Strange story this Jenrick thing. Fair play to the leader of the opposition for pulling the trigger. But, I always got the sense that Jenrick wants to be a leader, preferably of the Tories but maybe he doesn’t care. In Reform he would still be second prick - and arguably to someone with a thinner skin.
So, as soon as I read “plotting” in the BBC update I assumed he was getting the numbers for a swing at Badenoch not to join the teal mob.
It would be wonderful if it is a hilarious bit of 4D chess. He wasn’t planning on defecting but Badenoch (or someone in her team) has cooked up the story / letter to sully any future chance of a shot at the leadership.
This is why the smartest bet you can do at the moment is back him at 50 for next PM. There's none there but they are trading
Strange story this Jenrick thing. Fair play to the leader of the opposition for pulling the trigger. But, I always got the sense that Jenrick wants to be a leader, preferably of the Tories but maybe he doesn’t care. In Reform he would still be second prick - and arguably to someone with a thinner skin.
So, as soon as I read “plotting” in the BBC update I assumed he was getting the numbers for a swing at Badenoch not to join the teal mob.
It would be wonderful if it is a hilarious bit of 4D chess. He wasn’t planning on defecting but Badenoch (or someone in her team) has cooked up the story / letter to sully any future chance of a shot at the leadership.
Wonderful typo near the end of your first para. At least, I assume it's a typo. Second prick, indeed.
No typo - and I toned the language down from my initial draft. PB is a family website. I certainly do not think we are blessed in terms of our political leaders at present (on both sides of the aisle).
Trump says he and Delcy Rodriguez "had a great conversation today.
"She's a terrific person. She's somebody that we've worked with very well. Marco Rubio's dealing with her. I dealt with her this morning. We had a long call...We discussed a lot of things. And I think we're getting along very well with Venezuela." https://x.com/VeraMBergen/status/2011548936062763480
As la Rodriguez seems to be something of a Cuban stooge, I doubt Rubio is particularly happy about this.
Also, FFS, this.
Exclusive: Trump says Zelenskiy, not Putin, is holding up a Ukraine peace deal https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/trump-says-zelenskiy-not-putin-is-holding-up-ukraine-peace-deal-2026-01-15/ .."I think he's ready to make a deal," Trump said of the Russian president. "I think Ukraine is less ready to make a deal." Asked why U.S.-led negotiations had not yet resolved Europe's largest land conflict since World War Two, Trump responded: "Zelenskiy."..
One possible way this might go is that Zelensky agrees to a deal that concedes the Donbas, but only subject to a referendum, and then the whole thing gets snarled up in disputes over sequencing of implementation. This is apparently what happened with the Minsk II agreement.
This could lead to a frozen frontline, a small Anglo-French force in Ukraine, a referendum result in Ukrainian-held Donbas that rejects Ukrainian retreat and the US Congress voting to endorse security guarantees for Ukraine - so I wouldn't expect Russia to agree to it.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
Wow! Got to say well played Kemi. We of course await Jenrick's response.
Tactically it's a win for Kemi. Strategically it still has to be seen as a win for Farage.
She will be tempted to replace Jenrick with a wet. But I think probably Lam is the best suggestion. She will be unlikely to defect, as she wants the top job.
Strange story this Jenrick thing. Fair play to the leader of the opposition for pulling the trigger. But, I always got the sense that Jenrick wants to be a leader, preferably of the Tories but maybe he doesn’t care. In Reform he would still be second prick - and arguably to someone with a thinner skin.
So, as soon as I read “plotting” in the BBC update I assumed he was getting the numbers for a swing at Badenoch not to join the teal mob.
It would be wonderful if it is a hilarious bit of 4D chess. He wasn’t planning on defecting but Badenoch (or someone in her team) has cooked up the story / letter to sully any future chance of a shot at the leadership.
It hasn't yet been clarified whether the discovered speech was to resign from the party, to join Reform, or to resign from the shadow cabinet, to take on Kemi. We're all assuming the former, but...
Wow! Got to say well played Kemi. We of course await Jenrick's response.
Tactically it's a win for Kemi. Strategically it still has to be seen as a win for Farage.
She will be tempted to replace Jenrick with a wet. But I think probably Lam is the best suggestion. She will be unlikely to defect, as she wants the top job.
Err, Jenrick wanted the top job too and defected. No point promoting another potential defector.
However many MPs the Tories end upwith this, the Conservative Party is way more attractive with Jenrick now outside the tent.
I wonder if Kemi will call for anyone else who wants to leave to do so. Draw a line.
According to Mad Nad on R4 now, there are very few Tory MPs left that “Nigel” would allow in, as she thinks most of them are really Liberal Democrats…..
Wonder if Jenrick has war-gamed this scenario? Careless if not.
Yes he made detailed scenario by scenario plans laying out each step, and then left them on a photocopier.
The other thing is the memory of Two Brexit Columns Boris... You would have to be a shameless toad to say "I wrote the speech as an experiment to see how it felt, and whether I really wanted to defect..."
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
Per Behr in the Guardian, both Tory and Labour are nowadays seen as alternative cheeks of a consensus that has failed to deliver, since the financial crisis. Leaving those voters who want radical change towards a so-called progressive future to flock to the Greens, those voters who want radical change back to a regressive past to flock to Reform, and those voters who want change so that things are run properly without either the progressive future or the regressive past to vote LibDem.
However many MPs the Tories end upwith this, the Conservative Party is way more attractive with Jenrick now outside the tent.
I wonder if Kemi will call for anyone else who wants to leave to do so. Draw a line.
According to Mad Nad on R4 now, there are very few Tory MPs left that “Nigel” would allow in, as she thinks most of them are really Liberal Democrats…..
Trump is threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act in Minnesota as protestors continue to clash with ICE agents in Minneapolis
In my conversations with Trump officials, they have so far been hesitant to go there — not only because of the legal complications, but perhaps more so, because of the political ones.
Laura trott and Claire coutinho both 4.1 Cleverly 6.6 Katie Lam 7.2 Jeremy Hunt 20
No one else under 10
Of those, both Laura Trott and Coutinho have the safest seats. Kemi Badenoch's own seat looks safer to a Reform surge than some other Tories in the south east
However many MPs the Tories end upwith this, the Conservative Party is way more attractive with Jenrick now outside the tent.
I wonder if Kemi will call for anyone else who wants to leave to do so. Draw a line.
According to Mad Nad on R4 now, there are very few Tory MPs left that “Nigel” would allow in, as she thinks most of them are really Liberal Democrats…..
Well done Kemi! If you can move your party away from the Faragist right, your party will be more widely electable. You may even recover enough to win elections again in the future. Bad news for the Lib Dems, though if you do it.
"I don't think Nigel is the bloke you want to have running your kids' schools or running your local hospital or... trust your savings, your pension, your small business to." (Sept 2025)
"I don't think he's a serious politician. I don't think he's got the answers." (Oct 2024)
Hey boss? I’m too fucked up for work. Yeah, from the car thing. Here’s what’s crazy: I look fine. No bleeding, bruising, or swelling visible. But inside it’s a mess. The car happened to hit me at an angle that makes the injury only detectable by government officials. Bad luck.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
Apparently the rumours are all wrong. Jenrick is in fact plotting to take up a new role as a ticket inspector on London Underground, where he can make a real difference.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
Becoming the party of the settled Home Counties is a break out for the LibDems - one the party would have given a lot to achieve during earlier decades. The question is whether it is secure - the modelling done by that election maps website, noting that both its young author and its methodology are unknown - suggests most of the current LibDem seats are astoundingly safe. Since Johnson and Brexit the Tories have effectively been taken over by their version of the Corbynites, and it isn’t obvious that losing a bunch of them to Reform is going to change the balance of views in the membership that remains, which is good news for the LibDems, as is the shift from voting by class to voting by education, with the Tories still chasing the pensioner vote and on the wrong side of most cultural issues viewed from the perspective of educated working age folk.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
Per Behr in the Guardian, both Tory and Labour are nowadays seen as alternative cheeks of a consensus that has failed to deliver, since the financial crisis. Leaving those voters who want radical change towards a so-called progressive future to flock to the Greens, those voters who want radical change back to a regressive past to flock to Reform, and those voters who want change so that things are run properly without either the progressive future or the regressive past to vote LibDem.
If that is the case, that is a soluble problem. As Blair did with New Labour and Cameron did with his reinvention of the Tories, established parties can present themselves as offering change. It's harder for Starmer as he's already in no. 10, but the Tories should have the possibility of re-invention.
I’m not a Kemi fan. Too green, not smart enough, too lazy. She achieved nothing at all in government.
But she’s done very well here. This won’t impact polls, but it’s one of those things that longer term help prop up Tory claims to credibility, while undermining Reform’s.
@DavidL made some insightful comments however that Jenrick’s ability to generate political weather will be missed.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting model.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
One of the reasons that Britain is in a hole is that the country has had decades of politicians who prioritise the short-term over the long-term. If the Lib Dems are doing the same for the prospects of future success for their own party then it's probably for the good of the country that they remain in their niche.
Which is a shame, because there aren't too many promising options for political parties who might improve things.
Trump says he and Delcy Rodriguez "had a great conversation today.
"She's a terrific person. She's somebody that we've worked with very well. Marco Rubio's dealing with her. I dealt with her this morning. We had a long call...We discussed a lot of things. And I think we're getting along very well with Venezuela." https://x.com/VeraMBergen/status/2011548936062763480
As la Rodriguez seems to be something of a Cuban stooge, I doubt Rubio is particularly happy about this.
Also, FFS, this.
Exclusive: Trump says Zelenskiy, not Putin, is holding up a Ukraine peace deal https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/trump-says-zelenskiy-not-putin-is-holding-up-ukraine-peace-deal-2026-01-15/ .."I think he's ready to make a deal," Trump said of the Russian president. "I think Ukraine is less ready to make a deal." Asked why U.S.-led negotiations had not yet resolved Europe's largest land conflict since World War Two, Trump responded: "Zelenskiy."..
One possible way this might go is that Zelensky agrees to a deal that concedes the Donbas, but only subject to a referendum, and then the whole thing gets snarled up in disputes over sequencing of implementation. This is apparently what happened with the Minsk II agreement.
This could lead to a frozen frontline, a small Anglo-French force in Ukraine, a referendum result in Ukrainian-held Donbas that rejects Ukrainian retreat and the US Congress voting to endorse security guarantees for Ukraine - so I wouldn't expect Russia to agree to it.
No of that happens without a ceasefire, which Putin has refused. Trump, of course, has backed his stance ("it would be hard to start fighting again").
Hard to tell whether Trump is actually controlled in some way from Moscow, or whether he just really, really likes murderous autocrats.
I’m not a Kemi fan. Too green, not smart enough, too lazy. She achieved nothing at all in government.
But she’s done very well here. This won’t impact polls, but it’s one of those things that longer term help prop up Tory claims to credibility, while undermining Reform’s.
@DavidL made some insightful comments however that Jenrick’s ability to generate political weather will be missed.
Shes completely torpedoed Bobbins career too, he has zero pull with Nigel now especially after the Zahawi backlash from Reformers. 'Team Jenrick' already briefing many of them arent defecting
I see the government is planning to ban non-alcoholic beer from the under 18s, on the grounds of no evidence whatsoever.
When did Britain stop being a country of instinctive liberalism (as the US, despite being totally fucked, usually still is)?
The Labour Party has never been liberal, in that sense.
The core belief is that national, centralised government can Make Things Better, by pulling levers in a control room.
So anything that stops them doing that is bad.
Which is the dividing line, mainly, between that culture and the Liberal Democrats.
See the incredulity among the Labour negotiators, during the talks about forming the Coaltion. They couldn’t understand why the Lib Dem wouldn’t sign up to all kinds of illiberal policies.
I'm sure it's true, and so best to get ahead of it, but is the party strong enough to face the question head on - do they fight Reform, (win or lose) or do they make peace with the wolf at their door?
Would be funny if he hadn’t been planning to defect and it was just a cunning plan to get him out of the party and make him look like a chump and then if reform do take him in they look silly.
I see the government is planning to ban non-alcoholic beer from the under 18s, on the grounds of no evidence whatsoever.
When did Britain stop being a country of instinctive liberalism (as the US, despite being totally fucked, usually still is)?
The Labour Party has never been liberal, in that sense.
The core belief is that national, centralised government can Make Things Better, by pulling levers in a control room.
So anything that stops them doing that is bad.
Which is the dividing line, mainly, between that culture and the Liberal Democrats.
See the incredulity among the Labour negotiators, during the talks about forming the Coaltion. They couldn’t understand why the Lib Dem wouldn’t sign up to all kinds of illiberal policies.
I’m talking more broadly than that. British liberalism always distinguished it from continental peer countries.
But I feel the reflex has withered and may be lost. I don’t see politicians of any stripes really sticking up for it.
Like the boiled frog, many Brits don’t even realise what a nannyish state they live in. It’s very obvious the moment you step from Heathrow onto the tube.
I'm sure it's true, and so best to get ahead of it, but is the party strong enough to face the question head on - do they fight Reform, (win or lose) or do they make peace with the wolf at their door?
There wont be any accomodation until Zia Yusuf is invited to f*ck very far off and after that then some sort of localised non agresssion pact probably comes into play Reform need to tucker themselves out with the bad 1980s Ben Elton 'grrr the TOREEZ' act first
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
I’m not a Kemi fan. Too green, not smart enough, too lazy. She achieved nothing at all in government.
But she’s done very well here. This won’t impact polls, but it’s one of those things that longer term help prop up Tory claims to credibility, while undermining Reform’s.
@DavidL made some insightful comments however that Jenrick’s ability to generate political weather will be missed.
It's definitely a tactical victory for Badenoch to have spiked the guns of Jenrick's defection, and it reduces the short-term damage that the defection would have caused. But the defection is only happening because the tide is running very strongly against the Tories, and so it shows how strategically weak the Tory position is.
Changes from 7th January [Find Out Now, 14th January, N=2,823]
Basic picture seems to be an almost 50:50 left-right split but with 2 right parties and 3 left parties (4 in Scotland and Wales). Whoever unites their coalition will win the next election.
Reform are going to overperform on the night of the local elections, but ultimately underperform during the day when the journalists have lost interest.
"Iran is yet another example of people being murdered in the name of religion. Since time immemorial, religion has been the cause of most deaths. This won’t change until all religions are entirely abolished."
Don't forget Communism, Fascism, Maoism and various other apparently non-religious isms. No slouches in the mass murdering department. Let's abolish these power mad cults too.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
Changes from 7th January [Find Out Now, 14th January, N=2,823]
Basic picture seems to be an almost 50:50 left-right split but with 2 right parties and 3 left parties (4 in Scotland and Wales). Whoever unites their coalition will win the next election.
There's more than one way to skin a cat. To win under FPTP, you need to 'unite your coalition' and/or optimise the geographical spread of your vote and/or have tactical voting work for you. (I guess the last could be considered uniting your coalition.)
Reform are going to overperform on the night of the local elections, but ultimately underperform during the day when the journalists have lost interest.
Is that right?
Whens London counting? They will look 'one of many' in London, underperform in Scotland and fall short of first probably in Wales but clean up in many of the councils going ahead It wont be as good for them or as bad for the Tories as 2025. The Tories arent defending many councils and will already definitely retain Broxbourne (leaving outside London - Norfolk, Essex and Fareham as defences i think) edit - and Hampshire
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
It is a core LibDem belief that people don't vote for the party because they think the LibDems can't win wherever they're voting. If you solve that (e.g., with voting reform), the logic goes, people will rush to vote LibDem, way beyond the current 15% apparent ceiling.
The first evidence of any real organisational ability. Hardly rocket science, but it's not nothing.
Kemi Badenoch's ambush of Robert Jenrick was carefully planned and deliberately timed for Nigel Farage's press conference
Rebecca Harris, the chief whip, called Jenrick to tell him he had been sacked while Farage was holding his press conference
At 11.06, moments after Jenrick slammed the phone down after protesting his innocence, Kemi Badenoch announced on X that she was sacking Jenrick with a pre-recorded video
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
The evidence in Scotland and Wales is the opposite. The Lib Dems have done pretty badly in what were once considered redoubts of the old Liberal party, which have had quasi-PR systems.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
It is a core LibDem belief that people don't vote for the party because they think the LibDems can't win wherever they're voting. If you solve that (e.g., with voting reform), the logic goes, people will rush to vote LibDem, way beyond the current 15% apparent ceiling.
Yeh, the argument is faulty, but as you say it’s a core belief.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
I don't really disagree. Getting PR is more likely if they adopt a more ambitious strategy, I think.
I see the government is planning to ban non-alcoholic beer from the under 18s, on the grounds of no evidence whatsoever...
.. and supported by no principle either.
A relatively minor, but utterly absurd idea.
I’ve heard it said that the reason for the ban is a concern that non-alcoholic drinks may become a gateway for young people to become (bigger) drinkers.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
It is a core LibDem belief that people don't vote for the party because they think the LibDems can't win wherever they're voting. If you solve that (e.g., with voting reform), the logic goes, people will rush to vote LibDem, way beyond the current 15% apparent ceiling.
Holyrood 2021, regional list vote, Lib Dems, 5.1% Senedd 2021, regional list vote, Lib Dems, 4.3%
Would be funny if he hadn’t been planning to defect and it was just a cunning plan to get him out of the party and make him look like a chump and then if reform do take him in they look silly.
I can't see our MPs taking that kind of risk.
I worded that terribly as was in a rush - I meant that Kemi had come up with this ruse to get him out of the party - make up a story that he was defecting and then sack him as she couldn’t have just sacked him for being a twit but this gives cause! Obviously not the case but would be very funny.
As I’ve said many times, NZ is your guide to what happens when you move from FPTP to (proper) PR.
A decade of instability and then things kinda of go back to what they were like before, except you now have a permanent green, nationalist, and populist presence which the main parties have to deal with.
The Lib Dems, ceteris paribus, would probably *decline* in % support under PR, because their core offer doesn’t land distinctively and appealingly enough at a *national* level.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
It is a core LibDem belief that people don't vote for the party because they think the LibDems can't win wherever they're voting. If you solve that (e.g., with voting reform), the logic goes, people will rush to vote LibDem, way beyond the current 15% apparent ceiling.
Holyrood 2021, regional list vote, Lib Dems, 5.1% Senedd 2021, regional list vote, Lib Dems, 4.3%
I rest my case m'lud.
Welsh Liberalism is almost extinct under PR indeed, theyll do well to get more than 1, possibly 2 members in May
Bemusing to me why Tories are celebrating today’s news. There is only so far they can squeeze the Lib Dems. And it casts quite a lot of doubt on their ability to rebuild their big tent and re-attract lost voters of the right, if they can’t keep the likes of Jenrick on board.
I see the government is planning to ban non-alcoholic beer from the under 18s, on the grounds of no evidence whatsoever...
.. and supported by no principle either.
A relatively minor, but utterly absurd idea.
I’ve heard it said that the reason for the ban is a concern that non-alcoholic drinks may become a gateway for young people to become (bigger) drinkers.
Somewhat like vapes and smoking.
Sounds rather vague grounds for it. Also, so long as they still cannot buy alcohol, why does it matter if they get a taste for the non-alcoholic stuff? They'll be adults by then (and voters long before, it is plan).
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
The evidence in Scotland and Wales is the opposite. The Lib Dems have done pretty badly in what were once considered redoubts of the old Liberal party, which have had quasi-PR systems.
I don't think that's Gardenwalker's point.
He's talking about what political pitch would most benefit them at the next election rather than which future electoral system they might thrive under.
(Edit.. I see it is his point. He's right about the pitch; and wrong about PR, IMO.)
On a slightly different point Russia has now suffered 1.22m casualties in Ukraine. To put that into perspective it is more than 20x the casualties that the US suffered in Vietnam (58k) traumatising a nation and producing endless songs, films, books and documentaries. And this is from a significantly lower population of 144m compared with the US population of 200m in 1968. Russia continues to suffer a Vietnam of casualties every 2 months. Trump is as mad as a box of frogs but Putin is a sociopath of a completely different order.
I tend to think that the Tory tent probably needs to be as broad as possible if they are going to both see off the challenge from Reform on their right, and make inroads on regaining voters towards the centre. It's always a difficult balancing act trying to do both at the same time, but I'm not convinced that wholesale losing its right-wing to Reform is going to help the Tories remain the leading party of the British Right.
Also, dismissing Jenrick as acting out of "personal ambition" is not really the blow against his credibility that Badenoch thinks it is. Everyone thinks that politicians are shameless careerists, what's new? What's new is that the Tory party is no longer the vehicle for a right-wing politician with ambition. Reform is. That's not a great look for the Tories, really. They risk becoming the party for right-wingers who are unwilling to bend the knee to Farage, and I'm not convinced that constitutes a majority on the right-wing, much as I might personally admire those right-wingers with more principle than ambition.
I agree with your first paragraph. I think it’s good for both the Tories and Labour to be broad tent parties in a 2-party system.
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
British politics broke into pieces before, and a duopoly was re-established. I wouldn't rule it out, though the parties that down that duopoly may be different.
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
For the LDs to seize that opportunity means breaking out of their “successful” model, one that works inside their comforting bubble.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Agreed, though it probably requires a new leader for that.
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
This is bad strategy. PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
It is a core LibDem belief that people don't vote for the party because they think the LibDems can't win wherever they're voting. If you solve that (e.g., with voting reform), the logic goes, people will rush to vote LibDem, way beyond the current 15% apparent ceiling.
The only problem with this idea is that the German equivalent of the LDs, the Free Democrats, are currently on about 3-4% in the polls despite a proportional voting system.
As I’ve said many times, NZ is your guide to what happens when you move from FPTP to (proper) PR.
A decade of instability and then things kinda of go back to what they were like before, except you now have a permanent green, nationalist, and populist presence which the main parties have to deal with.
Which is fine of course. That's democracy and people are entitled to hold those views, retarded as they all are.
The first evidence of any real organisational ability. Hardly rocket science, but it's not nothing.
Kemi Badenoch's ambush of Robert Jenrick was carefully planned and deliberately timed for Nigel Farage's press conference
Rebecca Harris, the chief whip, called Jenrick to tell him he had been sacked while Farage was holding his press conference
At 11.06, moments after Jenrick slammed the phone down after protesting his innocence, Kemi Badenoch announced on X that she was sacking Jenrick with a pre-recorded video
Comments
It’s JENRICK
I bet Tice is less than delighted...
I wonder if Kemi will call for anyone else who wants to leave to do so. Draw a line.
This could lead to a frozen frontline, a small Anglo-French force in Ukraine, a referendum result in Ukrainian-held Donbas that rejects Ukrainian retreat and the US Congress voting to endorse security guarantees for Ukraine - so I wouldn't expect Russia to agree to it.
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2025/12/04/the-worm-that-turned/
But we no longer have a 2-party system. Where once FPTP created sufficient pressure to ensure that, something has happened — social media? — and the two party system has broken. The Conservative Party (and ditto Labour) need a strategy for a multi-party world, or a sure fire way to get back to a 2-party world.
Tactically it's a win for Kemi. Strategically it still has to be seen as a win for Farage.
She will be tempted to replace Jenrick with a wet. But I think probably Lam is the best suggestion. She will be unlikely to defect, as she wants the top job.
Sky were drawing comparisons with Starmer dumping Corbyn which strengthened Starmer and see this as similar
Apparently a senior labour mp has complimented Kemi on her decisive action
You would have to be a shameless toad to say "I wrote the speech as an experiment to see how it felt, and whether I really wanted to defect..."
But Energetic Bob is a shameless toad.
I suspect Farage will let him into the party but I hope it will do neither of them much good
How many birds is it possible to kill with one stone?
@alaynatreene
Trump is threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act in Minnesota as protestors continue to clash with ICE agents in Minneapolis
In my conversations with Trump officials, they have so far been hesitant to go there — not only because of the legal complications, but perhaps more so, because of the political ones.
https://x.com/alaynatreene/status/2011791570253541695?s=20
Laura trott and Claire coutinho both 4.1
Cleverly 6.6
Katie Lam 7.2
Jeremy Hunt 20
No one else under 10
Of those, both Laura Trott and Coutinho have the safest seats. Kemi Badenoch's own seat looks safer to a Reform surge than some other Tories in the south east
He isn't outside the tent pissing in.
He's pissing his pants.
This will surely put the skids on some wavering Tory MPs thinking about defecting to Reform
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz7y1vq2qq0o
Lord Offord is the new Reform UK leader in Scotland
Farage was at the meeting, held in Fife
"I don't think Nigel is the bloke you want to have running your kids' schools or running your local hospital or... trust your savings, your pension, your small business to." (Sept 2025)
"I don't think he's a serious politician. I don't think he's got the answers." (Oct 2024)
Hey boss? I’m too fucked up for work. Yeah, from the car thing. Here’s what’s crazy: I look fine. No bleeding, bruising, or swelling visible. But inside it’s a mess. The car happened to hit me at an angle that makes the injury only detectable by government officials. Bad luck.
https://x.com/travis_view/status/2011778847125971067?s=20
This is why I think the current failure of the Lib Dems to break out of their niche is so consequential. There's a chance for them to be one of the parties of a future duopoly, but they seem blind to the opportunity.
What will tend to recreate a duopoly is the pain of repeated defeat. FPTP will give someone victory, and the other side will then conclude that they can compromise a bit more to get the government out.
It’s the innovator’s dilemma.
For a start, they’d need a coherent and compelling economic offer, probably something like the “Abundance” agenda essayed here in the U.S.
But that would mean pissing off some, probably noisy, current supporters.
Flying visit on an hilarious day.
Zahawi Bounce on display with FoN, lolololol
Find Out Now voting intention:
🟦 Reform UK: 28% (-4)
🔵 Conservatives: 19% (+1)
🟢 Greens: 18% (+1)
🔴 Labour: 15% (-)
🟠 Lib Dems: 12% (-)
Changes from 7th January
[Find Out Now, 14th January, N=2,823]
Too green, not smart enough, too lazy.
She achieved nothing at all in government.
But she’s done very well here.
This won’t impact polls, but it’s one of those things that longer term help prop up Tory claims to credibility, while undermining Reform’s.
@DavidL made some insightful comments however that Jenrick’s ability to generate political weather will be missed.
Which is a shame, because there aren't too many promising options for political parties who might improve things.
Trump, of course, has backed his stance ("it would be hard to start fighting again").
Hard to tell whether Trump is actually controlled in some way from Moscow, or whether he just really, really likes murderous autocrats.
When did Britain stop being a country of instinctive liberalism (as the US, despite being totally fucked, usually still is)?
'Team Jenrick' already briefing many of them arent defecting
The core belief is that national, centralised government can Make Things Better, by pulling levers in a control room.
So anything that stops them doing that is bad.
Which is the dividing line, mainly, between that culture and the Liberal Democrats.
See the incredulity among the Labour negotiators, during the talks about forming the Coaltion. They couldn’t understand why the Lib Dem wouldn’t sign up to all kinds of illiberal policies.
if we do changes on the Find Out Now poll of a year ago (15th January 2025), then we have:
RFM +3
CON -6
GRN +8
LAB -9
LDM (nc)
British liberalism always distinguished it from continental peer countries.
But I feel the reflex has withered and may be lost.
I don’t see politicians of any stripes really sticking up for it.
Like the boiled frog, many Brits don’t even realise what a nannyish state they live in. It’s very obvious the moment you step from Heathrow onto the tube.
Reform need to tucker themselves out with the bad 1980s Ben Elton 'grrr the TOREEZ' act first
At the moment they seem instead to be hoping for a hung parliament where they can make PR the price of their support.
Which is at least a reasonably principled position, since they have advocated for the system for a very long time.
It's definitely a tactical victory for Badenoch to have spiked the guns of Jenrick's defection, and it reduces the short-term damage that the defection would have caused. But the defection is only happening because the tide is running very strongly against the Tories, and so it shows how strategically weak the Tory position is.
Is that right?
Any concrete info on whether Farage was announcing a Labour defector next week or just idly speculating?
Would like to see odds on Glassman and Mann.
A relatively minor, but utterly absurd idea.
"Iran is yet another example of people being murdered in the name of religion. Since time immemorial, religion has been the cause of most deaths. This won’t change until all religions are entirely abolished."
Don't forget Communism, Fascism, Maoism and various other apparently non-religious isms. No slouches in the mass murdering department. Let's abolish these power mad cults too.
PR itself doesn’t push them toward breakout from their permanent 10-15% box.
They will look 'one of many' in London, underperform in Scotland and fall short of first probably in Wales but clean up in many of the councils going ahead
It wont be as good for them or as bad for the Tories as 2025. The Tories arent defending many councils and will already definitely retain Broxbourne (leaving outside London - Norfolk, Essex and Fareham as defences i think) edit - and Hampshire
Hardly rocket science, but it's not nothing.
Kemi Badenoch's ambush of Robert Jenrick was carefully planned and deliberately timed for Nigel Farage's press conference
Rebecca Harris, the chief whip, called Jenrick to tell him he had been sacked while Farage was holding his press conference
At 11.06, moments after Jenrick slammed the phone down after protesting his innocence, Kemi Badenoch announced on X that she was sacking Jenrick with a pre-recorded video
It meant Nigel Farage faced questions at the presser and that team Jenrick were caught completely unawares..
https://x.com/Steven_Swinford/status/2011779415097671790
Getting PR is more likely if they adopt a more ambitious strategy, I think.
Somewhat like vapes and smoking.
Senedd 2021, regional list vote, Lib Dems, 4.3%
I rest my case m'lud.
A decade of instability and then things kinda of go back to what they were like before, except you now have a permanent green, nationalist, and populist presence which the main parties have to deal with.
The Lib Dems, ceteris paribus, would probably *decline* in % support under PR, because their core offer doesn’t land distinctively and appealingly enough at a *national* level.
Signed, a teetotaller
He's talking about what political pitch would most benefit them at the next election rather than which future electoral system they might thrive under.
(Edit.. I see it is his point.
He's right about the pitch; and wrong about PR, IMO.)