Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
Well, that depends on whether the "rats" have made the right judgement call. Not sure if would place the judgement of Nadine Dorries, Andrea Jenkyns, and Nadhim Zahawi particularly high.
This judgement, issued by The Guardian in the wake of the Zahawi announcement, seems pretty sound:
"Almost without exception, recruits from the Tories to Farage have all come from the more shifty, opportunist wing of the party (other adjectives are available)". You could add to that "self important" and "entitled".
So Captain Badenoch has made the Tory ship a rat-free zone? Hmm.
I think the timing is interesting however. Why didn't Zahawi make his move 6 to 12 months ago?
Unlike many on here I don't really buy the Kemiwave. Maybe some prejudice because I find her deeply unimpressive, but I'm also aware the best chance of avoiding Farage as PM is if the Conservatives get back vote share, so I should be emphatically Team Kemi, who isn't actually malign.
The problem is in the numbers. Badenoch took over a party that was already the worst place in its 200 year history and plunged it further into the doldrums. She's clawed back some vote share but nowhere near where she first started. And if you say, what about popularity ratings? I would counter that by pointing out Zack Polanski has higher ratings, and as I recall Corbyn had sky high ratings at certain points. That doesn't always translate into likely additional Tory seats at the next election. The reverse in fact.
Given that, is it surprising if Zahawi thinks, sod them, I'll hitch up with a party that wins seats?
Let's leave aside the numbers for the moment - they're important, but we do need to have a look at the wider picture.
We have an electorate who are completely fed up with the two main parties - they feel tremendously let down by Labour, and they feel a great deal of anger towards the Tories for the incompetence displayed during their time in office.
It is hardly surprising that those people are turning to alternatives - Reform, the Greens, etc.
But there is a wider point that we are around 3 years out from the next GE, and people are unlikely to be thinking through their vote in any great detail.
The thing about Farage is that he represents and gives a voice to that general sense of malaise/fed-up-ness that many feel. Listen to Reform-bods on the radio, a lot of them, superficially, make compelling arguments for many people - things aren't going great, the country doesn't work anymore, mainstream politicians don't care about you, etc etc.
But for a lot of the electorate a calculation remains to be made at election time about whether they really want Nigel Farage, along with an ragtag band of former Tories who weren't impressive the first time around, running the country.
I, unlike others, do not think Reform are going away completely. I think they will continue to capture votes from the very disillusioned/disenchanted, who want to roll the dice and don't see any downsides. But I do think, particularly as the party continues to fail to professionalise / drift on its policy aims, there is some scope for a number of voters, particularly those on the centre-right, to feel their vote is best placed with a more "established" offering. And for that, the Tories could offer a repository (so too, could Labour for some).
On Badenoch, I have been very critical of her in the past 12 months, and as I say above she is very far from the finished article, but I do think she has improved significantly. I think it is slightly unfair to put the collapse in the Tories' poll rating on her - I think any Tory leader, particularly out of the candidates they had, would have struggled faced with the situation she found herself in. Her challenge is now to rebuild and continue her development and policy platform. It is absolutely true that the Tories find themselves in an unenviable position, and I think they are far from experiencing a "Kemiwave" but I think for the first time since the GE there is at least a plausible opening for the party in a way that 6 months ago there simply wasnt, and they looked increasingly doomed.
‘ A migrant jailed over Britain’s biggest ever benefit fraud is claiming Universal Credit AGAIN after an early prison release. Bulgarian national Tsvetka Todorova helped swindle £54million from the Department for Work and Pensions, or DWP.’
Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
Well, that depends on whether the "rats" have made the right judgement call. Not sure if would place the judgement of Nadine Dorries, Andrea Jenkyns, and Nadhim Zahawi particularly high.
This judgement, issued by The Guardian in the wake of the Zahawi announcement, seems pretty sound:
"Almost without exception, recruits from the Tories to Farage have all come from the more shifty, opportunist wing of the party (other adjectives are available)". You could add to that "self important" and "entitled".
So Captain Badenoch has made the Tory ship a rat-free zone? Hmm.
I think the timing is interesting however. Why didn't Zahawi make his move 6 to 12 months ago?
Unlike many on here I don't really buy the Kemiwave. Maybe some prejudice because I find her deeply unimpressive, but I'm also aware the best chance of avoiding Farage as PM is if the Conservatives get back vote share, so I should be emphatically Team Kemi, who isn't actually malign.
The problem is in the numbers. Badenoch took over a party that was already the worst place in its 200 year history and plunged it further into the doldrums. She's clawed back some vote share but nowhere near where she first started. And if you say, what about popularity ratings? I would counter that by pointing out Zack Polanski has higher ratings, and as I recall Corbyn had sky high ratings at certain points. That doesn't always translate into likely additional Tory seats at the next election. The reverse in fact.
Given that, is it surprising if Zahawi thinks, sod them, I'll hitch up with a party that wins seats?
Let's leave aside the numbers for the moment - they're important, but we do need to have a look at the wider picture.
We have an electorate who are completely fed up with the two main parties - they feel tremendously let down by Labour, and they feel a great deal of anger towards the Tories for the incompetence displayed during their time in office.
It is hardly surprising that those people are turning to alternatives - Reform, the Greens, etc.
But there is a wider point that we are around 3 years out from the next GE, and people are unlikely to be thinking through their vote in any great detail.
The thing about Farage is that he represents and gives a voice to that general sense of malaise/fed-up-ness that many feel. Listen to Reform-bods on the radio, a lot of them, superficially, make compelling arguments for many people - things aren't going great, the country doesn't work anymore, mainstream politicians don't care about you, etc etc.
But for a lot of the electorate a calculation remains to be made at election time about whether they really want Nigel Farage, along with an ragtag band of former Tories who weren't impressive the first time around, running the country.
I, unlike others, do not think Reform are going away completely. I think they will continue to capture votes from the very disillusioned/disenchanted, who want to roll the dice and don't see any downsides. But I do think, particularly as the party continues to fail to professionalise / drift on its policy aims, there is some scope for a number of voters, particularly those on the centre-right, to feel their vote is best placed with a more "established" offering. And for that, the Tories could offer a repository (so too, could Labour for some).
On Badenoch, I have been very critical of her in the past 12 months, and as I say above she is very far from the finished article, but I do think she has improved significantly. I think it is slightly unfair to put the collapse in the Tories' poll rating on her - I think any Tory leader, particularly out of the candidates they had, would have struggled faced with the situation she found herself in. Her challenge is now to rebuild and continue her development and policy platform. It is absolutely true that the Tories find themselves in an unenviable position, and I think they are far from experiencing a "Kemiwave" but I think for the first time since the GE there is at least a plausible opening for the party in a way that 6 months ago there simply wasnt, and they looked increasingly doomed.
I hope you're right. If it is how we avoid Farage (and also Jenrick, absolutely Kemi. Sometimes you have to choose the least bad realistic alternative. There is no doubt in my mind which is. Also logically if Labour and Reform are deeply unpopular, the Conservatives should cash in. Not seeing it right now, but very happy to be proved wrong.
On the point about the collapse in Tory poll rating, it was trending up after the election and before Badenoch became leader. It then plummeted. I do think that's on her.
And further further add, Tory bottom was something I wildly overestimated in the predictions competition
‘ A migrant jailed over Britain’s biggest ever benefit fraud is claiming Universal Credit AGAIN after an early prison release. Bulgarian national Tsvetka Todorova helped swindle £54million from the Department for Work and Pensions, or DWP.’
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
I look at that list and I think, are those the biggest problems facing us? My answer is then: no.
I think the biggest issues facing us are something like (1) Trump, (2) powerful tech companies, (3) demographic change with an ageing population, (4) implications of AI, (5) better International cooperation, (6) Putin.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
I look at that list and I think, are those the biggest problems facing us? My answer is then: no.
I think the biggest issues facing us are something like (1) Trump, (2) powerful tech companies, (3) demographic change with an ageing population, (4) implications of AI, (5) better International cooperation, (6) Putin.
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
I look at that list and I think, are those the biggest problems facing us? My answer is then: no.
I think the biggest issues facing us are something like (1) Trump, (2) powerful tech companies, (3) demographic change with an ageing population, (4) implications of AI, (5) better International cooperation, (6) Putin.
I don't deny those are huge issues, but most of those are fundamental global perspectives that affect much of western society (and the wider world in some instances). The UK can have some impact on those - particularly with better international co-operation - but it has only limited influence in shaping policy on those. That is not to downplay their impact or the influence the UK can have - but closer to home there are a number of issues over which we do have more agency and where reform can be instituted.
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
“{Kemi} has measurably improved”
How are you measuring Kemi’s improvement?
To some extent I have PM and LOTO (gov and opp) linked on popularity like a seesaw, one down the other up and vice versa, with no actual substance or logic to it. As example, how Labour shot up after the Truss budget in similar measure to how Con sank - but Labours own economic policies were broadly in line with the Truss budget, not just Starmer’s growth growth growth catchphrase, but the thing the markets hated most and main reason for market response, £250B of government handouts, not from growth but from borrowing, to everyone to help with inflation pain, was what Starmer had been bragging all summer he would do - TSE even wrote “Starmer has shot the Tory fox” type header supporting Starmer’s proposal, a plan Truss lifted and stole for her budget.
My point being you can have a surge upwards in popularity, whilst simultaneously talking gibberish and proposing the very worst and ruinous of policy.
So which of Kemi’s policy idea’s do you think underpin the measurable improvement? Do you foresee the manifesto proposals from “cavemen managed fine without a welfare state” being widely popular with the electorate in the 2029 GE?
Badenoch's British ICE policy was launched three months ago. She had plenty opportunity to realise Trump wasn't benign by that point. By that point it was also clear what the ICE crowd was up to but Badenoch made it her policy anyway. As far as I know it still is Conservative Party policy so presumably Badenoch does think this country needs state sponsored vigilantes pulling people off the streets or breaking into houses to cart them away.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
I look at that list and I think, are those the biggest problems facing us? My answer is then: no.
I think the biggest issues facing us are something like (1) Trump, (2) powerful tech companies, (3) demographic change with an ageing population, (4) implications of AI, (5) better International cooperation, (6) Putin.
Climate Change?
Overrated. They said we wouldn't see snow again and those poor folk near Aberdeen had meters of the stuff.
ETA: Although if, as Kemi states, we're taking about Britain, then Scotland is astonishingly crime free. Well done SNP!
ETA2: So humble pie for me actually. The map says it's by LSOA, which are (loosely) population based. So more urban versus rural crime rates if true (although dots are an odd way to show LSOAs and it's surprising if on that basis that there are apparently no large rural ones represented).
Yes, but there are more LSOAs in urban areas - so you would expect in any given characteristic to produce that map. You could produce a similar map of LSOAs whose names, when turned into numbers, add up to a number divisible by 57. I think dots are quite a good way to illustrate LSOAs - they avoid making rural areas look over-significant.
ETA: Although if, as Kemi states, we're taking about Britain, then Scotland is astonishingly crime free. Well done SNP!
ETA2: So humble pie for me actually. The map says it's by LSOA, which are (loosely) population based. So more urban versus rural crime rates if true (although dots are an odd way to show LSOAs and it's surprising if on that basis that there are apparently no large rural ones represented).
Yes, but there are more LSOAs in urban areas - so you would expect in any given characteristic to produce that map. You could produce a similar map of LSOAs whose names, when turned into numbers, add up to a number divisible by 57. I think dots are quite a good way to illustrate LSOAs - they avoid making rural areas look over-significant.
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
“{Kemi} has measurably improved”
How are you measuring Kemi’s improvement?
To some extent I have PM and LOTO (gov and opp) linked on popularity like a seesaw, one down the other up and vice versa, with no actual substance or logic to it. As example, how Labour shot up after the Truss budget in similar measure to how Con sank - but Labours own economic policies were broadly in line with the Truss budget, not just Starmer’s growth growth growth catchphrase, but the thing the markets hated most and main reason for market response, £250B of government handouts, not from growth but from borrowing, to everyone to help with inflation pain, was what Starmer had been bragging all summer he would do - TSE even wrote “Starmer has shot the Tory fox” type header supporting Starmer’s proposal, a plan Truss lifted and stole for her budget.
My point being you can have a surge upwards in popularity, whilst simultaneously talking gibberish and proposing the very worst and ruinous of policy.
So which of Kemi’s policy idea’s do you think underpin the measurable improvement? Do you foresee the manifesto proposals from “cavemen managed fine without a welfare state” being widely popular with the electorate in the 2029 GE?
I think I responded quite fundamentally to those points in my earlier reply, I'm not quite sure what point you are making.
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
“{Kemi} has measurably improved”
How are you measuring Kemi’s improvement?
To some extent I have PM and LOTO (gov and opp) linked on popularity like a seesaw, one down the other up and vice versa, with no actual substance or logic to it. As example, how Labour shot up after the Truss budget in similar measure to how Con sank - but Labours own economic policies were broadly in line with the Truss budget, not just Starmer’s growth growth growth catchphrase, but the thing the markets hated most and main reason for market response, £250B of government handouts, not from growth but from borrowing, to everyone to help with inflation pain, was what Starmer had been bragging all summer he would do - TSE even wrote “Starmer has shot the Tory fox” type header supporting Starmer’s proposal, a plan Truss lifted and stole for her budget.
My point being you can have a surge upwards in popularity, whilst simultaneously talking gibberish and proposing the very worst and ruinous of policy.
So which of Kemi’s policy idea’s do you think underpin the measurable improvement? Do you foresee the manifesto proposals from “cavemen managed fine without a welfare state” being widely popular with the electorate in the 2029 GE?
I think that must be the longest post ever on PB against the most mild of observations. (As it's PB I'm sure it's far from true and I may find that there's a little known 400 volume diatribe against a purely accidental mis-spelling).
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Ructions seem to be incoming around the RefUK London Mayoral candidate - Ant Middleton & his supporters are kicking off a little. That is a potential split on the right to match the one on the left.
We want MORE candidates !!
Count Binfaces ceiling seems to be about 3% so I would like to see a couple of hundred candidates splitting the vote to let the great man climb to the top.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
This protest has not really resonated among the public.
Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
It's a mixed indicator. It tells you about rats but not so much about political foxes, hedgehogs and tigers who are so far conspicuous by their absence.
Moldovan President Maia Sandu says she would support unification with Romania if a referendum were held, stating she would vote yes. “It’s becoming increasingly hard for Moldova to survive as a democracy and resist Russia, and the global situation is very dangerous,” she said.
‘ A migrant jailed over Britain’s biggest ever benefit fraud is claiming Universal Credit AGAIN after an early prison release. Bulgarian national Tsvetka Todorova helped swindle £54million from the Department for Work and Pensions, or DWP.’
Apart from anything else, why didn't we pack him off to Bulgaria with instructions not to come back as soon as we decided he'd spent enough time in clink?
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
This protest has not really resonated among the public.
Well yes because you can still protest about whatever it is that Pro Hamas Palestinian folk protest about (I'm never quite sure if they are protesting the actions of the British government, or of Israel). You just cannot specifically protest about Palestine Action because the government has made that illegal.
Now you can argue that the government has overstepped the mark on this, but there are likely intelligence reasons why we are not being told.
Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
It's a mixed indicator. It tells you about rats but not so much about political foxes, hedgehogs and tigers who are so far conspicuous by their absence.
I assume that zahawi managed to untangle himself from his financial irregularities whilst in the Tories. Unless reform are happy to have dubious people like this.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
I don't think we shall know until it happens. I suspect a lot of people have sympathies and unsympathies with all sides. We actually live in a society with a rule of law and separation of powers. Denial of bail is a matter for the judicial system, and in particular if they are being held unlawfully (which keeps being hinted at in sympathetic media) there is an extensive battery of lawyers who are going straight to the high court, appeal and SC to sort it. Which SFAICS has not happened.
In general in a 'rule of law' society when people being held is custody go on hunger strike and seek to hold everyone else responsible for the outcome it feels a bit blackmaily.
Finally, to what extent does all this really help ordinary Palestinians families and children in shelterless, cold, damp, dangerous conditions. Has PA slightly lost touch with what it is for? Would it be better to campaign within our law - which for all its mistakes over PA allows a lot of campaigning - and send a large donation to the Red Cross Gaza appeal?
It's a real struggle being a member of the Labour Party at the moment. But at least we don't have to suffer the indignity of the likes of Nadhim Zahawi or Nadine Dorries trying to join us, so there is that.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
TBH I think you're understating both a & b. What both Hamas and Israel did was vicious and savage. But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
I look at that list and I think, are those the biggest problems facing us? My answer is then: no.
I think the biggest issues facing us are something like (1) Trump, (2) powerful tech companies, (3) demographic change with an ageing population, (4) implications of AI, (5) better International cooperation, (6) Putin.
I don't deny those are huge issues, but most of those are fundamental global perspectives that affect much of western society (and the wider world in some instances). The UK can have some impact on those - particularly with better international co-operation - but it has only limited influence in shaping policy on those. That is not to downplay their impact or the influence the UK can have - but closer to home there are a number of issues over which we do have more agency and where reform can be instituted.
There’s one discussion about what needs to be done, and there’s another about how you win an election. Your words appeared to be in the context of winning an election.
I’m not convinced most of the electorate are going to be enthused by policies like “simplify the tax code” or “incentivise investment”. We have evidence, e.g. Canada, that electorates can be moved by “we don’t like Trump”. We know electorates respond to “pay less tax” and to “better fund public services”. So, your putative manifesto for Badenoch, while not without some merit, doesn’t seem to me to be enough to put her in pole (or poll) position (but talking about the issues I suggested might have more impact).
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
This protest has not really resonated among the public.
Well yes because you can still protest about whatever it is that Pro Hamas Palestinian folk protest about (I'm never quite sure if they are protesting the actions of the British government, or of Israel). You just cannot specifically protest about Palestine Action because the government has made that illegal.
Now you can argue that the government has overstepped the mark on this, but there are likely intelligence reasons why we are not being told.
There's a lot of different issues here.
So you have the question of whether Palestine Action should have been designated a terrorist organisation. That's a discussion I've participated in before, and is worth having, but I don't think it's the most relevant to the hunger strike.
Then you have the question as to whether disputing the designation of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation should constitute support for terrorism and be itself illegal. This feels like a more important general question - one of the defining features of a democracy is the freedom to dissent, but on this issue it would seem that dissent is not possible. How are mistakes by the Executive on the designation of terrorist organisations to be corrected if it is not possible to protest them?
I would think that even if you trusted the government made the right decision on Palestine Action that you could still support the right of other people to disagree with public protest.
And the final issue, the one on which the hunger strike rests, is that the government appears to lack the confidence in its case to convict these people such that it is not scheduling court dates and bringing these people to trial, instead subjecting them to indefinite detention on remand.
This is quite a stark contrast to the action in response to riots which rests on rapid trial and conviction and exemplary sentencing as an example to others to bring the riots to an end. You would expect the same here in response to illegal in support of a terrorist organisation. But instead, nothing.
This is an intolerable abuse of the legal process, but sadly not one that the public seem to have understood. I do not expect many people to notice if and when the hunger strikers start to die. There are allegations that the media has been leant on by the government to suppress this story, but I don't know about that. There's plenty other news going on and there's a reasonable case that you shouldn't encourage hunger strikes as a form of protest by giving them attention.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
TBH I think you're understating both a & b. What both Hamas and Israel did was vicious and savage. But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
Hunger strikes worked for the Suffragettes in a way that attacks on property hadn’t, so parallels with Palestine Action there perhaps?
It's a real struggle being a member of the Labour Party at the moment. But at least we don't have to suffer the indignity of the likes of Nadhim Zahawi or Nadine Dorries trying to join us, so there is that.
The indignity is not that Nadhim Zahawi or Nadine Dorries want to join Reform, the indignity (were I/you a Reform member) is that Nigel is allowing those has-beens to join.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
This protest has not really resonated among the public.
Well yes because you can still protest about whatever it is that Pro Hamas Palestinian folk protest about (I'm never quite sure if they are protesting the actions of the British government, or of Israel). You just cannot specifically protest about Palestine Action because the government has made that illegal.
Now you can argue that the government has overstepped the mark on this, but there are likely intelligence reasons why we are not being told.
There's a lot of different issues here.
So you have the question of whether Palestine Action have been designated a terrorist organisation. That's a discussion I've participated in before, and is worth having, but I don't think it's the most relevant to the hunger strike.
Then you have the question as to whether disputing the designation of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation should constitute support for terrorism and be itself illegal. This feels like a more important general question - one of the defining features of a democracy is the freedom to dissent, but on this issue it would seem that dissent is not possible. How are mistakes by the Executive on the of terrorist to be corrected if it is not possible to protest them?
I would think that even if you trusted the government made the right decision on Palestine Action that you could still support the right of other people to disagree with public protest.
And the final issue, the one on which the hunger strike rests, is that the government appears to lack the confidence in its case to convict these people such that it is not scheduling court dates and bringing these people to trial, instead subjecting them to indefinite detention on remand.
This is quite a stark contrast to the action in response to riots which rests on rapid trial and conviction and exemplary sentencing as an example to others to bring the to an end. You would expect the same here in response to illegal in support of a terrorist organisation. But instead, nothing.
This is an intolerable abuse of the legal process, but sadly not one that the public seem to have understood. I do not expect many people to notice if and when the hunger strikers start to die. There are allegations that the media has been leant on by the government to suppress this story, but I don't know about that. There's plenty other news going on and there's a reasonable case that you shouldn't encourage hunger strikes as a form of protest by giving them attention.
Isn’t the failure to bring them to trial just reflective on the long delays throughout the justice system?
Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
Well, that depends on whether the "rats" have made the right judgement call. Not sure if would place the judgement of Nadine Dorries, Andrea Jenkyns, and Nadhim Zahawi particularly high.
This judgement, issued by The Guardian in the wake of the Zahawi announcement, seems pretty sound:
"Almost without exception, recruits from the Tories to Farage have all come from the more shifty, opportunist wing of the party (other adjectives are available)". You could add to that "self important" and "entitled".
So Captain Badenoch has made the Tory ship a rat-free zone? Hmm.
I think the timing is interesting however. Why didn't Zahawi make his move 6 to 12 months ago?
Unlike many on here I don't really buy the Kemiwave. Maybe some prejudice because I find her deeply unimpressive, but I'm also aware the best chance of avoiding Farage as PM is if the Conservatives get back vote share, so I should be emphatically Team Kemi, who isn't actually malign.
The problem is in the numbers. Badenoch took over a party that was already the worst place in its 200 year history and plunged it further into the doldrums. She's clawed back some vote share but nowhere near where she first started. And if you say, what about popularity ratings? I would counter that by pointing out Zack Polanski has higher ratings, and as I recall Corbyn had sky high ratings at certain points. That doesn't always translate into likely additional Tory seats at the next election. The reverse in fact.
Given that, is it surprising if Zahawi thinks, sod them, I'll hitch up with a party that wins seats?
Let's leave aside the numbers for the moment - they're important, but we do need to have a look at the wider picture.
We have an electorate who are completely fed up with the two main parties - they feel tremendously let down by Labour, and they feel a great deal of anger towards the Tories for the incompetence displayed during their time in office.
It is hardly surprising that those people are turning to alternatives - Reform, the Greens, etc.
But there is a wider point that we are around 3 years out from the next GE, and people are unlikely to be thinking through their vote in any great detail.
The thing about Farage is that he represents and gives a voice to that general sense of malaise/fed-up-ness that many feel. Listen to Reform-bods on the radio, a lot of them, superficially, make compelling arguments for many people - things aren't going great, the country doesn't work anymore, mainstream politicians don't care about you, etc etc.
But for a lot of the electorate a calculation remains to be made at election time about whether they really want Nigel Farage, along with an ragtag band of former Tories who weren't impressive the first time around, running the country.
I, unlike others, do not think Reform are going away completely. I think they will continue to capture votes from the very disillusioned/disenchanted, who want to roll the dice and don't see any downsides. But I do think, particularly as the party continues to fail to professionalise / drift on its policy aims, there is some scope for a number of voters, particularly those on the centre-right, to feel their vote is best placed with a more "established" offering. And for that, the Tories could offer a repository (so too, could Labour for some).
On Badenoch, I have been very critical of her in the past 12 months, and as I say above she is very far from the finished article, but I do think she has improved significantly. I think it is slightly unfair to put the collapse in the Tories' poll rating on her - I think any Tory leader, particularly out of the candidates they had, would have struggled faced with the situation she found herself in. Her challenge is now to rebuild and continue her development and policy platform. It is absolutely true that the Tories find themselves in an unenviable position, and I think they are far from experiencing a "Kemiwave" but I think for the first time since the GE there is at least a plausible opening for the party in a way that 6 months ago there simply wasnt, and they looked increasingly doomed.
This is about spot on. I would add that the Tories benefit from there being only two parties who are regarded (whatever the reality) as right of centre so the nearly 50% of the votes which tend that way pile up for Reform and Tories. Lab, LD, Greens, Jezbollah, Islamic independents, PC and SNP dilute and split the left of centre brand, and as the centre left are in power, in days when just being the government = being unpopular, there is a double effect.
At the moment the question for the right of centre is: Would the Tories sustain Reform in power, a question of course they would hate to answer. Kemi has two years to dissolve the question. This is done by polling which shows the real question is: Would Reform sustain the Tories.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
TBH I think you're understating both a & b. What both Hamas and Israel did was vicious and savage. But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
Hunger strikes worked for the Suffragettes in a way that attacks on property hadn’t, so parallels with Palestine Action there perhaps?
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
This protest has not really resonated among the public.
Well yes because you can still protest about whatever it is that Pro Hamas Palestinian folk protest about (I'm never quite sure if they are protesting the actions of the British government, or of Israel). You just cannot specifically protest about Palestine Action because the government has made that illegal.
Now you can argue that the government has overstepped the mark on this, but there are likely intelligence reasons why we are not being told.
There's a lot of different issues here.
So you have the question of whether Palestine Action have been designated a terrorist organisation. That's a discussion I've participated in before, and is worth having, but I don't think it's the most relevant to the hunger strike.
Then you have the question as to whether disputing the designation of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation should constitute support for terrorism and be itself illegal. This feels like a more important general question - one of the defining features of a democracy is the freedom to dissent, but on this issue it would seem that dissent is not possible. How are mistakes by the Executive on the of terrorist to be corrected if it is not possible to protest them?
I would think that even if you trusted the government made the right decision on Palestine Action that you could still support the right of other people to disagree with public protest.
And the final issue, the one on which the hunger strike rests, is that the government appears to lack the confidence in its case to convict these people such that it is not scheduling court dates and bringing these people to trial, instead subjecting them to indefinite detention on remand.
This is quite a stark contrast to the action in response to riots which rests on rapid trial and conviction and exemplary sentencing as an example to others to bring the to an end. You would expect the same here in response to illegal in support of a terrorist organisation. But instead, nothing.
This is an intolerable abuse of the legal process, but sadly not one that the public seem to have understood. I do not expect many people to notice if and when the hunger strikers start to die. There are allegations that the media has been leant on by the government to suppress this story, but I don't know about that. There's plenty other news going on and there's a reasonable case that you shouldn't encourage hunger strikes as a form of protest by giving them attention.
Isn’t the failure to bring them to trial just reflective on the long delays throughout the justice system?
It could be. It might be conspiratorial thinking on the part of the protestors to think otherwise.
But I think when you're doing mass arrests as part of a public order situation that rapid conviction is normally one of the ways the system uses to discourage copycat offending, so perhaps it's notable that approach hasn't been used.
And don't reported crimes tend to cluster in the streets where there are police stations, because that is often where the arrests/charges are actually made?
Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
Well, that depends on whether the "rats" have made the right judgement call. Not sure if would place the judgement of Nadine Dorries, Andrea Jenkyns, and Nadhim Zahawi particularly high.
This judgement, issued by The Guardian in the wake of the Zahawi announcement, seems pretty sound:
"Almost without exception, recruits from the Tories to Farage have all come from the more shifty, opportunist wing of the party (other adjectives are available)". You could add to that "self important" and "entitled".
So Captain Badenoch has made the Tory ship a rat-free zone? Hmm.
I think the timing is interesting however. Why didn't Zahawi make his move 6 to 12 months ago?
Unlike many on here I don't really buy the Kemiwave. Maybe some prejudice because I find her deeply unimpressive, but I'm also aware the best chance of avoiding Farage as PM is if the Conservatives get back vote share, so I should be emphatically Team Kemi, who isn't actually malign.
The problem is in the numbers. Badenoch took over a party that was already the worst place in its 200 year history and plunged it further into the doldrums. She's clawed back some vote share but nowhere near where she first started. And if you say, what about popularity ratings? I would counter that by pointing out Zack Polanski has higher ratings, and as I recall Corbyn had sky high ratings at certain points. That doesn't always translate into likely additional Tory seats at the next election. The reverse in fact.
Given that, is it surprising if Zahawi thinks, sod them, I'll hitch up with a party that wins seats?
Let's leave aside the numbers for the moment - they're important, but we do need to have a look at the wider picture.
We have an electorate who are completely fed up with the two main parties - they feel tremendously let down by Labour, and they feel a great deal of anger towards the Tories for the incompetence displayed during their time in office.
It is hardly surprising that those people are turning to alternatives - Reform, the Greens, etc.
But there is a wider point that we are around 3 years out from the next GE, and people are unlikely to be thinking through their vote in any great detail.
The thing about Farage is that he represents and gives a voice to that general sense of malaise/fed-up-ness that many feel. Listen to Reform-bods on the radio, a lot of them, superficially, make compelling arguments for many people - things aren't going great, the country doesn't work anymore, mainstream politicians don't care about you, etc etc.
But for a lot of the electorate a calculation remains to be made at election time about whether they really want Nigel Farage, along with an ragtag band of former Tories who weren't impressive the first time around, running the country.
I, unlike others, do not think Reform are going away completely. I think they will continue to capture votes from the very disillusioned/disenchanted, who want to roll the dice and don't see any downsides. But I do think, particularly as the party continues to fail to professionalise / drift on its policy aims, there is some scope for a number of voters, particularly those on the centre-right, to feel their vote is best placed with a more "established" offering. And for that, the Tories could offer a repository (so too, could Labour for some).
On Badenoch, I have been very critical of her in the past 12 months, and as I say above she is very far from the finished article, but I do think she has improved significantly. I think it is slightly unfair to put the collapse in the Tories' poll rating on her - I think any Tory leader, particularly out of the candidates they had, would have struggled faced with the situation she found herself in. Her challenge is now to rebuild and continue her development and policy platform. It is absolutely true that the Tories find themselves in an unenviable position, and I think they are far from experiencing a "Kemiwave" but I think for the first time since the GE there is at least a plausible opening for the party in a way that 6 months ago there simply wasnt, and they looked increasingly doomed.
This is about spot on. I would add that the Tories benefit from there being only two parties who are regarded (whatever the reality) as right of centre so the nearly 50% of the votes which tend that way pile up for Reform and Tories. Lab, LD, Greens, Jezbollah, Islamic independents, PC and SNP dilute and split the left of centre brand, and as the centre left are in power, in days when just being the government = being unpopular, there is a double effect.
At the moment the question for the right of centre is: Would the Tories sustain Reform in power, a question of course they would hate to answer. Kemi has two years to dissolve the question. This is done by polling which shows the real question is: Would Reform sustain the Tories.
I am reminded of the Tory MP in Thurrock back in the dim and distant. He put out a leaflet to the effect that Socialists in Thurrock had several candidates for whom to vote; Labour, Liberal, Green; Tories had only one, him. He lost.
It's a real struggle being a member of the Labour Party at the moment. But at least we don't have to suffer the indignity of the likes of Nadhim Zahawi or Nadine Dorries trying to join us, so there is that.
Zahawi moving from the Tories indicates the rats think the Reform ship at this moment is a lot more seaworthy than the Conservative one. That's a helpful indicator for Reform and bad news for the Tories.
No, more an indication of the aftermath of the 2022 Tory leadership and toppling of Boris still.
Zahawi, like Berry served in Liz Truss' Cabinet and like Gullis, Jenkyn etc backed Truss over Sunak. Kruger backed Braverman not Sunak too.
Most Truss backers backed Jenrick in the Tory leadership election in late 2024 too while most Sunak backers backed Badenoch in the final round (though many Sunak backers also supported Cleverly before he was knocked out in the last 3)
TBF Kemi has repelled quite a lot of vile dross.
Her party might even become electable again if she could jettison Patel, Braverman and Bob.
Maybe the first two but Jenrick is an effective opposition performer
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
TBH I think you're understating both a & b. What both Hamas and Israel did was vicious and savage. But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
Hunger strikes worked for the Suffragettes in a way that attacks on property hadn’t, so parallels with Palestine Action there perhaps?
It's not easy to see the link between the PA hunger strikes and getting for the people of Gaza the life they should have in peace and prosperity. The suffragettes, having a fortiori no vote in putting right the injustice they felt were right to use other means.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
TBH I think you're understating both a & b. What both Hamas and Israel did was vicious and savage. But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
Hunger strikes worked for the Suffragettes in a way that attacks on property hadn’t, so parallels with Palestine Action there perhaps?
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
TBH I think you're understating both a & b. What both Hamas and Israel did was vicious and savage. But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
Hunger strikes worked for the Suffragettes in a way that attacks on property hadn’t, so parallels with Palestine Action there perhaps?
Did they work for Bobby Sands et al, though?
It took time, but in the end they were released as part of a political process, implicitly recognising they were not ordinary criminals.
Do we think it matters (politically) if one of these Palestinian Action hunger strikers dies or just a collective "meh"? Sounds like one may be gettting close to it.
Where do the mass of the British people sit on Palestine Action? I suspect most people; (a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong (b) Israel have gone a bit OTT (c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and (d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
TBH I think you're understating both a & b. What both Hamas and Israel did was vicious and savage. But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
Hunger strikes worked for the Suffragettes in a way that attacks on property hadn’t, so parallels with Palestine Action there perhaps?
Did they work for Bobby Sands et al, though?
It took time, but in the end they were released as part of a political process, implicitly recognising they were not ordinary criminals.
Re Zahawi. In other circumstances you'd think it was a spoof. Why would people want the parts of the Tory Party the country wouldn't touch with a barge pole? They're even interviewing Nadine Dorries on the 5 PM News in case anyone thinks he's a one-off There's only Rees Mogg and they've got the whole circus. What does it do except remind people of the last five years? The ones that gave the Tories their worst result in 200 years?
I'd say it's a rare good day for Starmer. I'm sure he'll come up with some loony-tune-U-turn but there's nothing quite like watching your opponents putting the ball into their own net!
Excellent progress for Kemi especially in regard to Farage
May she continue her progress
It is suggesting in those numbers, those who tell pollsters they will vote Reform, actually prefer Kemi as PM, that’s important if “party support” in mid term is protest vote and preferred PM more indicative of what happens in May 29.
However ultimately we have to confess, Kemi’s Achilles Heel right now, unless it can be mitigated, is, as far as she has one, the party’s policy platform. “Cavemen done just fine without a welfare state” for example.
A Conservative Rise at expense of Reform may move everything towards a 1983 result, a split tribe cancels itself out allowing “majority unliked” government a landslide.
Predicting the next GE becomes even more uncertain.
I think a window is plausibly opening for the Badenoch Tories to essentially present themselves as the radical small-state, deregulating, low tax, free enterprise brooms. If they can sound plausible on immigration and asylum matters too, then they essentially inhabit a decent ground on the political spectrum to win back traditional centre-right voters, some of the professional classes and those for whom a Reform vote is possible but who cannot bring themselves to vote for Farage when the crunch point comes.
Now that coalition in and of itself probably wouldn’t win them more than 35% of the electorate absolute tops, but that would be more than enough to keep them relevant and on current fragmentation could even win them an election (no laughing at the back).
This is admittedly an overly-optimistic scenario but losing some of the old guard to Reform likely helps them in this situation. The two main problems they have are (a) infighting and leadership - if they’re going to go in on this, they have to look credible and to look credible they are going to have to stick with Badenoch as leader - anything else undermines the narrative of stability etc (b) any sensible reform of benefits in this country requires a discussion around the triple lock and the oldies are one part of their voter coalition they will find it hard to lose.
I know what you are saying, but there’s a reason for being reduced to just 120 MPs, how quickly will that be forgotten?
Reform keep banging on about “Boris Wave” the Conservative Government record on immigration, securing the borders, and assimilation of migrants to UK values, whilst Labour keep banging on about the last Conservative governments records on NHS, public services, cost of living - it’s possible that improvements in coming years on those things the, sitting government gets credit for.
To what extent does the May, Boris, Truss, Sunak government record still hurt the Conservatives not just in 2029, but the 2030’s elections too?
In the bigger picture to this, psephological comparisons with today and the 2 party past, just cannot be made anymore imo - it’s two different things now so comparing can’t neatly read across - same with “worst satisfaction ratings ever” questions.
However, correct me where wrong, what interests me is the current governments “true comparison” - and how, as explained above, lot of pebble counting stats don’t read across so leaves us with “psychological hunch’s” - with Lady Thatchers turbulent and unpopular first term.
What saved the Conservatives in 1983 General Election was neatly split opposition votes, whilst what delivered a landslide win in 1987 was the improved economy, and concern the opposition would fuck it up. You can be in government through some turbulent and unpopular years, and then as a party get even better results.
And where you say credibility in 2029 can only come from sticking with Kemi, credibility in 2029 would also be the policy platform Kemi is tied to - and if it’s not a popular policy platform across the electorate, is one reason she would be sent to Leadership Graveyard. But, if trying to get the best possible result up from 120 MPs is that a “best way to stop a PM Farage is Vote Conservative” message - that would need credibility in policy platform to back it up. Do Conservatives junk Kemi to junk her policies for others with broader appeal across all electorate, or junk Kemi in attempt to out battle Farage with Jenrick?
Do you see what I mean by how precarious Badenoch’s position is? The job simply boils down to put on MPs from historic low of 120 - that’s the only performance measurement really.
Is “cavemen done fine without a welfare state” popular policy across the broader electorate come 2029, whilst option of going toe to toe with Farage on Reforms narrow messaging, to win voters back and put on 120+ MPs, is the slicker Jenrick the better option?
Do you mean is campaigning on welfare reform enough?
No, of course it isn't. But the country is absolutely looking for someone to articulate an alternative, and there is an opening for a party to move to offer that alternative without resorting to the extremes of Reform or the Greens.
Plausibly, the Tories can move into that ground. Badenoch isn't the finished article, but she was flailing hopelessly 12 months ago and has measurably improved. There are cautious signs that she has some understanding of some of the things that need to be fixed* - over-regulation, lack of dynamism, a rigid and complex tax system, an over-powerful process state and civil service bureaucracy, disincentives to investment and enterprise etc. Whether she can continue in that vein, the jury is still out. I have always thought she has potential - I'm not wholly convinced it's enough to turn her into a true leader, but we will see.
*but as a counterpoint, so too does Starmer and Labour at times - they just don't seem to have any kind of plan to resolve them.
I look at that list and I think, are those the biggest problems facing us? My answer is then: no.
I think the biggest issues facing us are something like (1) Trump, (2) powerful tech companies, (3) demographic change with an ageing population, (4) implications of AI, (5) better International cooperation, (6) Putin.
Climate Change?
Overrated. They said we wouldn't see snow again and those poor folk near Aberdeen had meters of the stuff.
In retrospect, Climate Instability should have been the term used, morphing into Climate Chaos at every major disaster.
Comments
We have an electorate who are completely fed up with the two main parties - they feel tremendously let down by Labour, and they feel a great deal of anger towards the Tories for the incompetence displayed during their time in office.
It is hardly surprising that those people are turning to alternatives - Reform, the Greens, etc.
But there is a wider point that we are around 3 years out from the next GE, and people are unlikely to be thinking through their vote in any great detail.
The thing about Farage is that he represents and gives a voice to that general sense of malaise/fed-up-ness that many feel. Listen to Reform-bods on the radio, a lot of them, superficially, make compelling arguments for many people - things aren't going great, the country doesn't work anymore, mainstream politicians don't care about you, etc etc.
But for a lot of the electorate a calculation remains to be made at election time about whether they really want Nigel Farage, along with an ragtag band of former Tories who weren't impressive the first time around, running the country.
I, unlike others, do not think Reform are going away completely. I think they will continue to capture votes from the very disillusioned/disenchanted, who want to roll the dice and don't see any downsides. But I do think, particularly as the party continues to fail to professionalise / drift on its policy aims, there is some scope for a number of voters, particularly those on the centre-right, to feel their vote is best placed with a more "established" offering. And for that, the Tories could offer a repository (so too, could Labour for some).
On Badenoch, I have been very critical of her in the past 12 months, and as I say above she is very far from the finished article, but I do think she has improved significantly. I think it is slightly unfair to put the collapse in the Tories' poll rating on her - I think any Tory leader, particularly out of the candidates they had, would have struggled faced with the situation she found herself in. Her challenge is now to rebuild and continue her development and policy platform. It is absolutely true that the Tories find themselves in an unenviable position, and I think they are far from experiencing a "Kemiwave" but I think for the first time since the GE there is at least a plausible opening for the party in a way that 6 months ago there simply wasnt, and they looked increasingly doomed.
Keep working mugs 😂
‘ A migrant jailed over Britain’s biggest ever benefit fraud is claiming Universal Credit AGAIN after an early prison release. Bulgarian national Tsvetka Todorova helped swindle £54million from the Department for Work and Pensions, or DWP.’
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/cost-of-living/jailed-over-biggest-ever-dwp-33212974
Very interesting to see Lord Forsyth, who served as a minister under Thatcher and Major, elected Lord Speaker.
Above all known for speaking his mind and expected to bring a more, um, robust approach to the role
On the point about the collapse in Tory poll rating, it was trending up after the election and before Badenoch became leader. It then plummeted. I do think that's on her.
And further further add, Tory bottom was something I wildly overestimated in the predictions competition
I think the biggest issues facing us are something like (1) Trump, (2) powerful tech companies, (3) demographic change with an ageing population, (4) implications of AI, (5) better International cooperation, (6) Putin.
How are you measuring Kemi’s improvement?
To some extent I have PM and LOTO (gov and opp) linked on popularity like a seesaw, one down the other up and vice versa, with no actual substance or logic to it. As example, how Labour shot up after the Truss budget in similar measure to how Con sank - but Labours own economic policies were broadly in line with the Truss budget, not just Starmer’s growth growth growth catchphrase, but the thing the markets hated most and main reason for market response, £250B of government handouts, not from growth but from borrowing, to everyone to help with inflation pain, was what Starmer had been bragging all summer he would do - TSE even wrote “Starmer has shot the Tory fox” type header supporting Starmer’s proposal, a plan Truss lifted and stole for her budget.
My point being you can have a surge upwards in popularity, whilst simultaneously talking gibberish and proposing the very worst and ruinous of policy.
So which of Kemi’s policy idea’s do you think underpin the measurable improvement? Do you foresee the manifesto proposals from “cavemen managed fine without a welfare state” being widely popular with the electorate in the 2029 GE?
(a) think what Hamas did on Oct 7th was wrong
(b) Israel have gone a bit OTT
(c) they aren't quite sure who or what Palestine Action are and
(d) Someone is on a hunger strike?
Moldovan President Maia Sandu says she would support unification with Romania if a referendum were held, stating she would vote yes. “It’s becoming increasingly hard for Moldova to survive as a democracy and resist Russia, and the global situation is very dangerous,” she said.
https://t.me/noel_reports/40135
Also being reported by Politico.
https://www.politico.eu/article/maia-sandu-moldova-vote-reunification-romania/
Although they point out that there's a large majority opposed to unification with Romania in Moldova.
Polls show around two-thirds of Moldovans oppose reunification, while support is traditionally higher in Romania.
Liz Kendall says creating or requesting the creation of non-consensual intimate images is to be made illegal this week.
HamasPalestinian folk protest about (I'm never quite sure if they are protesting the actions of the British government, or of Israel). You just cannot specifically protest about Palestine Action because the government has made that illegal.Now you can argue that the government has overstepped the mark on this, but there are likely intelligence reasons why we are not being told.
In general in a 'rule of law' society when people being held is custody go on hunger strike and seek to hold everyone else responsible for the outcome it feels a bit blackmaily.
Finally, to what extent does all this really help ordinary Palestinians families and children in shelterless, cold, damp, dangerous conditions. Has PA slightly lost touch with what it is for? Would it be better to campaign within our law - which for all its mistakes over PA allows a lot of campaigning - and send a large donation to the Red Cross Gaza appeal?
But at least we don't have to suffer the indignity of the likes of Nadhim Zahawi or Nadine Dorries trying to join us, so there is that.
But you're right about c, and people aren't sure what whoever is on hunger strike is actually protesting about.
I’m not convinced most of the electorate are going to be enthused by policies like “simplify the tax code” or “incentivise investment”. We have evidence, e.g. Canada, that electorates can be moved by “we don’t like Trump”. We know electorates respond to “pay less tax” and to “better fund public services”. So, your putative manifesto for Badenoch, while not without some merit, doesn’t seem to me to be enough to put her in pole (or poll) position (but talking about the issues I suggested might have more impact).
So you have the question of whether Palestine Action should have been designated a terrorist organisation. That's a discussion I've participated in before, and is worth having, but I don't think it's the most relevant to the hunger strike.
Then you have the question as to whether disputing the designation of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation should constitute support for terrorism and be itself illegal. This feels like a more important general question - one of the defining features of a democracy is the freedom to dissent, but on this issue it would seem that dissent is not possible. How are mistakes by the Executive on the designation of terrorist organisations to be corrected if it is not possible to protest them?
I would think that even if you trusted the government made the right decision on Palestine Action that you could still support the right of other people to disagree with public protest.
And the final issue, the one on which the hunger strike rests, is that the government appears to lack the confidence in its case to convict these people such that it is not scheduling court dates and bringing these people to trial, instead subjecting them to indefinite detention on remand.
This is quite a stark contrast to the action in response to riots which rests on rapid trial and conviction and exemplary sentencing as an example to others to bring the riots to an end. You would expect the same here in response to illegal in support of a terrorist organisation. But instead, nothing.
This is an intolerable abuse of the legal process, but sadly not one that the public seem to have understood. I do not expect many people to notice if and when the hunger strikers start to die. There are allegations that the media has been leant on by the government to suppress this story, but I don't know about that. There's plenty other news going on and there's a reasonable case that you shouldn't encourage hunger strikes as a form of protest by giving them attention.
At the moment the question for the right of centre is: Would the Tories sustain Reform in power, a question of course they would hate to answer. Kemi has two years to dissolve the question. This is done by polling which shows the real question is: Would Reform sustain the Tories.
That would appear to be election pitch towards which Reform is heading.
But I think when you're doing mass arrests as part of a public order situation that rapid conviction is normally one of the ways the system uses to discourage copycat offending, so perhaps it's notable that approach hasn't been used.
He lost.
They obviously don't see much prospect of winning seats again as Tories, but think it likely as turquoise re-treads.
NEW THREAD
..
I'd say it's a rare good day for Starmer. I'm sure he'll come up with some loony-tune-U-turn but there's nothing quite like watching your opponents putting the ball into their own net!
You be hard pressed to beat that as a pol slogan.
Tim Miller @Timodc
Big news on the Senate map.
Mary Peltola @MaryPeltola
My name is Mary Peltola, and I'm running for U.S. Senate to fight for fish, family, and freedom
https://x.com/Timodc/status/2010724428750192960
https://x.com/MaryPeltola/status/2010699590128071017