2 weeks to go till the by-elections and more want BoJo OUT – politicalbetting.com
2 weeks to go till the by-elections and more want BoJo OUT – politicalbetting.com
While we are talking about YouGov the firm’s latest “Should BoJo” resign polling looks increasingly difficult for the current incumbent at Number 10 and these changes since last month are bigger than the margin of error.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://twitter.com/ValerioCNN/status/1534902481997553664
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1534876433021079555?t=WVfCMsorAWsSObPRWLs54g&s=19
@PickardJE
·
1h
the theme of the speech was please stfu about partygate now pls
Andrew Lilico
@andrew_lilico
·
1h
So Boris' plan for responding to the economic challenge of high inflation is to have govt-forced higher mortgage lending by banks plus govt-subsidised mortgages, boosting the money supply & thus driving inflation up more.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
https://twitter.com/andrew_lilico/status/1534886438629679106
So we are in agreement, it’s right to be on top internal threats and work to maximise GE vote, for Boris to be in full on electioneering mode all the way up to that General Election? And we will problem see the best of him now.
Farooq said down thread the glow from the uplands is they are on fire - that may be over the top, but Boris speech here was a whole lot more sunlit uplands to focus on. Perhaps instead of previous ones, as he not only criticised 13 years of Tory government in the guise of blaming labour, no money left, debt, high taxes, energy policy years behind, but also in this speech seemed to run against his manifesto of 2019.
The emphasis on reigning in spending, in favour of tax cuts and big cuts in government, is very much electioneering - it’s maybe NOT the right thing economically to do in the next two years - it’s like how Tory’s shot labours fox in 1992, kicking what honestly needed to be done till after the win? It’s also not sounding like his 2019 pitch anymore?
Boris emphasis on higher interest rates suggests this too? So how independent is the Bank of England if Boris wants those rates up?
Don’t mention early one? This Was not wait till the last moment speech, it’s a let’s be ready for that election speech. If Labour lose both leader and Deputy can you rule out a “its their own stonking fault if they don’t have a proper PM to offer you in this election” election?
This is a capped trial scheme, the inflationary impact not tomorrow but very much in future. And it’s about holding out the offer of help and hope to millions of people, and after their parents votes too - an effective political electioneering dimension to the policy you have to factor in and concede too if you wish to whinge about it.
Is it not fair to say?
A big unknown is if the Tories/Boris are at the nadir wrt Partygate, or is more attrition to come?
The trial and sentences are a breach of the Geneva Convention.
A huge amount of the cost comes back, by reducing inflationary pressure everywhere in the economy. It still makes petrol £1.20 or £1.30, which is where it was only a few months ago - but most importantly, it tells the country that the government is listening to them about the cost of living.
Come on on then, what would you actually have done? Over two hundred of his own MPs just gave him a positive endorsement despite party gate, meaning no more confidence vote anytime soon, his cabinet and government stood by him, despite partygate, you can forget courtroom style conventions, he doesn’t have to answer a question, he doesn’t have to tell any truth, and he controls the policy board.
What you saying the media done wrong today?
But the South West is otherwise fairly barren territory for the libdems.
They really should care about it though, because the cost of transport fuels feed back into absolutely everything else.
1. Con hold both.
2. Con lose both.
3. & 4. are hold one and not the other (and vice versa).
In simple terms, and trying not to get my hopes up too much(!):
Con hold both - 15% chance - I can't see it, but clearly it'd put wind back into Johnson's sails, upset the rebels and allow Johnson's team to try and move on from the leadership crisis into other matters. Not my hoped for outcome, but if he manages this then I'd say he's definitely safe for a good year or more, even with a bad Standards committee report.
Con lose Wakefield and hold Tiverton - 50% chance
I wonder if this is too high a chance, but lets run with it. Again, I think Johnson will spin it as 'we held on, and we were never going to hold Wakefield anyway... mid term... marginal... blah blah blah.....' and just ignore the issue completely.
Con hold Wakefield and lose Tiverton - 5% chance
Is this on anyone's radar?
It'd probably indicate more for the poor state of the Labour party and Starmer than Johnson if the Lib Dems do the near impossible whilst Labour can't clear a simple hurdle.
Con lose both - 30% chance
What I'd like to see, but what does it really get us? Johnson won't resign and the Con rebels are still 11 months and 1 week away from a reload!
Unless the cabinet turn against him (no chance, they all owe their position to him anyway) I don't see what it changes (except Johnson's majority by 4) in the short term.
I was just listening to 'Fever Pitch' when Nic Hornby describes seeing his first dead body.
'I was walking along with my mate and we saw this bloke with a Palace scarf lying on the pavement'. A man and a policeman were leaning over him.
'Is he dead' my mate asked.
'Yes he is' the man answered.
'Was it done by a scouser' I asked.
'No it was a heart attack you stupid idiot. Now fuck off"
Not at all baked in but..... Assume Boris wants to stay PM at all costs. His MPs have foolishly given away their only easy chance of a fairly bloodless coup, but the form book says he is now on borrowed time.
Boris has few options (apart from being replaced); he has in fact two.
1) Wait and see, recover ground, win the next election on merit/because Labour blows a fuse, between late 2023 and Jan 2025.
2) Go for broke right now, and prepare for a populist election this year before all the bills come in, and after some giveaways. Rely on his genius campaigning skills.
From Boris point of view which is less risky and more likely to be successful?
(2) Is the answer because if he starts now and goes full on he maximises his chances of being PM at the GE. If he goes for (1) his chance of still being leader is small(er).
The chances of the Tories winning are the same in each case. But his chance of being leader isn't.
That's the case for 2022 election.
This hasn't happened. The inflation is due to a supply shock. You can't cut inflation created by a supply shock by providing a subsidy - you only make it worse.
There are three possible responses that make sense: increase supply, reduce demand (by increasing efficiency), reduce demand (by providing an alternative).
The middle one of those is the quickest to implement. The last is what we're planning to do due to global warming anyway. So we should get on with it.
But it means hes out. On his terms though (the brave knight etc)
So it's Autumn, specifically after conference season..... things will be much worse by then. Colder weather coming, nights drawing in, petrol at £2 per litre; diesel at £2.15.
Nawh. He's toast if he tries that.
I know we love to speculate on it, but there really is no need or desire to hold an election. Even if he would win a majority, he's still looking at 30 seat losses. He won't really want that......
The government has to wean itself off fuel duty anyway, may as well do it now when it’s politically prudent and massively popular. They can always bring it back as the oil price falls.
Bonus points if the green-minded Labour party oppose the cut.
Con hold both: Almost zero.
Con lose Wakefield, hold T and H: 25% chance
Con hold Wakefield, lose T and H: Almost zero
Con lose both: 75% chance.
I have a small bet on Tories lose Wakefield and hold T and H. Not holding my breath.
The interesting question is whether his party could or would stop him calling an election.
And when i say 'the danger' frankly, he is.
From the rest of the country, there will be massive thanks.
https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1534906217688088577
https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1534904095319916545
People have moved on from partygate. What they see is a government that apparently doesn't have any answers to the cost of living crisis.
The only light for the government is that such observations among my friends are usually followed up by "the other lot don't have a clue what to do, either".
In a sense BoJo has become Corbyn and Starmer has become BoJo
No way is he calling an election now for mid-July.
I was wrong three years ago when I said you couldn't have a December election, but we faced a massive political crisis and it HAD to be done in the end.
We now face an economic crisis but not a political one.
No one, but no one, wants an election either Thursday 14th July or Thursday 21st. The latter date is after the kids have broke up, and whilst the 14th probably isn't there will be too many people THINKING about the holidays to want to get excited by a GE. They'll hammer Johnson if he tries.
Remember, Brenda from Bristol is what the majority of people think. WE'RE the weirdos!
*everyone outside central London anyway.
It's both and more.
You really need to reduce fuel duty and given that (as @Sandpit points out) fuel duty needs to be replaced anyway as we switch to electric it is something that could be done.
Fuel would still be taxed if duty is abolished, it will simply be taxed with VAT like any other product.
Even the Tories' middle class codger core vote might start to have second thoughts about backing them when the news is that they either have to wait a decade to have their knackered joints replaced, or go down the equity release path to pay for a quick op at the nearest Spire or Nuffield.
Thought experiment.
What do you think is more likely to give the Conservatives a greater bump in the polls?
Boris saying "Sorry I got Partygate wrong" and resigning, or Boris announcing Sandpit's suggestion of an immediate suspension of fuel duty?
It's pissing into the wind of a supply shock.
Levelling up is well and truly dead, and so is the commitment to build more housing.
We’re back to let’s cut taxes, albeit with extreme chutzpah given that Boris has already put them up so high in the first place.
Price electicity of demand for petrol is something like 0.2. Only @Dura_Ace on this forum uses it discretionarily.
Besides, electric cars cost so much nowadays that I doubt fuel costs are really much of an incentive. Bragging rights probably count for much more.
(Speaking of which, we might need to change our 10-year old VW Passat soon. I haven't really looked into it, but would consider electric, but prefer to buy second-hand which might be a problem...)
The only rule is: don’t get caught, because you might die
And this is not to exonerate Putin. An unprovoked invasion of a neighbouring country is horrible, vile, barbaric. It is immoral and dangerous and has to be opposed. But my abhorrence has nothing to do with “rules of war”
We should not subsidise fuel, but there's no need to tax it so highly.