingly concentrated in those age groups not to date perceived as being overly susceptible to serious illness - but, early evidence is that boosters begin to wain in their effectiveness (in contracting infection - to the extent that they offer protection against omicron anyway) from a period of 6-10 weeks. So for a very significant percentage of the population (particularly the older/more vulnerable population) will be back (arguably for many are already back) to double dose levels of protection by the end of the current period of restrictions - fortunately, as above, this may be sufficient for combatting serious illness - the booster programme is not a "business as usual" operation, but is diverting significant funds and NHS resources towards its delivery* - even if the restrictions are vaguely successful in having some impact on spread of omicron, what reasons are there not to expect the next few months to be dominated by rolling waves of infection (beyond everyone just getting infected anyway? - which if its going to happen doesn't provide justification for economically damaging restrictions to facilitate ongoing (and possibly repeated) booster programmes) - when, and how does this ever end? What triggers are going to facilitate a rolling back of mass testing and requirement/need to isolate, particularly for asymptomatic people?
*i wonder how many of those generously offering their time as volunteers would be quite so generous if they knew how much some people are making off the back of their contributions
The booster program will have saved thousands of lives in the current wave but I certainly agree it is extremely disappointing that its effects seem so short term.
Sturgeon has perhaps failed to see the end of the rope that Boris (with more than a little help from his cabinet) has. People are sick to the back teeth with restrictions, things being cancelled and not living normally. Sturgeon is risking drifting from mother of the nation status to a total pain in the neck destroying business and stopping younger and less at risk people enjoying themselves. Her stopping crowds at football matches has gone down particularly badly.
At this moment I should be roughly round Gretna Green on our way to Glasgow - as you can tell we aren’t.
So this evening is now to the cinema at Catterick because it’s the only place showing West Side Story at a decent time.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
Currently I'd imagine a few alternatives might poll better than Boris, but he's of course in a bit of a pit of his own making, and I expect him to recover some ground - he can hardly do worse. I think Hunt as well as Sunak, as you suggest, might well poll better than Boris in the medium term though.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
If Theresa May can earn millions from speeches etc then I think we're grossly underestimating it if anything.
Boris has the advantage Blair had of being known in America too.
Yeah.
But I don't think he'll earn much more by waiting. If anything money for funny speech on Brexit might be less over time. Plus people who are bad at managing money need it NOW.
HYUFD is right to remind us though that the perks he gets are considerable.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
They've got enough clout to ensure that one of their own makes the final two. Then over to you and your comrades to make the choice...
May as well keep Boris unless it is Sunak in my view.
Just as only David Miliband as leader might have made any difference to Labour if they had replaced Brown before the 2010 general election, so only Sunak would get any sustained bounce back from Starmer
I've never understood Labour's fascination with David Miliband. He spoke like a policy wonk, spewing out impenetrable jargon in a manner that made Keir Starmer sound like Winston Churchill. He'd have had no appeal to the average voter imo.
And couldn't even beat his brother. He hasn't even created any new Thunderbirds yet in his post politics job he been doing for years.
So Scotland's new restrictions are officially in place to "target spread of omicron whilst booster vaccinations continue to be rolled out". To be reviewed after 3 weeks.
Noting: - to date there is not much, if any, evidence that booster vaccinations offer much additional protection (over those already vaccinated) against serious outcomes (albeit there may be some limited effect to the extent that boosters might prevent infection in some people) - the booster programme is increasingly concentrated in those age groups not to date perceived as being overly susceptible to serious illness - but, early evidence is that boosters begin to wain in their effectiveness (in contracting infection - to the extent that they offer protection against omicron anyway) from a period of 6-10 weeks. So for a very significant percentage of the population (particularly the older/more vulnerable population) will be back (arguably for many are already back) to double dose levels of protection by the end of the current period of restrictions - fortunately, as above, this may be sufficient for combatting serious illness - the booster programme is not a "business as usual" operation, but is diverting significant funds and NHS resources towards its delivery* - even if the restrictions are vaguely successful in having some impact on spread of omicron, what reasons are there not to expect the next few months to be dominated by rolling waves of infection (beyond everyone just getting infected anyway? - which if its going to happen doesn't provide justification for economically damaging restrictions to facilitate ongoing (and possibly repeated) booster programmes) - when, and how does this ever end? What triggers are going to facilitate a rolling back of mass testing and requirement/need to isolate, particularly for asymptomatic people?
*i wonder how many of those generously offering their time as volunteers would be quite so generous if they knew how much some people are making off the back of their contributions
The booster program will have saved thousands of lives in the current wave but I certainly agree it is extremely disappointing that its effects seem so short term.
Sturgeon has perhaps failed to see the end of the rope that Boris (with more than a little help from his cabinet) has. People are sick to the back teeth with restrictions, things being cancelled and not living normally. Sturgeon is risking drifting from mother of the nation status to a total pain in the neck destroying business and stopping younger and less at risk people enjoying themselves. Her stopping crowds at football matches has gone down particularly badly.
Wait until the Scottish football fans see the full stadia in England next week.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
So Scotland's new restrictions are officially in place to "target spread of omicron whilst booster vaccinations continue to be rolled out". To be reviewed after 3 weeks.
Noting: - to date there is not much, if any, evidence that booster vaccinations offer much additional protection (over those already vaccinated) against serious outcomes (albeit there may be some limited effect to the extent that boosters might prevent infection in some people) - the booster programme is increasingly concentrated in those age groups not to date perceived as being overly susceptible to serious illness - but, early evidence is that boosters begin to wain in their effectiveness (in contracting infection - to the extent that they offer protection against omicron anyway) from a period of 6-10 weeks. So for a very significant percentage of the population (particularly the older/more vulnerable population) will be back (arguably for many are already back) to double dose levels of protection by the end of the current period of restrictions - fortunately, as above, this may be sufficient for combatting serious illness - the booster programme is not a "business as usual" operation, but is diverting significant funds and NHS resources towards its delivery* - even if the restrictions are vaguely successful in having some impact on spread of omicron, what reasons are there not to expect the next few months to be dominated by rolling waves of infection (beyond everyone just getting infected anyway? - which if its going to happen doesn't provide justification for economically damaging restrictions to facilitate ongoing (and possibly repeated) booster programmes) - when, and how does this ever end? What triggers are going to facilitate a rolling back of mass testing and requirement/need to isolate, particularly for asymptomatic people?
*i wonder how many of those generously offering their time as volunteers would be quite so generous if they knew how much some people are making off the back of their contributions
The booster program will have saved thousands of lives in the current wave but I certainly agree it is extremely disappointing that its effects seem so short term.
Sturgeon has perhaps failed to see the end of the rope that Boris (with more than a little help from his cabinet) has. People are sick to the back teeth with restrictions, things being cancelled and not living normally. Sturgeon is risking drifting from mother of the nation status to a total pain in the neck destroying business and stopping younger and less at risk people enjoying themselves. Her stopping crowds at football matches has gone down particularly badly.
There is a certain irony that Nicola Sturgeon could save Boris Johnson.
Seeing empty stadia at places like Ibrox and Celtic Park, then contrasting that with places like Anfield and Old Trafford could make Boris seem like a relative success.
Boris needs to today confirm that there's no restrictions for New Year's Eve and then swiftly reverse Plan B. If he does that, he might regain his popularity.
So Scotland's new restrictions are officially in place to "target spread of omicron whilst booster vaccinations continue to be rolled out". To be reviewed after 3 weeks.
Noting: - to date there is not much, if any, evidence that booster vaccinations offer much additional protection (over those already vaccinated) against serious outcomes (albeit there may be some limited effect to the extent that boosters might prevent infection in some people) - the booster programme is increasingly concentrated in those age groups not to date perceived as being overly susceptible to serious illness - but, early evidence is that boosters begin to wain in their effectiveness (in contracting infection - to the extent that they offer protection against omicron anyway) from a period of 6-10 weeks. So for a very significant percentage of the population (particularly the older/more vulnerable population) will be back (arguably for many are already back) to double dose levels of protection by the end of the current period of restrictions - fortunately, as above, this may be sufficient for combatting serious illness - the booster programme is not a "business as usual" operation, but is diverting significant funds and NHS resources towards its delivery* - even if the restrictions are vaguely successful in having some impact on spread of omicron, what reasons are there not to expect the next few months to be dominated by rolling waves of infection (beyond everyone just getting infected anyway? - which if its going to happen doesn't provide justification for economically damaging restrictions to facilitate ongoing (and possibly repeated) booster programmes) - when, and how does this ever end? What triggers are going to facilitate a rolling back of mass testing and requirement/need to isolate, particularly for asymptomatic people?
*i wonder how many of those generously offering their time as volunteers would be quite so generous if they knew how much some people are making off the back of their contributions
The booster program will have saved thousands of lives in the current wave but I certainly agree it is extremely disappointing that its effects seem so short term.
Sturgeon has perhaps failed to see the end of the rope that Boris (with more than a little help from his cabinet) has. People are sick to the back teeth with restrictions, things being cancelled and not living normally. Sturgeon is risking drifting from mother of the nation status to a total pain in the neck destroying business and stopping younger and less at risk people enjoying themselves. Her stopping crowds at football matches has gone down particularly badly.
Wait until the Scottish football fans see the full stadia in England next week.
She may benefit from the SP Winter break but she needs to get rid of these restrictions before that ends.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
To be fair, one can argue about the basis for the process (Census/ONS/electoral roll etc) but suggesting that boundary reviews should only occur to even out current perceived "advantages" in the system and be designed to do so is wrong. The production of the new boundaries should, in theory, be politically colourblind (of course it will never be so, as parties will lobby for changes that they see as beneficial, but the judgement should be based on sound non political criteria. The reason why the system currently looks so skewed towards the Tories is exactly the same reason they previously looked skewed towards Labour. They've picked up huge number of seats in previous Labour strongholds (as well of course as the loss of Scotland to the SNP).
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Yes which was my original point but equally I can’t see why TSE would be lying about the judgement.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
They've got enough clout to ensure that one of their own makes the final two. Then over to you and your comrades to make the choice...
May as well keep Boris unless it is Sunak in my view.
Just as only David Miliband as leader might have made any difference to Labour if they had replaced Brown before the 2010 general election, so only Sunak would get any sustained bounce back from Starmer
I've never understood Labour's fascination with David Miliband. He spoke like a policy wonk, spewing out impenetrable jargon in a manner that made Keir Starmer sound like Winston Churchill. He'd have had no appeal to the average voter imo.
And couldn't even beat his brother. He hasn't even created any new Thunderbirds yet in his post politics job he been doing for years.
Yet he does earn over a million dollars a year as head of International Rescue and lives in Manhattan.
Ed lost the 2015 general election and is only a minor Shadow Cabinet minister in Starmer's Shadow Cabinet now
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
Currently I'd imagine a few alternatives might poll better than Boris, but he's of course in a bit of a pit of his own making, and I expect him to recover some ground - he can hardly do worse. I think Hunt as well as Sunak, as you suggest, might well poll better than Boris in the medium term though.
Even Steve Baker beat Hunt in the new ConservativeHome survey today
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Good on her if she took the scoundrel to the cleaners.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
Weren’t they introduced in 2010?
They were introduced in 2007 but were first used in 2010. They were based on ward data from 2000.
Next year I'll be turning 40 and depending when about in 2000 they took the data from, I might not have even been old enough to vote when the current boundaries data was taken.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Yes which was my original point but equally I can’t see why TSE would be lying about the judgement.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
No doubt she could have provided an embarrassingly long list of paramours but I think Boris is beyond embarrassment about that and the reporting restrictions on the Family Court systems are fairly severe.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
Currently I'd imagine a few alternatives might poll better than Boris, but he's of course in a bit of a pit of his own making, and I expect him to recover some ground - he can hardly do worse. I think Hunt as well as Sunak, as you suggest, might well poll better than Boris in the medium term though.
Even Steve Baker beat Hunt in the new ConservativeHome survey today
Conservativehome aren’t looking for a new centralist leader that will win the next election, they are looking for a true believer who they can get behind and will take them to an implausible “promised land”
The irony is that I have Steve Baker down as a guaranteed loser at the next election (High Wycombe is an easy Labour win).
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
That should be reviewable by a Court now, surely? If true.
I think the youngest child, Nicotiana Sisypho or whatever, is now in their early 20s.
So Scotland's new restrictions are officially in place to "target spread of omicron whilst booster vaccinations continue to be rolled out". To be reviewed after 3 weeks.
Noting: - to date there is not much, if any, evidence that booster vaccinations offer much additional protection (over those already vaccinated) against serious outcomes (albeit there may be some limited effect to the extent that boosters might prevent infection in some people) - the booster programme is increasingly concentrated in those age groups not to date perceived as being overly susceptible to serious illness - but, early evidence is that boosters begin to wain in their effectiveness (in contracting infection - to the extent that they offer protection against omicron anyway) from a period of 6-10 weeks. So for a very significant percentage of the population (particularly the older/more vulnerable population) will be back (arguably for many are already back) to double dose levels of protection by the end of the current period of restrictions - fortunately, as above, this may be sufficient for combatting serious illness - the booster programme is not a "business as usual" operation, but is diverting significant funds and NHS resources towards its delivery* - even if the restrictions are vaguely successful in having some impact on spread of omicron, what reasons are there not to expect the next few months to be dominated by rolling waves of infection (beyond everyone just getting infected anyway? - which if its going to happen doesn't provide justification for economically damaging restrictions to facilitate ongoing (and possibly repeated) booster programmes) - when, and how does this ever end? What triggers are going to facilitate a rolling back of mass testing and requirement/need to isolate, particularly for asymptomatic people?
*i wonder how many of those generously offering their time as volunteers would be quite so generous if they knew how much some people are making off the back of their contributions
The booster program will have saved thousands of lives in the current wave but I certainly agree it is extremely disappointing that its effects seem so short term.
Sturgeon has perhaps failed to see the end of the rope that Boris (with more than a little help from his cabinet) has. People are sick to the back teeth with restrictions, things being cancelled and not living normally. Sturgeon is risking drifting from mother of the nation status to a total pain in the neck destroying business and stopping younger and less at risk people enjoying themselves. Her stopping crowds at football matches has gone down particularly badly.
Wait until the Scottish football fans see the full stadia in England next week.
Scotland's brought forward its annual winter break - so maybe won't have that much effect in that respect anyway.
Re: David L - i think the jury's still out on how many lives even the booster program has saved (or directly saved anyway - aren't the vast majority of genuinely proven Covid deaths still in unvaccinated people? - certainly all the anecdotal stories are still of the unvaccinated clogging up ICU). And if it has then it is against the delta wave crashing through the EU, rather than omicron.
So Scotland's new restrictions are officially in place to "target spread of omicron whilst booster vaccinations continue to be rolled out". To be reviewed after 3 weeks.
Noting: - to date there is not much, if any, evidence that booster vaccinations offer much additional protection (over those already vaccinated) against serious outcomes (albeit there may be some limited effect to the extent that boosters might prevent infection in some people) - the booster programme is increasingly concentrated in those age groups not to date perceived as being overly susceptible to serious illness - but, early evidence is that boosters begin to wain in their effectiveness (in contracting infection - to the extent that they offer protection against omicron anyway) from a period of 6-10 weeks. So for a very significant percentage of the population (particularly the older/more vulnerable population) will be back (arguably for many are already back) to double dose levels of protection by the end of the current period of restrictions - fortunately, as above, this may be sufficient for combatting serious illness - the booster programme is not a "business as usual" operation, but is diverting significant funds and NHS resources towards its delivery* - even if the restrictions are vaguely successful in having some impact on spread of omicron, what reasons are there not to expect the next few months to be dominated by rolling waves of infection (beyond everyone just getting infected anyway? - which if its going to happen doesn't provide justification for economically damaging restrictions to facilitate ongoing (and possibly repeated) booster programmes) - when, and how does this ever end? What triggers are going to facilitate a rolling back of mass testing and requirement/need to isolate, particularly for asymptomatic people?
*i wonder how many of those generously offering their time as volunteers would be quite so generous if they knew how much some people are making off the back of their contributions
The booster program will have saved thousands of lives in the current wave but I certainly agree it is extremely disappointing that its effects seem so short term.
Sturgeon has perhaps failed to see the end of the rope that Boris (with more than a little help from his cabinet) has. People are sick to the back teeth with restrictions, things being cancelled and not living normally. Sturgeon is risking drifting from mother of the nation status to a total pain in the neck destroying business and stopping younger and less at risk people enjoying themselves. Her stopping crowds at football matches has gone down particularly badly.
At this moment I should be roughly round Gretna Green on our way to Glasgow - as you can tell we aren’t.
So this evening is now to the cinema at Catterick because it’s the only place showing West Side Story at a decent time.
My wife is going to see that today with the daughter who gave it to her as a Christmas present. I went to see the Spiderman movie yesterday with my son as my present. It was excellent and the special effects were truly stunning. My wife was a bit disappointed its a remake. She loved the original.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong) it was Clement Attlee's government that set that term of reference and it has been used ever since.
Cameron just set tighter restrictions on sizes which had been allowed to drift.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
I'm not sure what's unfair about registered voters. The unregistered have disenfranchised themselves. And they are much easier to count than population.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
As above, the purpose of boundary reviews is not (or should not be) to increase or correct (party political) "fairness". It should be to ensure that they reflect the current size of electorate that reside in them. Increasing (or otherwise) perceived "fairness" is just a bi-product which may or may not occur. What is true is that the longer you leave necessary changes, the larger the consequential impact on current party composition is likely to be. Old Sarum.
The particular terms of reference for the current review are a slightly different issue.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong) it was Clement Attlee's government that set that term of reference and it has been used ever since.
Cameron just set tighter restrictions on sizes which had been allowed to drift.
There was also the change to individual voter registration, after the shambles with Lutfur Rahman in Tower Hamlets, and the judge who described the postal vote system as out of a banana republic back in 2005.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
HYakiUFDa still thinks that Boris is a vote winner, The man that the red wall are still supporting.
He endlessly quotes polls to try and back up his argument, yet despite the polls clearly showing Boris being the force repelling voters faster than you can say superinjunction, he's sticking to it.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Yes which was my original point but equally I can’t see why TSE would be lying about the judgement.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
No doubt she could have provided an embarrassingly long list of paramours but I think Boris is beyond embarrassment about that and the reporting restrictions on the Family Court systems are fairly severe.
That conversation assumes that it was setup in a Court.
I think i commented a couple of days ago that Labour shouldn't get too complacent about the polling because they didn't appear to have done too much to have earned their current position - which meant that they were mainly a consequence of current Government unpopularity/mid-term blues and which history shows could quite likely be turned around as the focus became more on the election and the choices placed in front of the electorate.
A counter to that (at least as far as the Johnson Govt is concerned) is that traditionally Government unpopularity in mid term is a consequence of "tough but necessary" measures generally taken in the early years of Government. Which, presuming things improve later, gives a clear message to be taken to the electorate of having taken those tough decisions for the good of the country and we are in a better position for it.
When so much of the current Governments woes are self inflicted (and i'm leaving out general Brexit and Covid policy (not the "party" stuff obviously) out of this - which i think retain the potential to help them in future) however, they lack that message to sell. So they clearly need a complete Government overhaul as a minimum - and they still need a lot more than that (even if Brexit/Covid improves) the economic clouds on the horizon are hardly propipitious...
It's commonplace for most people to say that Labour hasn't done much to earn their current polling position, as you put it. As far as a policy offer is concerned, I'd agree - though it's early days. But I do think that one shouldn't underestimate the progress that Starmer has made over the last 20 months:
- the stain of anti-semitism has largely been removed - the influence of the far left has dissipated, even though some still lurk inside and outside the PLP, which has always been the case - internal party organisation, including the NEC is now in Starmer's pocket - the Shadow Cabinet now in place is pretty formidable and reassuring to voters - Starmer himself has significantly improved his performance in the last few months.
Basically, I'd argue that there is a risk of underestimating Labour's progress.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Yes which was my original point but equally I can’t see why TSE would be lying about the judgement.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
No doubt she could have provided an embarrassingly long list of paramours but I think Boris is beyond embarrassment about that and the reporting restrictions on the Family Court systems are fairly severe.
That conversation assumes that it was setup in a Court.
So Boris signed something without reading it nor understanding it.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
I'm not sure what's unfair about registered voters. The unregistered have disenfranchised themselves. And they are much easier to count than population.
As in America, everything comes down to motive. There are all sorts of different approaches that one can take to determining boundary sizes, eligibility to vote, "ensuring security of the ballot" etc etc. And all sorts of variations employed around the World (and in America - within America in the same elections). Most can have arguments made in their favour that are reasonable if made in an academic/unbiassed environment.
However if changes are proposed, not genuinely to encourage fairness, but for ulterior party political motives, then that is wrong.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Most people find restrictions vaguely annoying but one rule for me and another for everyone else is something most people find fundamentally unfair so dislike.
As for taxes people don’t remember them. It’s only going to be in May (as local elections occur) that people notice that tax has increased and their take home pays gone down.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
I think i commented a couple of days ago that Labour shouldn't get too complacent about the polling because they didn't appear to have done too much to have earned their current position - which meant that they were mainly a consequence of current Government unpopularity/mid-term blues and which history shows could quite likely be turned around as the focus became more on the election and the choices placed in front of the electorate.
A counter to that (at least as far as the Johnson Govt is concerned) is that traditionally Government unpopularity in mid term is a consequence of "tough but necessary" measures generally taken in the early years of Government. Which, presuming things improve later, gives a clear message to be taken to the electorate of having taken those tough decisions for the good of the country and we are in a better position for it.
When so much of the current Governments woes are self inflicted (and i'm leaving out general Brexit and Covid policy (not the "party" stuff obviously) out of this - which i think retain the potential to help them in future) however, they lack that message to sell. So they clearly need a complete Government overhaul as a minimum - and they still need a lot more than that (even if Brexit/Covid improves) the economic clouds on the horizon are hardly propipitious...
It's commonplace for most people to say that Labour hasn't done much to earn their current polling position, as you put it. As far as a policy offer is concerned, I'd agree - though it's early days. But I do think that one shouldn't underestimate the progress that Starmer has made over the last 20 months:
- the stain of anti-semitism has largely been removed - the influence of the far left has dissipated, even though some still lurk inside and outside the PLP, which has always been the case - internal party organisation, including the NEC is now in Starmer's pocket - the Shadow Cabinet now in place is pretty formidable and reassuring to voters - Starmer himself has significantly improved his performance in the last few months.
Basically, I'd argue that there is a risk of underestimating Labour's progress.
Yes, they've got themselves into a position where when the time comes people will be prepared to give them the time of day. But i would argue that they (people) aren't currently in a position where they feel they need to do that. Just that the mood music has improved.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Most people find restrictions vaguely annoying but one rule for me and another for everyone else is something most people find fundamentally unfair so dislike.
I 100% agree with that but that bites much, much more when unfair rules are being imposed upon them at the time.
The juxtaposition of threatening Christmas and further restrictions at the same time as the revelations were coming out could hardly have been worse.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
I'm not sure what's unfair about registered voters. The unregistered have disenfranchised themselves. And they are much easier to count than population.
As in America, everything comes down to motive. There are all sorts of different approaches that one can take to determining boundary sizes, eligibility to vote, "ensuring security of the ballot" etc etc. And all sorts of variations employed around the World (and in America - within America in the same elections). Most can have arguments made in their favour that are reasonable if made in an academic/unbiassed environment.
However if changes are proposed, not genuinely to encourage fairness, but for ulterior party political motives, then that is wrong.
We are currently living through the proof that, due to various policies over the years, there is not a vaguely accurate population count.
See the ONS mid 2021 data vs the people actual found for vaccination.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Most people find restrictions vaguely annoying but one rule for me and another for everyone else is something most people find fundamentally unfair so dislike.
As for taxes people don’t remember them. It’s only going to be in May (as local elections occur) that people notice that tax has increased and their take home pays gone down.
The elephant in the room is still energy prices, which will for many people rise £100 a month in the next few months.
Petrol prices are close to all time highs too, and people notice those every day.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Yes which was my original point but equally I can’t see why TSE would be lying about the judgement.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
No doubt she could have provided an embarrassingly long list of paramours but I think Boris is beyond embarrassment about that and the reporting restrictions on the Family Court systems are fairly severe.
That conversation assumes that it was setup in a Court.
So Boris signed something without reading it nor understanding it.
Why am I completely and utterly unsurprised
It depends what was the driver, which we cannot know.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong) it was Clement Attlee's government that set that term of reference and it has been used ever since.
Cameron just set tighter restrictions on sizes which had been allowed to drift.
DCam changed the electoral register to be updated annually and require everyone to re-opt in each year, which was felt to make it more likely for labour voters to drop off and so not be counted.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to six months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
True, but have Labour reached the end of their well deserved time in opposition? That is the dilemma we are faced with.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
True, but have Labour reached the end of their well deserved time in opposition? That is the dilemma we are faced with.
Starmer, Reeves, Cooper and co are fit to govern. The deal is far from sealed, but they are up to the job.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
In 2010 there was a sense, inside the Labour Party, that a period of renewal in opposition would be good for the party... I imagine they expected a robust but ultimately cathartic leadership contest in which David Miliband emerged victorious, to roundly screw the Coalition to death and sweep into Downing Street under Neo Labour. I'm not sure the past 10 years or so was what they had in mind. In a nutshell: Opposition can be unpredictable and you might spend longer there than you think.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to six months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong) it was Clement Attlee's government that set that term of reference and it has been used ever since.
Cameron just set tighter restrictions on sizes which had been allowed to drift.
DCam changed the electoral register to be updated annually and require everyone to re-opt in each year, which was felt to make it more likely for labour voters to drop off and so not be counted.
I think you mean it made it more likely for Labour voters to only be on the register once, so only be counted once.
Previously anyone who moved was quite frequently on the register both in their old and current address for a period until the register finally dropped them out.
In the 2010 election I received a polling card at my address, while my parents also received a polling card for me at their address despite the fact I no longer lived with my parents anymore as the Council hadn't dropped me off their register yet despite having been informed of the change.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
His telegraph column was £250k for a mornings work. Easy money that didn't interfere with evening socialising. Probably can double that after being PM.
Yes, I think people grossly exaggerate the earing capacity of lecture circuits. Boris will do better than most because he is genuinely entertaining but its a pretty short term option as the novelty wears off.
The other major problem for Boris Johnson is that it is rumoured that his ex wife took him to the cleaners during the divorce and gets 50% of his future income.
Was Boris representing himself as it takes a particularly bad performance to get that sort of judgment in this day and age
Marianne Wheeler is a QC. I really cannot see any basis on which she would be receiving anything for herself at all in terms of income. Clearly she would have been entitled to capital and Boris would have still had some obligations towards the children although most should be adults now and finished their university education.
Yes which was my original point but equally I can’t see why TSE would be lying about the judgement.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
No doubt she could have provided an embarrassingly long list of paramours but I think Boris is beyond embarrassment about that and the reporting restrictions on the Family Court systems are fairly severe.
That conversation assumes that it was setup in a Court.
Not really. It simply tries to imagine what pressure might have been applied to allow to make the claims she apparently did.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
The vaccines are working on the people who have them.
But there's so many unvaccinated idiots out there that its "threatening the NHS" and thus restrictions.
Unvaccinated morons are the only reason we're at risk of restrictions now. Anyone opposed to lockdown should have been first in line for vaccinations.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
I agree with this. It's incredibly reassuring, as well.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
True, but have Labour reached the end of their well deserved time in opposition? That is the dilemma we are faced with.
Starmer, Reeves, Cooper and co are fit to govern. The deal is far from sealed, but they are up to the job.
There are still plenty of the Novara media/Owen Jones types in the party especially in its activist base.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
In 2010 there was a sense, inside the Labour Party, that a period of renewal in opposition would be good for the party... I imagine they expected a robust but ultimately cathartic leadership contest in which David Miliband emerged victorious, to roundly screw the Coalition to death and sweep into Downing Street under Neo Labour. I'm not sure the past 10 years or so was what they had in mind. In a nutshell: Opposition can be unpredictable and you might spend longer there than you think.
True, but those forces are there regardless and only fester if they are neglected. Labour had a post New Labour reckoning regardless. Tories have issues to deal of their own post Brexit and Covid. My observation is that they do not really know what they’re there for.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to six months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Ending testing = preventing people from protecting their loved ones. Would be a disaster.
The public are wrongly worried because of all the fearmongering. They rightly weren't worried six months ago and that's when the government were doing well in the polls.
Making the public worried has trashed the government's biggest success, that they'd got us through the crisis with the vaccines.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
True, but have Labour reached the end of their well deserved time in opposition? That is the dilemma we are faced with.
Starmer, Reeves, Cooper and co are fit to govern. The deal is far from sealed, but they are up to the job.
There are still plenty of the Novara media/Owen Jones types in the party especially in its activist base.
You’d be dishonest though if you said they had any influence
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Most people find restrictions vaguely annoying but one rule for me and another for everyone else is something most people find fundamentally unfair so dislike.
As for taxes people don’t remember them. It’s only going to be in May (as local elections occur) that people notice that tax has increased and their take home pays gone down.
The elephant in the room is still energy prices, which will for many people rise £100 a month in the next few months.
Petrol prices are close to all time highs too, and people notice those every day.
April is a perfect storm of bad news for the general public - small payrises (due to employment tax rises), a tax increase a 5% or higher increase in council tax and a 30-50% increase in fuel costs.
And on May 5th a lot of people can take a small piece of vengeance out on their local Tory party (although other incumbents may be equally impacted due to the council tax increases).
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to is months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Sure the vaccines are working, but the government is undermining its own message on that by imposing new restrictions...?
The vaccines are working on the people who have them.
But there's so many unvaccinated idiots out there that its "threatening the NHS" and thus restrictions.
Unvaccinated morons are the only reason we're at risk of restrictions now. Anyone opposed to lockdown should have been first in line for vaccinations.
Really?
Gibraltar has no unvaccinated morons. None at all. Not one. They still cancelled Christmas. Go figure.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
True, but have Labour reached the end of their well deserved time in opposition? That is the dilemma we are faced with.
Starmer, Reeves, Cooper and co are fit to govern. The deal is far from sealed, but they are up to the job.
There are still plenty of the Novara media/Owen Jones types in the party especially in its activist base.
All parties include a range of opinions. Labour have always has a left. Always will. The Tories will always have a right. Not a barrier to government.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
We'll see. If I'm right, then a return to libertarian principles will see a recovery in the polls.
If you're right, then nothing will lead to a recovery in the polls for Boris because he's not going to suddenly change how he speaks or acts.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
Get the impression that it's the 'do as I say not as I do' that's really cutting through. 'One rule for you' and all that if you want a rephrase!
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
Well don't worry because I am sure. You can work it out. The polls have turned in the last few weeks. It's been quick. What's happened? Paterson, Peppa, Parties, all of that stuff, stories that speak to a PM and govt taking the piss. This has cut through. No way is it due to the implementing of Plan B for Omicron and then resisting the pressure for a lockdown. It makes no sense whatsoever to blame that for the polling meltdown.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
There's a reason that six months ago Boris was on top electorally and right now he isn't.
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to six months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
Ending testing = preventing people from protecting their loved ones. Would be a disaster.
The public are wrongly worried because of all the fearmongering. They rightly weren't worried six months ago and that's when the government were doing well in the polls.
Making the public worried has trashed the government's biggest success, that they'd got us through the crisis with the vaccines.
Covid doesn’t “end” until mass free (self) testing ends. How on earth they go about doing without further crippling support in the polls that is another matter.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
Pretty sure there were large numbers of Ayn Rand aficionados at the Ally Pally arrers.
Apologies, that’s an obscene level of alliteration.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
The boundary commission is impartial and draws politically neutral constituency boundaries.
After 22 years its inevitable that many constituencies will contain either far too many or too few voters because of population movements over that time.
So Scotland's new restrictions are officially in place to "target spread of omicron whilst booster vaccinations continue to be rolled out". To be reviewed after 3 weeks.
Noting: - to date there is not much, if any, evidence that booster vaccinations offer much additional protection (over those already vaccinated) against serious outcomes (albeit there may be some limited effect to the extent that boosters might prevent infection in some people) - the booster programme is increasingly concentrated in those age groups not to date perceived as being overly susceptible to serious illness - but, early evidence is that boosters begin to wain in their effectiveness (in contracting infection - to the extent that they offer protection against omicron anyway) from a period of 6-10 weeks. So for a very significant percentage of the population (particularly the older/more vulnerable population) will be back (arguably for many are already back) to double dose levels of protection by the end of the current period of restrictions - fortunately, as above, this may be sufficient for combatting serious illness - the booster programme is not a "business as usual" operation, but is diverting significant funds and NHS resources towards its delivery* - even if the restrictions are vaguely successful in having some impact on spread of omicron, what reasons are there not to expect the next few months to be dominated by rolling waves of infection (beyond everyone just getting infected anyway? - which if its going to happen doesn't provide justification for economically damaging restrictions to facilitate ongoing (and possibly repeated) booster programmes) - when, and how does this ever end? What triggers are going to facilitate a rolling back of mass testing and requirement/need to isolate, particularly for asymptomatic people?
*i wonder how many of those generously offering their time as volunteers would be quite so generous if they knew how much some people are making off the back of their contributions
The booster program will have saved thousands of lives in the current wave but I certainly agree it is extremely disappointing that its effects seem so short term.
Sturgeon has perhaps failed to see the end of the rope that Boris (with more than a little help from his cabinet) has. People are sick to the back teeth with restrictions, things being cancelled and not living normally. Sturgeon is risking drifting from mother of the nation status to a total pain in the neck destroying business and stopping younger and less at risk people enjoying themselves. Her stopping crowds at football matches has gone down particularly badly.
Wait until the Scottish football fans see the full stadia in England next week.
Scotland's brought forward its annual winter break - so maybe won't have that much effect in that respect anyway.
Re: David L - i think the jury's still out on how many lives even the booster program has saved (or directly saved anyway - aren't the vast majority of genuinely proven Covid deaths still in unvaccinated people? - certainly all the anecdotal stories are still of the unvaccinated clogging up ICU). And if it has then it is against the delta wave crashing through the EU, rather than omicron.
The comparative death toll between the UK and the EU this time suggests that the very rapid booster roll out has had an effect. The number of cases we suffered over the Autumn and Summer may also have had an effect as might the number of people in this country who got the AZ dose which seems to be longer lasting, especially when combined with others. I would agree it is not definitive but it seems likely that the booster campaign has at least played a part. I just wish it lasted longer.
Just read boxing day sales footfall down 67% in London. No lockdown but people vote with their feet.
Sales may be down but I wouldn't call Boxing Day 2020 v Boxing Day 2021 a fair comparison. On Oxford Street Debenhams and House of Fraser have gone and John Lewis wasn't open).
When we went walked along Oxford Street on December 10th my only thought was how empty (and quiet) it was.
Regent Street and Bond Street doesn't have a problem but Oxford Street as it was is currently completely and utterly dead.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
Well don't worry because I am sure. You can work it out. The polls have turned in the last few weeks. It's been quick. What's happened? Paterson, Peppa, Parties, all of that stuff, stories that speak to a PM and govt taking the piss. This has cut through. No way is it due to the implementing of Plan B for Omicron and then resisting the pressure for a lockdown. It makes no sense whatsoever to blame that for the polling meltdown.
Plan B happened in the same timescale too.
Sorry but why does it make no sense whatsoever to blame that?
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
I'm not sure what's unfair about registered voters. The unregistered have disenfranchised themselves. And they are much easier to count than population.
It's an undisputed fact that people who are settled in one place (who tend to be older, which nowadays means more likely to be Tory) are more likely to be registered. People who move frequently (typically young people) will only regard electoral registration each time as a priority if they're political zealots like, er, us. So one can bring about a better Conservative result (without a single mind being changed) by requiring frequent re-registration. It's a subtle form of voter suppression, as conducted more energetically in the USA.
The cure, in my view, is to ask the Electoral Commission to define constituency boundaries according to the census (excluding foreign nationals where these are not eligible) rather than on who has currently registered.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
We'll see. If I'm right, then a return to libertarian principles will see a recovery in the polls.
If you're right, then nothing will lead to a recovery in the polls for Boris because he's not going to suddenly change how he speaks or acts.
I expect a recovery in the polls just from avoiding spectacular own goals for a few weeks.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
We'll see. If I'm right, then a return to libertarian principles will see a recovery in the polls.
If you're right, then nothing will lead to a recovery in the polls for Boris because he's not going to suddenly change how he speaks or acts.
I expect a recovery in the polls just from avoiding spectacular own goals for a few weeks.
There is an assumption in that statement which may well be tested.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
In 2010 there was a sense, inside the Labour Party, that a period of renewal in opposition would be good for the party... I imagine they expected a robust but ultimately cathartic leadership contest in which David Miliband emerged victorious, to roundly screw the Coalition to death and sweep into Downing Street under Neo Labour. I'm not sure the past 10 years or so was what they had in mind. In a nutshell: Opposition can be unpredictable and you might spend longer there than you think.
Indeed. Was watching a clip from election night 1997. Alan Duncan (I think), was enthusiastically spinning the line about how they'd be back in four or five years. Paxman interrupted him to point out that on that majority, this was certainly a two, and most probably a 3 term Labour government. Nearer a dozen. His face fell. You could see it dawning just how far away that was. I'm 55. We've had only two changes of governing party since I became a teenager.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
We'll see. If I'm right, then a return to libertarian principles will see a recovery in the polls.
If you're right, then nothing will lead to a recovery in the polls for Boris because he's not going to suddenly change how he speaks or acts.
I expect a recovery in the polls just from avoiding spectacular own goals for a few weeks.
That, Mr K is quite a big assumption, given recent events.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
I'm not sure what's unfair about registered voters. The unregistered have disenfranchised themselves. And they are much easier to count than population.
It's an undisputed fact that people who are settled in one place (who tend to be older, which nowadays means more likely to be Tory) are more likely to be registered. People who move frequently (typically young people) will only regard electoral registration each time as a priority if they're political zealots like, er, us. So one can bring about a better Conservative result (without a single mind being changed) by requiring frequent re-registration. It's a subtle form of voter suppression, as conducted more energetically in the USA.
The cure, in my view, is to ask the Electoral Commission to define constituency boundaries according to the census (excluding foreign nationals where these are not eligible) rather than on who has currently registered.
A flaw with that argument is that the 2021 census is the last one planned - other methods are supposed to be used in the future
The issue with Cameron's plan was that the margins were so tight that seemingly random unrelated areas needed to be included to hit the numbers. Without a 10% or so margin it was impossible to create constituencies that geographical sense.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
We'll see. If I'm right, then a return to libertarian principles will see a recovery in the polls.
If you're right, then nothing will lead to a recovery in the polls for Boris because he's not going to suddenly change how he speaks or acts.
I expect a recovery in the polls just from avoiding spectacular own goals for a few weeks.
Convenient.
I suspect the famous Ally Pally crowd are more bothered by threats to ban people from going to crowded events like Ally Pally, or the pub in general, than they are the ins and outs of Owen Paterson or speeches to the CBI.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Most people find restrictions vaguely annoying but one rule for me and another for everyone else is something most people find fundamentally unfair so dislike.
As for taxes people don’t remember them. It’s only going to be in May (as local elections occur) that people notice that tax has increased and their take home pays gone down.
The elephant in the room is still energy prices, which will for many people rise £100 a month in the next few months.
Petrol prices are close to all time highs too, and people notice those every day.
April is a perfect storm of bad news for the general public - small payrises (due to employment tax rises), a tax increase a 5% or higher increase in council tax and a 30-50% increase in fuel costs.
And on May 5th a lot of people can take a small piece of vengeance out on their local Tory party (although other incumbents may be equally impacted due to the council tax increases).
And the higher inflation goes, the more brutal the effect of freezing income tax thresholds.
There's a lot of pain for the government that's now baked in.
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
Well don't worry because I am sure. You can work it out. The polls have turned in the last few weeks. It's been quick. What's happened? Paterson, Peppa, Parties, all of that stuff, stories that speak to a PM and govt taking the piss. This has cut through. No way is it due to the implementing of Plan B for Omicron and then resisting the pressure for a lockdown. It makes no sense whatsoever to blame that for the polling meltdown.
Plan B happened in the same timescale too.
Sorry but why does it make no sense whatsoever to blame that?
Transfer to Reform = restrictions Transfer to Lib/Lab = parties/corruption Increase in (ex-Tory) don’t knows = bit of both/either
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Taxes & restrictions is why you've ditched him and I'm sure you speak with unforked tongue on that. But don't kid yourself you're in tune with the public on this. The sharp fall in the polls for him and the Cons is due to the stuff you don't care about - lack of integrity, honesty, seriousness, grip - not to the libertarian and small state stuff you do.
We'll see. If I'm right, then a return to libertarian principles will see a recovery in the polls.
If you're right, then nothing will lead to a recovery in the polls for Boris because he's not going to suddenly change how he speaks or acts.
I expect a recovery in the polls just from avoiding spectacular own goals for a few weeks.
The only way to avoid spectacular own goals would be to replace the goal keeper - Boris will always get distracted and let the next ball sail past him into the net.
Would be basically 2010 in reverse on these figures, a hung parliament but Labour largest party and close to a majority with the LDs. Starmer as Cameron and Boris as Brown but Labour as largest party able to ignore the LDs.
However considering the endless media attacks on partygate, which was more significant than Paterson in moving the polls, still no Labour majority even on this poll.
Don't forget you have gerrymandered the constituency boundaries to help yourselves prevent a Labour majority.
What are you talking about? The last boundary review was held under Labour.
The current boundaries are decades out of date and the boundary review is being done by the independent Electoral Commission as always, no gerrymandering in sight.
The next one isn't and it stands to benefit the already advantaged Conservative Party. The unfair Labour advantage of GE2005 was a very long time ago!
HYUFD takes much comfort from the Tories ahead by circa 40 seats at level pegging on points and level pegging on seats when Labour are 3 points ahead ( on new boundaries).
But of course you would call it efficiency of votes.
The current boundaries will be 22 years out of date in a few weeks' time.
What a daft point. So they are 22 years old and unfair. So updating them so they are even more unfair is progress?
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong) it was Clement Attlee's government that set that term of reference and it has been used ever since.
Cameron just set tighter restrictions on sizes which had been allowed to drift.
DCam changed the electoral register to be updated annually and require everyone to re-opt in each year, which was felt to make it more likely for labour voters to drop off and so not be counted.
I think you mean it made it more likely for Labour voters to only be on the register once, so only be counted once.
Previously anyone who moved was quite frequently on the register both in their old and current address for a period until the register finally dropped them out.
In the 2010 election I received a polling card at my address, while my parents also received a polling card for me at their address despite the fact I no longer lived with my parents anymore as the Council hadn't dropped me off their register yet despite having been informed of the change.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you aren't a Labour voter though.
Just read boxing day sales footfall down 67% in London. No lockdown but people vote with their feet.
Sales may be down but I wouldn't call Boxing Day 2020 v Boxing Day 2021 a fair comparison. On Oxford Street Debenhams and House of Fraser have gone and John Lewis wasn't open).
When we went walked along Oxford Street on December 10th my only thought was how empty (and quiet) it was.
Regent Street and Bond Street doesn't have a problem but Oxford Street as it was is currently completely and utterly dead.
Will these polls encourage enough Tory red wallers to send their letters to Brady, that is the question.
Not sure back to austerity with Sunak or ex Remainer Truss is going to get much swingback from the redwall.
Better for Boris to keep on with the booster programme and try and avoid more restrictions
Boris is marching the party to an election disaster and you are so blinded or in denial to see what is staring you in the face
After 10 years in power most parties normally lose a general election.
The only exception was John Major in 1992 but he then led the Tories to a landslide defeat in 1997.
Even this poll still sees only a hung parliament not even a Labour majority against Boris. In 1992 remember most of the final polls also had Kinnock winning most seats in a hung parliament as this poll shows Starmer doing
You do not get it
Clearly you don't.
The only alternative leader to Boris who might get a bounce v Starmer is Sunak and on today's ConservativeHome survey Sunak would not even win the Tory membership vote, albeit only a narrow loss
The vast majority of voters are decent law abiding citizens and in Boris they see the 'one rule for them one rule for us' playing out every day from Paterson through wallpapergate, partygate to sleaze and say 'be gone'
Until you understand that simple fact, and be mindful how quickly Ratner trashed his brand you should take stock and as a conservative accept you have a responsibility to change the perception, and that cannot start with Boris in no10
The whole Tory party needs a time in opposition to reflect and rebuild. It’s not just Boris.
True, but have Labour reached the end of their well deserved time in opposition? That is the dilemma we are faced with.
Starmer, Reeves, Cooper and co are fit to govern. The deal is far from sealed, but they are up to the job.
There are still plenty of the Novara media/Owen Jones types in the party especially in its activist base.
You’d be dishonest though if you said they had any influence
Well I’m not a dishonest person and I vote labour at national elections.
However labour seem to have little interest in places like where I live. It is more a case of waiting for us to come home.
Let’s see where the policy platform for labour goes in the next few years ahead of the general election.
Just read boxing day sales footfall down 67% in London. No lockdown but people vote with their feet.
Sales may be down but I wouldn't call Boxing Day 2020 v Boxing Day 2021 a fair comparison. On Oxford Street Debenhams and House of Fraser have gone and John Lewis wasn't open).
When we went walked along Oxford Street on December 10th my only thought was how empty (and quiet) it was.
Regent Street and Bond Street doesn't have a problem but Oxford Street as it was is currently completely and utterly dead.
Vs 2019 I think
I did think compared to 2020 would be unlikely but yep compared to 2019 - 2 fewer department stores, 1 more closed for the day and a lot of other empty shops
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
Certainly true six months ago. Now? I am less sure to be honest.
Well don't worry because I am sure. You can work it out. The polls have turned in the last few weeks. It's been quick. What's happened? Paterson, Peppa, Parties, all of that stuff, stories that speak to a PM and govt taking the piss. This has cut through. No way is it due to the implementing of Plan B for Omicron and then resisting the pressure for a lockdown. It makes no sense whatsoever to blame that for the polling meltdown.
Plan B happened in the same timescale too.
Sorry but why does it make no sense whatsoever to blame that?
Transfer to Reform = restrictions Transfer to Lib/Lab = parties/corruption Increase in (ex-Tory) don’t knows = bit of both/either
I'd include Lib Dems as both/either too.
I'd currently tell a pollster Lib Dems and backed the Lib Dems to win NS on the basis of Covid not Paterson etc.
While Labour have been calling for more restrictions the Lib Dems have rightly been opposing them. 👍🔸
EXCL: Significant life events such as weddings and funerals are set to be exempted from new Covid restrictions this time if the government decides it needs to impose tougher measures
Good news. Some of the worst stories not involving death of the whole pandemic, have been from people forced to cancel weddings and unable to attend funerals.
I hadn't appreciated until recently how much stress the "what stupid covid rules will be in force on the date" causes. I've a vested interest, I'm getting married next May (and we're doing it primarily because we want to be married to each other, so we'll go ahead come what may, even if it's literally just the two of us, a minister and two witnesses), but planning everything round various different levels of restriction is just nightmarish - and we're having a small do by modern standards - 120ish people in the little mission hall my fiancée attended until she left home, and a hog roast afterwards in a hired church hall.
What the poor people who want to invite hundreds to a fancy do in a big hotel costing thousands and thousands* are going through I've no idea...
*I reckon we'll end up spending £1500-2000 all in
£12 a person sounds a bit low: are you charging these 120 teetotallers for the hog roast or has your accountant slipped a decimal point somewhere along the line? ETA and congratulations!
Indoor hog roast? Ye Gods.
If it's a Gospel Hall, they will be quite happy with the absence of most of the ceremony.
At my cousins wedding they paraded the hog roast in carried by 6 people to the tune of Flight of the Valkyries
When people make mistakes, there is one question. Was it a mistake that was obvious at the time? If not, then they should be allowed it. We all make mistakes, and it is sometimes better to be willing to make a decision and risk being wrong than hesitating and finding it's all gone to hell in a handcart anyway.
This mistake was not only clearly a gargantuan clusterfuck at the time, it actually looks even worse with hindsight. It has literally destroyed Johnson's government and ended his career in spectacular fashion. It may have done significant damage to the party as a whole. It has shattered political unity at a moment when it had become important due to a renewed public health emergency.
And all for Owen Paterson. An undistinguished former middle-ranking cabinet minister who was deep in the politics of the pork barrel and was not likely to stay in politics much longer anyway. Even if the theoretical aim was to protect Johnson or Patel, it was clearly never going to work.
Sheer bloody madness. Johnson deserves every ounce of opprobrium he gets for it.
Have a good morning.
His mistake here was listening to Charles Moore, wasn't it? And why does he listen to an imbecile like Charles Moore? Because he needs the Telegraph pay check once again when his time in Number 10 is over to keep his wife in the style to which she expects to become accustomed.
This is where Boris is most vulnerable. He needs money, lots of money to sustain his families and to live like his richer friends. It will be his downfall but probably not yet.
I would have thought an ex-PM really ought to be able to make much, much more money on the lecture/speech circuit than the Telegraph could ever afford.
I'm not sure the entirety of the current decline in the Tory shares is down to the Owen Paterson saga though. The timing also lines up with fears over Covid.
Lets not forget that the rise back in the Tory share earlier in the year was due to the success of the vaccines in getting us out of Covid. Then people started fearmongering over Omicron etc and restrictions coming back, that pissed all over the government's biggest success.
Any government that is putting restrictions upon its people twelve months after vaccines became available has failed to manage Covid well. That includes the British government.
Though frankly the devolved governments and our continental neighbours have all fared much worse it seems, so a rebound in the polls in the new year could be quite plausible as the vaccines again are shown to be a success and the fearmongering over restrictions is shown to be the bullshit it always was.
Alternatively if restrictions are imposed, then Boris has to be ousted, no ifs, no buts.
There is just no scintilla of an excuse to impose restrictions on the people over a year after vaccines became available. None whatsoever.
Pure projection and patently false. Johnson's polling decline is due to things like Paterson, Peppa, Parties - things which demonstrate beyond doubt to all but the most unwary or disinterested that he is personally unfit for the office he holds. His implementation of some Covid restrictions in response to Omicron has absolutely sweet fa to do with it.
We'll see. He's lost my support due to imposing restrictions [and increasing taxes].
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
Most people find restrictions vaguely annoying but one rule for me and another for everyone else is something most people find fundamentally unfair so dislike.
As for taxes people don’t remember them. It’s only going to be in May (as local elections occur) that people notice that tax has increased and their take home pays gone down.
The elephant in the room is still energy prices, which will for many people rise £100 a month in the next few months.
Petrol prices are close to all time highs too, and people notice those every day.
April is a perfect storm of bad news for the general public - small payrises (due to employment tax rises), a tax increase a 5% or higher increase in council tax and a 30-50% increase in fuel costs.
And on May 5th a lot of people can take a small piece of vengeance out on their local Tory party (although other incumbents may be equally impacted due to the council tax increases).
And the higher inflation goes, the more brutal the effect of freezing income tax thresholds.
There's a lot of pain for the government that's now baked in.
The killer for families won't be the frozen in tax thresholds. It will be the clawing back of Child Benefit as a salary hits £50k
Comments
So this evening is now to the cinema at Catterick because it’s the only place showing West Side Story at a decent time.
But I don't think he'll earn much more by waiting. If anything money for funny speech on Brexit might be less over time. Plus people who are bad at managing money need it NOW.
HYUFD is right to remind us though that the perks he gets are considerable.
Seeing empty stadia at places like Ibrox and Celtic Park, then contrasting that with places like Anfield and Old Trafford could make Boris seem like a relative success.
Boris needs to today confirm that there's no restrictions for New Year's Eve and then swiftly reverse Plan B. If he does that, he might regain his popularity.
So you then have to ask how bad was the divorce case that a judge went against current precedent to award such a judgement - did Boris represent himself and try to make it up as he went along rather than reading a prepared script.
Ed lost the 2015 general election and is only a minor Shadow Cabinet minister in Starmer's Shadow Cabinet now
And Phil mentioned earlier that the Commission is independent, however didn't Cameron set the terms of reference, i.e. registered voters not general voting age population?
https://www.survation.com/new-political-polling-shows-a-collapse-in-public-opinion-for-boris-johnson-the-conservative-party-and-government/
Next year I'll be turning 40 and depending when about in 2000 they took the data from, I might not have even been old enough to vote when the current boundaries data was taken.
The irony is that I have Steve Baker down as a guaranteed loser at the next election (High Wycombe is an easy Labour win).
There is no guarantee if Boris goes you get Sunak
I think the youngest child, Nicotiana Sisypho or whatever, is now in their early 20s.
Though OTOH he did marry a lawyer.
Re: David L - i think the jury's still out on how many lives even the booster program has saved (or directly saved anyway - aren't the vast majority of genuinely proven Covid deaths still in unvaccinated people? - certainly all the anecdotal stories are still of the unvaccinated clogging up ICU). And if it has then it is against the delta wave crashing through the EU, rather than omicron.
Cameron just set tighter restrictions on sizes which had been allowed to drift.
The particular terms of reference for the current review are a slightly different issue.
I couldn't care less about Peppa or Parties. Paterson is an embarrassment, but the restrictions and taxes are far more serious in my eyes.
Not every voter is the same. Some will be Paterson, but not 100%.
He endlessly quotes polls to try and back up his argument, yet despite the polls clearly showing Boris being the force repelling voters faster than you can say superinjunction, he's sticking to it.
- the stain of anti-semitism has largely been removed
- the influence of the far left has dissipated, even though some still lurk inside and outside the PLP, which has always been the case
- internal party organisation, including the NEC is now in Starmer's pocket
- the Shadow Cabinet now in place is pretty formidable and reassuring to voters
- Starmer himself has significantly improved his performance in the last few months.
Basically, I'd argue that there is a risk of underestimating Labour's progress.
Why am I completely and utterly unsurprised
However if changes are proposed, not genuinely to encourage fairness, but for ulterior party political motives, then that is wrong.
As for taxes people don’t remember them. It’s only going to be in May (as local elections occur) that people notice that tax has increased and their take home pays gone down.
The juxtaposition of threatening Christmas and further restrictions at the same time as the revelations were coming out could hardly have been worse.
See the ONS mid 2021 data vs the people actual found for vaccination.
Petrol prices are close to all time highs too, and people notice those every day.
Was time or money of the essence for Boris?
Ephemera like Peppa isn't it, Boris has always been Boris.
The imposition of restriction in response to Omicron, and the fear of more and the fear that the vaccines haven't led us out of Covid restrictions is the biggest change to six months ago. Not Paterson or anything else.
Perhaps the best thing the Government could do in the new year is to end testing for Covid. People are afraid of "cases" now, not deaths or hospitalisations. If we weren't detecting these cases because we weren't testing for them then there would be no worries. The vaccines are working.
Of course any idiots who aren't vaccinated aren't helping with that, are they @MISTY ?
In a nutshell: Opposition can be unpredictable and you might spend longer there than you think.
Ending testing = preventing people from protecting their loved ones. Would be a disaster.
Previously anyone who moved was quite frequently on the register both in their old and current address for a period until the register finally dropped them out.
In the 2010 election I received a polling card at my address, while my parents also received a polling card for me at their address despite the fact I no longer lived with my parents anymore as the Council hadn't dropped me off their register yet despite having been informed of the change.
But there's so many unvaccinated idiots out there that its "threatening the NHS" and thus restrictions.
Unvaccinated morons are the only reason we're at risk of restrictions now. Anyone opposed to lockdown should have been first in line for vaccinations.
Making the public worried has trashed the government's biggest success, that they'd got us through the crisis with the vaccines.
And on May 5th a lot of people can take a small piece of vengeance out on their local Tory party (although other incumbents may be equally impacted due to the council tax increases).
Gibraltar has no unvaccinated morons. None at all. Not one. They still cancelled Christmas. Go figure.
If you're right, then nothing will lead to a recovery in the polls for Boris because he's not going to suddenly change how he speaks or acts.
Apologies, that’s an obscene level of alliteration.
After 22 years its inevitable that many constituencies will contain either far too many or too few voters because of population movements over that time.
When we went walked along Oxford Street on December 10th my only thought was how empty (and quiet) it was.
Regent Street and Bond Street doesn't have a problem but Oxford Street as it was is currently completely and utterly dead.
Sorry but why does it make no sense whatsoever to blame that?
The cure, in my view, is to ask the Electoral Commission to define constituency boundaries according to the census (excluding foreign nationals where these are not eligible) rather than on who has currently registered.
They have a bit of a point- even Truss wouldn't be as keen to jump in muddy puddles and then wonder why their clothes are a mess.
But the other factors- the lack of money, the need to resolve the contradictions in the 2019 coalition- they're going to be there whoever is PM.
Alan Duncan (I think), was enthusiastically spinning the line about how they'd be back in four or five years.
Paxman interrupted him to point out that on that majority, this was certainly a two, and most probably a 3 term Labour government. Nearer a dozen.
His face fell. You could see it dawning just how far away that was.
I'm 55. We've had only two changes of governing party since I became a teenager.
The issue with Cameron's plan was that the margins were so tight that seemingly random unrelated areas needed to be included to hit the numbers. Without a 10% or so margin it was impossible to create constituencies that geographical sense.
I suspect the famous Ally Pally crowd are more bothered by threats to ban people from going to crowded events like Ally Pally, or the pub in general, than they are the ins and outs of Owen Paterson or speeches to the CBI.
There's a lot of pain for the government that's now baked in.
Transfer to Lib/Lab = parties/corruption
Increase in (ex-Tory) don’t knows = bit of both/either
However labour seem to have little interest in places like where I live. It is more a case of waiting for us to come home.
Let’s see where the policy platform for labour goes in the next few years ahead of the general election.
I'd currently tell a pollster Lib Dems and backed the Lib Dems to win NS on the basis of Covid not Paterson etc.
While Labour have been calling for more restrictions the Lib Dems have rightly been opposing them. 👍🔸