With the prospect of an early Conservative leadership election becoming increasingly more likely there has been a lot of activity in the betting. As can be seen Rishi Sunak has edged up even further to his highest level ever but he is still rated as only a 35% chance.
(OGH/TSE - you have a surplus sentence after the byline in the posting)
Lab 40% +2
Con 29% +1
Lib Dem 11% -2
Green 6% -1
Reform 6% +2 https://link.thetimes.co.uk/view/61951ae63c8a77683416a40ffp1uk.k3y/c2b1aba1 https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1481925069274292230/photo/1
Obviously people will go on about the not being prepared for a pandemic, but i thinks its an irrelevance, as its a complex story and all ifs, buts and maybes.
He has actually had a good COVID, made more sensible suggestions than the opposition.
(Still very high don't knows as well) https://twitter.com/p_surridge/status/1481927804551933954/photo/1
@HYUFD will be along any moment to explain why that's a good poll for the Tories.
Hunt being so high in the price just shows the laziness about which candidate to back. There is no why Hunt would get the post.
says, “No matter what you keep reading about Liz Truss, don’t believe the hype: 45% of voters have no idea who she is and those who do know her overwhelmingly dislike her”
(By the way is BDS still a thing? Had a lot of currency on these pages)
However Hunt is more pro restriction than Boris and was a Remainer which may not adhere him to the Tory base still as he failed to attract them in 2019 either
Hence the interest in Hunt.
It's just that I was stung for assuming they'd (the MPs, at least) want a grown-up the last time.
But Johnson's allies know he's on thin ice:
"Everything has to go right for him to survive this, no further mistakes. Boris realises he’s lost another of his nine lives and this is a brush with political death"
And in May? "If we lose badly, he’s out"
This was trotted out last year after the first party was revealed. It doesn't have a leg to stand on.
The Covid laws have a "Not Withstanding" provision in them which means they do apply.
What do you make of Harper or Mordaunt as value long-shots??
I do think Truss' position is strong. She tops the ConHome members polling, who have the final say, she's the only contender with a good Brexit story to tell, and she can show that the NI Protocol negotiations are safe in her hands, provided she doesn't compromise before a contest.
Why is Patel completely absent from the odds?
Edit/I see he beat me to it.
But I can't help thinking these odds are more defined by personal preferences of punters than by any consideration of the selectorate - who should it be, rather than who will it be.
The big questions to ask are:
1) Which contenders have support amongst fellow MPs to enable them to get to the last two?
2) Following that, who does the membership choose?
The answer to the former really needs some insider knowledge. I'm surprised Steve Baker or Mark Harper aren't higher, because I'd expect some representation from that wing of the party in the final three - from where getting into the final two is merely a matter of how the other candidates' votes are distributed.
The answer to the latter is more readily discernible from opinion polls (i.e. Truss does well if she gets to the last two), but I wouldn't necessarily set a great deal of store by these either, since minds will be changed by the campaign to a much greater extent that they would be a GE campaign.
"There really is one rule for us and another rule for you"
That will go down really well. Guaranteed.
Ah, so they have acquired the Blairite Legal Theory
1) We con construct an argument that X might be legal
2) Therefore X is legal
3) Therefore we were almost compelled to do X.
4) Therefore we are completely innocent of all wrong doing.
I’m not laying Sunak too much, but I think his ideal time is close to passing, he looks involved with this week’s headlines and there’s tax rises coming down the line.
Not sure on Truss this time around, she really needs another couple of years to get some achievements at FCO under her belt.
If we get a contest this year, it could end up with a relative outsider even when in government.
Can’t get any clearer.
YouGov 12-13 January (+/- change from YouGov 11-12 January)
Lab 40% (+2)
Con 29% (+1)
LD 11% (-2)
Grn 6% (-1)
Ref 6% (+2)
SNP 5% (nc)
oth 1% (-2)
"What should worry the Tories now is that the Johnsonian advantage in the marginal seats is now in tatters. Voters are angry everywhere, but they’re especially so in the marginals that matter. That’s what makes this situation far more worrisome for the Tories than the national polls would imply. In the seats that Labour lost in 2019, the Labour lead is larger than in the national polls. Similarly, Johnson’s favourability numbers are now worse in the marginals than the country at large."
Or even the thinking of a more calculating politician, able to foresee the damage that would be done if they were found not to be following their own rules.
Hunt is of course by miles the best option, though it is not possible to see how he gets through the voting process, and of course would appeal to a very different constituency from Boris; which may take time to recover.
Perhaps the Tories should tell themselves that the next election is a good one to lose.
Hunt handling the post Brexit process would be quite a test.
And this "Tory base" - describe the profile if you would.
I was thinking this morning, that one of the main characteristics of being 'British' is our sense of fair play, that everyone should play by the rules, that we should be treated fairly. This goes against the fundamental tenet of that.
Only way SNP get indyref2 is a hung parliament with Tories most seats but less than Labour and SNP
Which is actually an argument to go early, while we are still in the pandemic crisis, since this gives the excuse not to have the distraction of a leadership election.
Both public school, Oxford PPE, independently wealthy with successful careers pre politics. Neither as far as we know have any personal scandals or interesting relationship situations going on or to be dug up.
Neither have so far really presented or needed to present any sort of vision for their brand of govt.
The key differences are as far as I can see that Hunt is more part of the old guard - beneficial as less tainted by Boris, maybe appears more matured, associated in some minds with Cameron govt which is looking better as time passes but bad in that he has a track record in govt that parts of can be used against him whilst also making people ask “what did he actually do if any interest or value”.
Sunak is more of the new guard - beneficial as younger more dynamic style, good communicator with social media etc, aspirational even, Indian heritage, more down with the youth maybe but bad in that even though he’s holding the second most powerful role he might be seen as inexperienced by virtue of relative youth and also clearly a major part of the Boris govt.
If both were to stand I think ultimately a lot would ride on their “vision” for what they want to do. I also think there will be an element that Tory MPs will look at Hunt and look at Starmer and find them rather too similar and uninspiring - like a pair of boring wooden bookends and Sunak might have that bit of stardust necessary to cut through and refresh the party image.
This of course could all be rubbish!