Tory leadership contenders are close to outing themselves – politicalbetting.com
Tory leadership contenders are close to outing themselves – politicalbetting.com
? @gordonrayner reports: Dame Priti Patel will stand in the Conservative leadership race after being “urged to run” by fellow MPs, The Telegraph has learnedhttps://t.co/D8uDWc09NO
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The Tories need a new perma-leader * in place after Jan 1st, so my 40:1 bet comes off.
(* Perms = more than 3 months, I guess.)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2024/uk/constituencies/E14001246
I think that's unlikely tbh; Major's not eligible, Shirley?
Is TSE saying that Priti is a pantomime dame ?
Automatic voter registration could lead to loss of constituencies, says Conservative MP Andrew Bowie
Scotland could lose almost 20 per cent of its MPs under plans to add millions more people across the UK to the electoral roll for future elections.
Automatic registration (AVR) already exists in several European countries and is being proposed by Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour government as a way of extending the franchise.
But Andrew Bowie, the Conservative MP, has warned that the measures, that are expected to be revaled as part of a Democracy Bill within the King’s Speech on Wednesday, could lead to loss of about ten Scottish constituencies with more seats based within English cities.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/article/dreadful-voting-reforms-could-cost-scotland-ten-mps-kzqqh9n65
So will Boris endorse her candidacy if she makes it as far as the members' vote? That is, I think, the question backers need to answer before 8/1-ish looks value. Otherwise Priti is swimming in the same lane as everyone else who is not Tom Tugendhat.
"Oh no you're not!"
https://x.com/kyleichan/status/1813443554703794389
Which, along with Biden's tech embargo, is likely to greatly hamper their challenge as a global leader in the technology.
Former disgraced leaders are disgracing themselves more by offering fealty to Trump. Farage the same. Braverman moves in those circles.
Will Patel, Cleverley etc have to go and kiss the ring to be contenders, or will they reject the Trump madness as not being relevant?
What is the mood of the Tory membership towards Trump?
In the last 35 years the Tories have only had a successful campaign under pale and stale males.
1992 Major
2010 Cameron
2015 Cameron
2019 Johnson.
OK, so there have been a few that have flopped too, but I think trumpeting about diversity isn't really a vote winner.
Though admittedly there aren't any Labour figures directly adopting MAGA style nonsense.
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/latest-news-and-research/parliamentary-briefings/automatic-voter-registration-avr-briefing/
(*Which is more than you can say for voter ID.)
And yet, the Conservatives could reasonably easily do worse.
What's the estimate for the numbers of over counted and non existent voters ?
And has anyone actually seen the detail of the proposed legislation ?
The bill is apparently about allowing LAs more powers to run their own services, rather than nationalising lots of bus companies.
Though I don't think anyone's actually seen it yet.
Neither is insurmountable. Making it easier for people to vote has to be a good thing.
Thatcher became Conservative party leader nearly fifty years ago. In all that time, Labour have not had a single permanent female leader, let alone PM.
Labour supporters should really ask themselves why that is, and why the Conservatives somehow find it easier to move women and ethnic minorities towards the top.
I was against the ID card imposition. It was a bad idea. I am *really* against this move, and it is a far worse idea. And it is also really open to potential misuse.
Thatcher, Major, Hague, IDS, Howard, Cameron, May, Boris, Truss, Rishi.
Kinnock, Smith, Blair, Brown, Corbyn, Starmer.
Twice as many Tory leaders means double the chance of reaching the top of the blue greasy pole, even for ethnic minority ladies.
ETA apologies if I've missed anyone out as this theory has only just occurred to me, and I forgot John Smith initially.
Currently constituency sizes are set on numbers which have up to 20% of citizens missing in some areas, meaning some voters are over-represented by a large margin.
We are currently not even able to get a half way decenet estimate of how menay people are in each local council area for funding purposes. How on earth do you take that to the next level and identify every named individual in a constituency? (Which of course won't even match the council areas.)
Lowering the voting age to 16 looks like a more straightforward gerrymander, and it is interesting Labour seems to have cooled on the idea following reports the young'uns like Reform, Greens and Gaza.
Mr. Pointer, voters and constituents are not the same thing.
It's kind of Labour, having won a landslide majority on a third of the vote*, is now fighting for fairer electoral results by increasing the number of constituencies in areas where they're strong. True champions of democracy.
*I don't care about this. It's the nature of FPTP. But it is fun to juxtapose with the proposed constituency fiddling.
I'm not clear
- what's meant by 'not correctly registered
- whether there is likely to be significant over counting as a result of this legislation
- whether there is likely to be a significant number of 'non existent' voters as a result of this legislation
- whether the legislation contains additional proposals to clean up the electoral roll...
In any event, I'm not going to get wound up and call it 'dreadful' until I've seen it.
"All went to their own towns to be registered. Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from David."
And arguably Wilson and Callaghan too, who were Labour leaders while Thatcher led the Tories.
It doesn't seem to have adversely impacted on them at elections, while a more diverse set of leaders does seem to not help electoral success. It didn't help my party either. I think Davey would have handled 2019 much better than we did.
On the whole I think it best to appoint a leader best suited to the challenges before a party rather than tick some diversity box. If that person is a white male then so be it. If it's an ethnic minority female then so be it too.
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/research-reports-and-data/electoral-registration-research/accuracy-and-completeness-electoral-registers/2023-report-electoral-registers-uk
Combine the data from HMRC, DVLA and DWP and you'd get >95% accuracy.
That’s where a lot of that eight million are.
At the next election the Tories need to win back a lot of Lib Dem seats and a lot of marginal Labour seats. They will probably still be second but will have a better launch pad for the early 2030s. A big switch to the right does not seem likely to achieve this. It would be the same self indulgent nonsense Labour indulged in with Corbyn.
The last Party of Government entered the election on a manifesto of "we may be corrupt and inept, but so is everyone else, best to stick with the Devil you know".
I thought I'd get that in before he enters the building. It's that time!
Anyway there can be no argument about this, it was in Labour's manifesto and they've just won a landslide:
"To encourage participation in our democracy, Labour will improve voter registration..."
Er ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lG7m_QQEkHQ
Which is a shame. They should've gone for him rather than the oafish Johnson.
And even if it were possible that is still something like 3 million people either missed off or added on incorrectly depending on which way the errors occur.
Tugendhat will also benefit from the fact the Tory parliamentary party is much more southern than in 2019. He also likely wins most Scottish Tory MPs.
Jenrick is the only contender who openly backed Sunak v Truss so likely gets much of Sunak's MP support with the rest mainly going to Tugendhat. So I expect a Tugendhat and Jenrick final two most likely with Jenrick narrowly winning the membership.
Jenrick also looks most like the Hague or Ed Miliband of this leadership contest to take over the party in opposition having lost power
Also as an aside Johnson got an 80 seat majority in the last election but that didn't stop you (or me) criticising his policies.
Britain would probably be better run if we had multiple parties in dialogue the electorate at every election, but it doesn't happen very often. There's usually one, but in 2019 we didn't really have any.
I didn’t think the Cybertruck could be made to look worse. I was wrong.
https://x.com/erininthemorn/status/1813394499306987818?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
As to the risk of multiple and non-existent voters and votes, linking the vote to NI numbers would enable some checks to be made; and drastically cutting down the right to postal votes would help too.
But your first and main point is a good one.
That seems appropriate, somehow.
The obvious start point would be 1965, when the Tories started having leadership elections. That helps you as it adds Heath to the Tory total but not Wilson (1963) to the Labour one.
Tory PMs often get on well with Democrat Presidents by contrast ie Churchill and FDR, Macmillan and JFK, Cameron and Obama.
Thatcher and Reagan and Major and Bush 41 had a close relationship as did Callaghan and Carter and Blair and Clinton but they were not the norm
Also can you see the issues of refreshing/not refreshing the AVR data in an election.
At best it’ll be two years out.
(For example, the only person I know not registered with a doctor gets a state pension, pays income tax and council tax. Living off grid is quite hard).
BTW the one thing almost everyone does when moving is register with a doctor - even young people and students do this.
There are roughly three lanes (actual centrist, think Tugendhat; continuity Sunakite; hard right) but only two go to the membership. So one question is which lane fizzles out before the final. Another is how Badenoch styles herself; does she embrace her time in government or deny it? I suspect she would beat Tom T with ease, but would struggle against a fruitier right winger like Patel or Braverman.
That's all that needs to be said.
Five big problems the Starmer government has to fix
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1e5pw1qpx8o
DeSantis by contrast was loudly cheered
IEA Britain-unchained free-marketeers whose chosen target out-groups are lazy skiving benefits cheats, trade unions and the civil service blob.
Goodwinite culture warriors whose target out-groups are trans people, immigrants and the ECHR.
There is a reasonable degree of overlap but it’s not complete. It looks like the second group is in the ascendancy currently.
Jenrick? No way. Very red.
It's beginning to look like there'll be a large field standing for the first round, so there might be some unexpected results given the turnover of MPs at the GE.
Hunt would've been inferior at campaigning, but infinitely better at governing.