Greens + CDU = 51% ie the only option now with a majority
At least 77% of germans would be offended by your "CDU + AfD + FDP" calculation.
If the CDU and FDP had any interest at all in such a coalition, it would be the current government.
Why is the AfD so anathema but the ex communist Links is not?
Many in the AfD are openly racist, and most of the others are "I'm not racist, but ..." types. This does not appeal to german politicians, a group of people who know a lot about pre-WWII politics.
There are many voters who dislike die Linke, because of the old but fading connections with the DDR-party (SED). There are also many in the SPD/Greens who are against forming coalitions with die Linke.
But many eastern German voters are, on the whole, left voters and agree with many of the policies that die Linke have. Don't be fooled by British media that all East Germans hated life under socialism. They hated the Stasi, not being allowed free travel and the chronic shortage of imported goods. There were many other areas such as housing, employment, male/female equality and childcare which took a big jump backwards when taken over by the BRD.
That makes 3 new endorsements since yesterday . If his original support holds he’s now upto 22.
Still a long slog though to get to 33 votes .
If he does make it, given Hunt only got 43 votes last time and hasn't picked up any new endorsements since, then it'll be a close fight for who the second MP is that goes to the members: Gove, Stewart or Hunt.
I think he'll probably just do it, with Raab and Javid eliminated.
Gove sounded like he was ready to throw it in
I think that he is a bit desperate because Boris as leader could prove very problematic given their history. He is a politician who really thrives on doing things. Sitting on the back benches would not appeal at all. Objectively this party and government are far too short of talent to waste Gove but I'm not sure Boris will feel that way.
The logic of that position is to throw his support behind someone who might stop Boris. But who? Is there anyone who has a chance really and, if not, would this just make things even worse?
I'd have thought the logic of the position would be to try and mend bridges with Boris.
Interesting piece. I think if I were a Lib Dem member I would plump for Ed Davey. And while we're at it - if I were a Tory member I would be voting for Michael Gove. Labour, I'm OK with Jeremy but would not be heartbroken if he were replaced by Emily Thornbury. The SNP? Nicola Sturgeon is fine by me. Irish parties and Plaid, no view other than I don't hate Arlene Foster in quite the way that I ought to. Not keen though.
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
That makes 3 new endorsements since yesterday . If his original support holds he’s now upto 22.
Still a long slog though to get to 33 votes .
If he does make it, given Hunt only got 43 votes last time and hasn't picked up any new endorsements since, then it'll be a close fight for who the second MP is that goes to the members: Gove, Stewart or Hunt.
I think he'll probably just do it, with Raab and Javid eliminated.
Gove sounded like he was ready to throw it in
I think that he is a bit desperate because Boris as leader could prove very problematic given their history. He is a politician who really thrives on doing things. Sitting on the back benches would not appeal at all. Objectively this party and government are far too short of talent to waste Gove but I'm not sure Boris will feel that way.
The logic of that position is to throw his support behind someone who might stop Boris. But who? Is there anyone who has a chance really and, if not, would this just make things even worse?
I'd have thought the logic of the position would be to try and mend bridges with Boris.
Trying to burn bridges even further won't work.
If that were possible, yes. But it may not be. Hence the desperation we saw last night where he was battling Raab for last place.
In any case those are the combined voteshare for the main right and left of centre blocks
Three of the last 4 governments were Union/SPD coalitions. Many Germans now regard the SPD as a centre party rather than a left party, which is why they are loosing support so quickly.
The SPD certainly won't collapse completely in the next few years, as they have such a strong infrastructure and ground support.
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
That makes 3 new endorsements since yesterday . If his original support holds he’s now upto 22.
Still a long slog though to get to 33 votes .
If he does make it, given Hunt only got 43 votes last time and hasn't picked up any new endorsements since, then it'll be a close fight for who the second MP is that goes to the members: Gove, Stewart or Hunt.
I think he'll probably just do it, with Raab and Javid eliminated.
Gove sounded like he was ready to throw it in
I think that he is a bit desperate because Boris as leader could prove very problematic given their history. He is a politician who really thrives on doing things. Sitting on the back benches would not appeal at all. Objectively this party and government are far too short of talent to waste Gove but I'm not sure Boris will feel that way.
The logic of that position is to throw his support behind someone who might stop Boris. But who? Is there anyone who has a chance really and, if not, would this just make things even worse?
If we have to go through this insane No Deal Brexit, as consolation I hope it will be a very long time before any Tory politician is given the opportunity to "do things" to the country again.
Corbyn keeps telling us what he really thinks- he's voted against Europe forever, he's against capitalism as practiced by America and it's allies, he's absolutely set on leaving the EU. His problem is that the members who support him are largely dead set on not leaving regardless of their views on capitalism. He needs to keep them with him to keep the cancer process going but can't keep them and clearly state his opinion.
So instead they attack literally everyone and everything that is associated with Europe , and if that means trashing the reputation of the Labour government so much the better. Nothing persuades people to vote Labour better than attacking Labour those people who voted Labour and those people who think Labour made them better off (it definitely didn't apparently).
Is there another example of the current leadership of a major party so endlessly attacking the record of previous leaders and previous spells in government? If you want comprehensive conclusive evidence that the Corbyn cancer exists to kill Labour not to become a Labour government it's in its attacks on the last Labour government.
Angela Raynor - who personally owes most of who she is to the Blair government and says so frequently - should show us an example and resign from the Shadow Cabinet.
Is it Corbyn or Milne? My impression is of a pattern where JC says something vaguely supportive of Remain/Referendum/Revoke but hours later after he's met the tankies in his private office, it is "clarified" that he meant the opposite.
Correct and that is precisely why nothing he says that is supportive of Brexit can ever really be trusted. Milne et al are running the show.
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
Because the market drives up quality in spheres where competition is possible. The BBC stifles competition. Barriers to entry into "broadcasting" are historically low, and the consumer is the best judge of what she should consume (unlike, say, medical services).
The BBC being there by definition increases the competition for the commercial broadcasters.
If the broadcasting market is one in which commercial companies can perform well compared to the state broadcaster then these companies have to be good at their job to be sucessfull and survive. Hindering the state provider just so that private companies can make a profit is a bad idea.
Do you know of the economic theory of crowding out?
Yes - it's a theory based on ideology rather than evidence.
You’re probably thinking of trickle down?
Crowding out simply says that if a government body increases the level of demand for fixed pool of assets those assets will increase in price. This will result in some private sector operators being unable to compete - they have been crowded out. I don’t think it’s particularly ideological
In the BBC’s terms, even more simply, because they don’t need to generate an equity return for investors they can afford to pay higher prices for employees. Hence they have a competitive advantage.
This was particularly noticeable when they tried to expand their website into local micro sites. (I think the CMA even got involved?) They put huge pressure on local newspapers and news sites - the BBC saw it as a service/traffic driver so was happy to run at a loss.
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
Does that work Richard? Maybe, but it is more than a marker.
What the MPs are doing is choosing the person who will go to the membership along with Boris. The suspicion has to be if that is anyone other than Rory then we may once again have a coronation because the person chosen may concede defeat.
I think Boris needs to be properly tested. Anointing May hid her manifest deficiencies as a campaigner until it was too late. Boris' weakness is more on the policy side but again should be tested by an actual contest. Stewart would test those weaknesses severely as would Gove in fairness. The others, not so much.
A superficial look at the polling average graph on Wikipedia suggests that they are also taking votes from the CDU and Linke. So the questions are, how high can the Greens go and will the bubble burst before the next election?
It is probably fair to say that mothe the SDP and CDU/CSU are at short term low points. The SPD leader has stepped down after the bad EP Elections. And the CSU has started to scratch at the 70 year sore again by suggesting that the CSU leader should be then next Chancellor-Candidate not Anne Kramp-Karrenbauer the new CDU leader. The press have enjoyed baiting the Union politicians over this.
But I am getting the feeling that the greens are now "THE" party for the centre left, and are attracting some of the unadventurous traditional SPD-voters who just want the centre left to be strong.
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
Mistake by Bangladesh choosing to bowl first. Gayle is less dangerous after 50 overs in the field.
ODI Batting in England is much harder in the first innings (for day matches), batsmen usually get some tricky balls in the first overs, and scoring is slower. AUS and SA have come unstuck on this a few times by just choosing the default. But Bangladesh will probably loose the match, so the decision will probably "look like the wrong one" anyway.
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
So I guess you want no deal?
My order of preference, long stated here.
Good deal > No deal > Remain > Bad deal
Backstop is a bad deal.
So seeing as both 'good deal' and 'no-deal' aren't going to happen.
I'll add my thanks to Dr Fox for the update and good to see @Icarus still with us,
I still haven't decided - there is the veritable cigarette paper between Jo and Ed on most issues. Both are tainted by the Coalition as some would see it but in a Party where three quarters of the membership joined after 2015 that doesn't have the resonance it seems to so with some (and notably the anti-LDs) on here.
Choosing Ed would mean the three parties would all be led by London MPs which sends a message of sorts to the rest of the UK and while that's not a good reason for choosing Jo it wouldn't be a bad reason.
Likewise, I'm an undecided voter looking for a killer reason to go for one or the other. Would be happy with either.
I'd assumed I'd support Jo; great communicator, passionate speaker and she seems ready after a gaffe-free stint as deputy.
Jo won a seat that should never have been Lib Dem; Ed won a more natural seat but with naff all central support. Both impressive achievements, and I admire their sticking power to come back from 2015. However it does seem that Lib Dem priorities have changed from simply "get noticed" which it's been since 2015. Not yet ready to form a Government but I'm now thinking more seriously about policy, who could build alliances and negotiate deals if needed.
Still leaning Jo, I simply think that she can take opponents apart more easily. She sliced Barry Gardiner into pieces on the local election results show this year and I've no doubt she could do the same to Corbyn. My main fear was that she'd turn the Lib Dems into the 'gender neutral bathroom' party which would be a big turn off for me - but she seems rooted in Brexit, green economy and anticipating tech changes to the workplace which seem the right priorities. I can't see Ed having quite the same impact against opponents, does he have the star quality that is needed in a Lib Dem leader? Is he Jeremy Hunt to Swinson's Rory Stewart?
But Ed is having a stronger leadership campaign than I'd anticipated. Still 60:40 for Jo but that's closer than it was a fortnight ago.
Thanks. An informative header. I'm immediately prejudiced against Sir Ed Davey because of his acceptance of a poltical honour. It tells you rather more about the person's character than anything he might have done as an MP. John Redwood and Bill Cash's recent honours havent helped but I note Tony Blair whose achievments eclipse all of them is still plain 'Tony'.
Indeed. Tony wanted to focus his talents on making money for himself and his family
Nothing wrong by with that, but he thought that public service in the Lords would restrict his ability to do so.
And would oblige him to identify his clients...
Wr're talking knighthood not HEREDITARY baronetcies like the Thatchers
I know - although the PM has a right to an Earldom, no one since Stockton has taken it up. Thatcher took a life peerage, while Major a knighthood. If Blair had asked for a life peerage he’d definitely have got it, not sure about an Earldom.
I suspect he will wait until he is done making money and then retire to the Lords
If a general election is called, the compromise that Labour has settled on internally will disappear. I suspect in that case, 2nd ref will win out between the remaining options
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
Does that work Richard? Maybe, but it is more than a marker.
What the MPs are doing is choosing the person who will go to the membership along with Boris. The suspicion has to be if that is anyone other than Rory then we may once again have a coronation because the person chosen may concede defeat.
I think Boris needs to be properly tested. Anointing May hid her manifest deficiencies as a campaigner until it was too late. Boris' weakness is more on the policy side but again should be tested by an actual contest. Stewart would test those weaknesses severely as would Gove in fairness. The others, not so much.
Also, it's important frankly, that if Brexit and Boris as PM blows up for the Tories, that they have then somewhere to go. Stewarts position allows that and allows them to compete at a future election quicker to rebuild. It would allow those arguements to be met, decided and then a new position to develop.
Thanks. An informative header. I'm immediately prejudiced against Sir Ed Davey because of his acceptance of a poltical honour. It tells you rather more about the person's character than anything he might have done as an MP. John Redwood and Bill Cash's recent honours havent helped but I note Tony Blair whose achievments eclipse all of them is still plain 'Tony'.
Indeed. Tony wanted to focus his talents on making money for himself and his family
Nothing wrong by with that, but he thought that public service in the Lords would restrict his ability to do so.
And would oblige him to identify his clients...
Wr're talking knighthood not HEREDITARY baronetcies like the Thatchers
The Order of the Garter is not a given for former Prime Ministers. Since WWII Macmillan, Douglas Home, Blair, Brown and Cameron have not received the Garter.
Macmillan received a hereditary earldom and Douglas Home was a Knight of the Thistle, hereditary peer and then life peer.
The Garter is the personal gift of the Queen isn’t it? (Or it may be Order of Merit I’m thinking of)
I was surprised there weren't a few more opinion polls at the weekend. Do we think they were held back to go into the field after yesterday's debate? Might we have some post-debate polls this evening?
Or are the opinion poll budgets fairly empty after recent political excitement?
On topic: The choice for the LibDems is simple. If they want to feel good about themselves as a party of protest, they should choose Jo Swinson. If on the other hand they want to be part of a realignment in politics which could lead to them having a significant role in how the country is governed, they should choose Ed Davey. I expect they want the former.
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
Does that work Richard? Maybe, but it is more than a marker.
What the MPs are doing is choosing the person who will go to the membership along with Boris. The suspicion has to be if that is anyone other than Rory then we may once again have a coronation because the person chosen may concede defeat.
I think Boris needs to be properly tested. Anointing May hid her manifest deficiencies as a campaigner until it was too late. Boris' weakness is more on the policy side but again should be tested by an actual contest. Stewart would test those weaknesses severely as would Gove in fairness. The others, not so much.
Last time, the MPs chose May and Leadsom to go through to the members, and the latter exploded like a failed macerator. She also failed to get past the first round this time.
The problem is that the MPs chose two people who were unsuited for the job - even if it had got through to the members' vote, they would have had Hobson's choice.
The MPs should contemplate whether they should make that same mistake again.
Davey looks the more heavyweight of the 2 but both seem C list compared to the A list Chuka and now he has joined the party this leadership contest mainly seeks to be a warm up for his succession
There is something in that. Chuka'a a big player but he needs be fully integrated into the LDs before he can think of leadership and we don't know yet how successful that will be.
Genuine question: Chuka has never been a senior minister, flunked one run at leader, failed in settling up a new party and I don’t believe has any distinctive position that he has marked out as one he owns*
In what way is he a “big player”?
* excluding Brexit because there are lots of other big names who have arguably been more effective than him on his side of the argument
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
Meandering through the 1st ballot numbers, subsequent exits and recent events I wonder whether by second ballot announcement tomorrow we may be left with only two candidates and the non Boris candidate so weakened as to withdraw and effectively end up with another coronation.
Scenario - Javid, Rabb, Stewart and Gove all fail to pass the 33 vote hurdle. Hunt barely improves and Boris is streets ahead :
Mistake by Bangladesh choosing to bowl first. Gayle is less dangerous after 50 overs in the field.
ODI Batting in England is much harder in the first innings (for day matches), batsmen usually get some tricky balls in the first overs, and scoring is slower. AUS and SA have come unstuck on this a few times by just choosing the default. But Bangladesh will probably loose the match, so the decision will probably "look like the wrong one" anyway.
And he's out! Shows what I know. This may be an excitingly close game and there have not been enough of those.
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
Does that work Richard? Maybe, but it is more than a marker.
What the MPs are doing is choosing the person who will go to the membership along with Boris. The suspicion has to be if that is anyone other than Rory then we may once again have a coronation because the person chosen may concede defeat.
I think Boris needs to be properly tested. Anointing May hid her manifest deficiencies as a campaigner until it was too late. Boris' weakness is more on the policy side but again should be tested by an actual contest. Stewart would test those weaknesses severely as would Gove in fairness. The others, not so much.
Also, it's important frankly, that if Brexit and Boris as PM blows up for the Tories, that they have then somewhere to go. Stewarts position allows that and allows them to compete at a future election quicker to rebuild. It would allow those arguements to be met, decided and then a new position to develop.
Brexit blowing up for the Tories may well be a terminal event for the party. They are in a terrible hole at the moment.
Davey looks the more heavyweight of the 2 but both seem C list compared to the A list Chuka and now he has joined the party this leadership contest mainly seeks to be a warm up for his succession
There is something in that. Chuka'a a big player but he needs be fully integrated into the LDs before he can think of leadership and we don't know yet how successful that will be.
Genuine question: Chuka has never been a senior minister, flunked one run at leader, failed in settling up a new party and I don’t believe has any distinctive position that he has marked out as one he owns*
In what way is he a “big player”?
* excluding Brexit because there are lots of other big names who have arguably been more effective than him on his side of the argument
I don't mind Chuka, but it's sadly becoming clear that he's only a big player in his own head. Deeds matter, and his achievements few.
Not a big favourite of the current membership, I don't like to rule things out or advise people on betting but when it comes to a membership vote he would really struggle (unless the membership changes) as a trading bet or other things possibly or automatically takes over for a period when Corbyn steps down.
There has been a lot of talk about the next leader being a woman as well.
Davey looks the more heavyweight of the 2 but both seem C list compared to the A list Chuka and now he has joined the party this leadership contest mainly seeks to be a warm up for his succession
There is something in that. Chuka'a a big player but he needs be fully integrated into the LDs before he can think of leadership and we don't know yet how successful that will be.
Genuine question: Chuka has never been a senior minister, flunked one run at leader, failed in settling up a new party and I don’t believe has any distinctive position that he has marked out as one he owns*
In what way is he a “big player”?
* excluding Brexit because there are lots of other big names who have arguably been more effective than him on his side of the argument
Identity politics and a physical and stylistic similarity to Obama at the time when he was an up and coming MP and Obama was POTUS
I think Javid comes last, Raab has already picked up Stephen Metcalfe's endorsement over the weekend and will get some McVey and Leadsom voters, Javid has had no new endorsements and hard yo see where his extra votes come from if Hancock's voters are splitting between Boris and Rory. Maybe Harper but I would have thought his backers will go to Stewart, Gove and Hunt
I have a hunch that some of Javid's and possibly Hunt's first-round votes might switch to Rory in this second round. The reasoning will be that Boris is so far ahead that the only consideration now is to put down a marker that there is a sensible wing of the party and that it is there ready for when the party comes to its senses. The other broadly centrist candidates have compromised too much with the no-deal extremists to fill that role.
Does that work Richard? Maybe, but it is more than a marker.
What the MPs are doing is choosing the person who will go to the membership along with Boris. The suspicion has to be if that is anyone other than Rory then we may once again have a coronation because the person chosen may concede defeat.
I think Boris needs to be properly tested. Anointing May hid her manifest deficiencies as a campaigner until it was too late. Boris' weakness is more on the policy side but again should be tested by an actual contest. Stewart would test those weaknesses severely as would Gove in fairness. The others, not so much.
Also, it's important frankly, that if Brexit and Boris as PM blows up for the Tories, that they have then somewhere to go. Stewarts position allows that and allows them to compete at a future election quicker to rebuild. It would allow those arguements to be met, decided and then a new position to develop.
Brexit blowing up for the Tories may well be a terminal event for the party. They are in a terrible hole at the moment.
Quite possibly, but something will rise from the ashes.
Just reflecting (and on topic), here you have two politicians who in 2015 thought that it was Game Over for at least the next 5 years, and here we are just 4 years later and one of them is about to lead their party.
Meanwhile, the buffoon who declared himself unfit to lead his party 2 years ago is a shoo-in for the job.
Meandering through the 1st ballot numbers, subsequent exits and recent events I wonder whether by second ballot announcement tomorrow we may be left with only two candidates and the non Boris candidate so weakened as to withdraw and effectively end up with another coronation.
Scenario - Javid, Rabb, Stewart and Gove all fail to pass the 33 vote hurdle. Hunt barely improves and Boris is streets ahead :
Genuine question: Chuka has never been a senior minister, flunked one run at leader, failed in settling up a new party and I don’t believe has any distinctive position that he has marked out as one he owns*
Boris made a pointless resignation after a disastrous period as a senior minister, flunked one run at leader, is running scared of a new party and I don’t believe has any consistent or distinctive position that he has marked out as one he owns, and yet...
Meandering through the 1st ballot numbers, subsequent exits and recent events I wonder whether by second ballot announcement tomorrow we may be left with only two candidates and the non Boris candidate so weakened as to withdraw and effectively end up with another coronation.
Scenario - Javid, Rabb, Stewart and Gove all fail to pass the 33 vote hurdle. Hunt barely improves and Boris is streets ahead :
I'm sure that's what Team Boris would like, and it seems eminently plausible. But a new PM getting the gig with the support of less than half the MPs, and then having to do something controversial? That seems... brave...
Meandering through the 1st ballot numbers, subsequent exits and recent events I wonder whether by second ballot announcement tomorrow we may be left with only two candidates and the non Boris candidate so weakened as to withdraw and effectively end up with another coronation.
Scenario - Javid, Rabb, Stewart and Gove all fail to pass the 33 vote hurdle. Hunt barely improves and Boris is streets ahead :
Meandering through the 1st ballot numbers, subsequent exits and recent events I wonder whether by second ballot announcement tomorrow we may be left with only two candidates and the non Boris candidate so weakened as to withdraw and effectively end up with another coronation.
Scenario - Javid, Rabb, Stewart and Gove all fail to pass the 33 vote hurdle. Hunt barely improves and Boris is streets ahead :
Meandering through the 1st ballot numbers, subsequent exits and recent events I wonder whether by second ballot announcement tomorrow we may be left with only two candidates and the non Boris candidate so weakened as to withdraw and effectively end up with another coronation.
Scenario - Javid, Rabb, Stewart and Gove all fail to pass the 33 vote hurdle. Hunt barely improves and Boris is streets ahead :
Johnson just short of >50% support on those figures (157 MPs). If he passed that threshold the logic for a coronation would be stronger.
Tend to think that Hunt is more likely to lose support than Gove. Hunt has really struggled to make a compelling pitch, and he was short of the numbers in the first round that would have made the case for him.
Thanks. An informative header. I'm immediately prejudiced against Sir Ed Davey because of his acceptance of a poltical honour. It tells you rather more about the person's character than anything he might have done as an MP. John Redwood and Bill Cash's recent honours havent helped but I note Tony Blair whose achievments eclipse all of them is still plain 'Tony'.
Indeed. Tony wanted to focus his talents on making money for himself and his family
Nothing wrong by with that, but he thought that public service in the Lords would restrict his ability to do so.
And would oblige him to identify his clients...
Wr're talking knighthood not HEREDITARY baronetcies like the Thatchers
The Order of the Garter is not a given for former Prime Ministers. Since WWII Macmillan, Douglas Home, Blair, Brown and Cameron have not received the Garter.
Macmillan received a hereditary earldom and Douglas Home was a Knight of the Thistle, hereditary peer and then life peer.
The Garter is the personal gift of the Queen isn’t it? (Or it may be Order of Merit I’m thinking of)
The Garter and the Thistle (sounds like a trendy London gastro pub) are in the gift of the monarch as is the Order of Merit.
Traditionally the PM was offered an earldom but since life peerages it has become the norm for former PM's to take that route should they desire.
Thatcher recommended Macmillan and Speaker Thomas for a viscountcy and Denis got a baronetcy.
Thanks. An informative header. I'm immediately prejudiced against Sir Ed Davey because of his acceptance of a poltical honour. It tells you rather more about the person's character than anything he might have done as an MP. John Redwood and Bill Cash's recent honours havent helped but I note Tony Blair whose achievments eclipse all of them is still plain 'Tony'.
Indeed. Tony wanted to focus his talents on making money for himself and his family
Nothing wrong by with that, but he thought that public service in the Lords would restrict his ability to do so.
And would oblige him to identify his clients...
Wr're talking knighthood not HEREDITARY baronetcies like the Thatchers
The Order of the Garter is not a given for former Prime Ministers. Since WWII Macmillan, Douglas Home, Blair, Brown and Cameron have not received the Garter.
Macmillan received a hereditary earldom and Douglas Home was a Knight of the Thistle, hereditary peer and then life peer.
The Garter is the personal gift of the Queen isn’t it? (Or it may be Order of Merit I’m thinking of)
Yes it is there is one, Mary Peters waiting to be invested and one vacant
If a general election is called, the compromise that Labour has settled on internally will disappear. I suspect in that case, 2nd ref will win out between the remaining options
Exactly. Ref2 versus GE is a false binary. Labour cannot realistically force a referendum as the opposition to a Tory PM and government who are dead against it. And even if they could, why would they? All it does is risk letting the Tories off the Brexit spike that they have, completely unassisted, impaled themselves upon. Makes no political sense whatsoever, despite what the FBPE crowd say.
What Labour can do is oppose a Tory Brexit (any Tory Brexit) and try to force the only thing that will allow them to enter government and take over the Brexit process - a general election. At which point there is not a shadow of a doubt that they will make a commitment to Ref2. The Labour position is, has been for quite some time, perfectly clear, perfectly reasonable. The bottom line is that the referendum comes only with a Labour government. And a Labour government comes with the referendum.
I think we could be seeing signs that British politics is going to "normalize" in the 2020's.
Way I see things (possibly) panning out:
1. Boris Wins autumn general election and we Brexit.
2. Jezza resigns. Labour elects a more centrist leader.
3. Boris loses 2024 general election.
4. Rory Stewart becomes Con leader.
Suddenly by 2025 we're back Lab and Con being center left and center right parties and the previous ten years seems a bit like Pam's dream in Dallas.
Centrist leaders operating within the remit of being outside the EU was all most leavers wanted out of the referendum I'd have thought. But they couldn't compromise
Boris ducking the C4 debate was understandable, but chickening out of the press gallery hustings does look as though he's terrified of being asked awkward questions.
If a general election is called, the compromise that Labour has settled on internally will disappear. I suspect in that case, 2nd ref will win out between the remaining options
Exactly. Ref2 versus GE is a false binary. Labour cannot realistically force a referendum as the opposition to a Tory PM and government who are dead against it. And even if they could, why would they? All it does is risk letting the Tories off the Brexit spike that they have, completely unassisted, impaled themselves upon. Makes no political sense whatsoever, despite what the FBPE crowd say.
What Labour can do is oppose a Tory Brexit (any Tory Brexit) and try to force the only thing that will allow them to enter government and take over the Brexit process - a general election. At which point there is not a shadow of a doubt that they will make a commitment to Ref2. The Labour position is, has been for quite some time, perfectly clear, perfectly reasonable. The bottom line is that the referendum comes only with a Labour government. And a Labour government comes with the referendum.
But I bet he will try to negotiate and if he thinks he’s got what he wants the referendum goes out the window. Without a categorical promise of a referendum with remain on the ballot paper then he won’t ever be PM
On topic: The choice for the LibDems is simple. If they want to feel good about themselves as a party of protest, they should choose Jo Swinson. If on the other hand they want to be part of a realignment in politics which could lead to them having a significant role in how the country is governed, they should choose Ed Davey. I expect they want the former.
It's always nice to hear the Conservative perspective on these things.
Given our experience of "having a significant role in Government" last time, you'll forgive me if I take the view the spoon isn't long enough for the Party to sup with either your lot or Corbyn but if circumstances compelled otherwise, I'd demand STV implemented for all elections without a referendum before any kind of negotiation.
The prospect of having to deal with Johnson, Corbyn or Farage is truly stomach-churning but be assured the next time the LDs find themselves with the balance of power the price of our support will be higher than you can possibly imagine.
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
Not if it is BRINO when we are taking rules from the EU with no borders between UK and EU. The Brexit party would carry on, perhaps at around 10-15% in the polls instead of 25% and the Tories would have a problem.
The Good Friday agreement means that there will be no borders between the UK and EU
I think we could be seeing signs that British politics is going to "normalize" in the 2020's.
Way I see things (possibly) panning out:
1. Boris Wins autumn general election and we Brexit.
2. Jezza resigns. Labour elects a more centrist leader.
3. Boris loses 2024 general election.
4. Rory Stewart becomes Con leader.
Suddenly by 2025 we're back Lab and Con being center left and center right parties and the previous ten years seems a bit like Pam's dream in Dallas.
Centrist leaders operating within the remit of being outside the EU was all most leavers wanted out of the referendum I'd have thought. But they couldn't compromise
I think many Leavers voted Leave to upset the apple cart because they weren't happy with the status quo. If the change that Brexit brings doesn't improve their mood they're unlikely to then return to voting for the status quo.
It's always nice to hear the Conservative perspective on these things.
Given our experience of "having a significant role in Government" last time, you'll forgive me if I take the view the spoon isn't long enough for the Party to sup with either your lot or Corbyn but if circumstances compelled otherwise, I'd demand STV implemented for all elections without a referendum before any kind of negotiation.
The prospect of having to deal with Johnson, Corbyn or Farage is truly stomach-churning but be assured the next time the LDs find themselves with the balance of power the price of our support will be higher than you can possibly imagine.
You make my point for me perfectly. That is why you will probably choose Jo Swinson, as an expression of distaste for actually being involved in government. Seems a strange motivation for being a member of a political party, but it takes all sorts I guess.
But I bet he will try to negotiate and if he thinks he’s got what he wants the referendum goes out the window. Without a categorical promise of a referendum with remain on the ballot paper then he won’t ever be PM.
Absolutely right. The manifesto must have that clear and unambiguous commitment. And it will.
Davey looks the more heavyweight of the 2 but both seem C list compared to the A list Chuka and now he has joined the party this leadership contest mainly seeks to be a warm up for his succession
There is something in that. Chuka'a a big player but he needs be fully integrated into the LDs before he can think of leadership and we don't know yet how successful that will be.
What qualities do you see in Chuka?
I see someone indecisive, with bad judgement, unable to lead.
I think Chuka may have blown it back in 2015, when he decided not to run for Labour leader. Wasn't there some ideas at the time that he might have skeletons in the closet that would be aired in a leadership contest?
I also can't see him being leader of the Lib Dems anytime soon either. He's been in four 'parties' (okay, three and independent) this year alone and that's going to count against him. He's giving Winston McKenzie a run for his money at this rate, and his many past tweets dissing the LD will be brought up time and time again.
Alex Wickham has been pretty rude to Rory Stewart over the past few days. However when you remember he used to work for Guido it makes more sense. He's too busy swooning over Boris to even notice what the other candidates are doing.
I think we could be seeing signs that British politics is going to "normalize" in the 2020's.
Way I see things (possibly) panning out:
1. Boris wins autumn general election and we Brexit.
2. Jezza resigns. Labour elects a more centrist leader.
3. Boris loses 2024 general election.
4. Rory Stewart becomes Con leader.
Suddenly by 2025 we're back Lab and Con being center left and center right parties and the previous ten years seems a bit like Pam's dream in Dallas.
Hard to see how Boris wins a GE. Maybe if Farage goes back on his word and does go for a pact, that could be enough, but even then, Labour will regain almost all of the green party vote and a large chunk of the lib dem vote that they are currently predicted to lose, even if Labour continue to offer equivocation on Brexit. Anyone opposed to a Boris Farage pact will reluctantly vote Labour much like in 2017. SNP likely to clean up again in Scotland removes a chunk of Scot Tory MPs and parliament ends up more hung than before.
If there's no Farage Boris pact then all bets are off, the huge vote split would leave many Remainers feeling more comfortable denying Corbyn their vote, and we could see scenarios playing out like all the recent yougov polls.
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
So I guess you want no deal?
My order of preference, long stated here.
Good deal > No deal > Remain > Bad deal
Backstop is a bad deal.
Ah, so you're another unicorn hunter.
You say unicorn I say normality. I used to live in Australia and have family in Canada. I compare us to them and say we should be like them. Independent nations with an FTA. What is unicorn about that?
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
So I guess you want no deal?
My order of preference, long stated here.
Good deal > No deal > Remain > Bad deal
Backstop is a bad deal.
So seeing as both 'good deal' and 'no-deal' aren't going to happen.
you're a remainer, as well as all of the ERG are.
I think a good deal is possible as is no deal. Yes remaining is better than May's deal.
An interesting positive straw in the wind for the Roryites hoping he'll make the 33 threshold has been the slow or lack of further endorsements for the second ballot of his rivals.
Gove and Rabb have added one and Javid and Hunt none. Stewart has added four and he significantly outperformed his declared backers last time. He needs to do so again to progress.
On topic: The choice for the LibDems is simple. If they want to feel good about themselves as a party of protest, they should choose Jo Swinson. If on the other hand they want to be part of a realignment in politics which could lead to them having a significant role in how the country is governed, they should choose Ed Davey. I expect they want the former.
Yet one of the nuances between them is that Jo is more open to co-operating and re-aljgnment and Ed prefers go it alone
An interesting positive straw in the wind for the Roryites hoping he'll make the 33 threshold has been the slow or lack of further endorsements for the second ballot of his rivals.
Gove and Rabb have added one and Javid and Hunt none. Stewart has added four and he significantly outperformed his declared backers last time. He needs to do so again to progress.
Centrist leaders operating within the remit of being outside the EU was all most leavers wanted out of the referendum I'd have thought. But they couldn't compromise
If we are going to persist with centrist governments implementing nothing of substance that could not just as easily have been done as an EU member there seems little point in leaving the EU. It will have been an enormous waste of time and resources.
OTOH, if we move to either (i) small state, deregulated laissez faire, or (ii) big state, egalitarian socialism - that is quite a different matter. Then we would genuinely be using our new found 'freedom'.
This is all hypothetical, of course, if Labour win a pre-Brexit election and Remain wins the resulting 2nd referendum. Which is eminently possible IMO.
You make my point for me perfectly. That is why you will probably choose Jo Swinson, as an expression of distaste for actually being involved in government. Seems a strange motivation for being a member of a political party, but it takes all sorts I guess.
I don't know why you think Ed Davey is such a positive force for "being involved in Government" and Jo Swinson isn't but that's your view to which you are entitled.
Jo served in the Coalition Government as well but "being involved in Government" next time won't be the same. I merely point out the lessons of the 2010-15 experience haven't been lost on the LDs. If of course you see the LD role as simply being there to prop up Conservative Government ad infinitum you are going to be disappointed and perhaps a prolonged spell in Opposition may be no bad thing as your Party looks tired, divided and lacking in any kind of meaningful direction.
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
So I guess you want no deal?
My order of preference, long stated here.
Good deal > No deal > Remain > Bad deal
Backstop is a bad deal.
Ah, so you're another unicorn hunter.
You say unicorn I say normality. I used to live in Australia and have family in Canada. I compare us to them and say we should be like them. Independent nations with an FTA. What is unicorn about that?
This is Boris Johnson’s contest to lose and most of the leading figures in the Scottish party are convinced the Tory membership is about to make a hideous blunder. “He’s the SNP’s candidate of choice. That fact alone is a serious worry,” says one senior Tory MSP. And yes, it is true that the prospect of Prime Minister Johnson has SNP politicians breaking out all the heart emojis. Perhaps they are mistaken about this; perhaps Johnson can once again be a Heineken candidate, who refreshes the parts other candidates cannot reach, even in Scotland. But it is worth observing that neither the Scottish Tories nor the SNP think he is.
First things must come first, however. That means seeing off the mortal threat posed by Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party. Unionism, to the minor extent it’s ever a true concern for home counties Tories, is not a priority. The SNP is a danger to be confronted another day, if indeed it ever comes to that. However much Scottish Tories might despair of this, there is at least some logic here.
Unfortunately, the essential message sent by cuddling the Brexit Party is a simple one: “Nigel Farage is right, please don’t vote for him.” The Tories are in this mess partly because, in the end, successive prime ministers have preferred to pander to the Tory right than muster the courage to tell them they’re wrong.
That is why UKIP died the first time. Once the Tories adopted the policy of leaving, UKIP became a rotting corpse that even Farage knew had no future. It is only when the Tories failed to Brexit and May attempted to deliver a pathetic "deal" with a backstop that would keep us bound to the EU that the Brexit Party arose.
If the Tories ensure we leave the EU, the Brexit Party dies.
There is either May's deal (perhaps with very minor alterations), or no deal.
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
So I guess you want no deal?
My order of preference, long stated here.
Good deal > No deal > Remain > Bad deal
Backstop is a bad deal.
So seeing as both 'good deal' and 'no-deal' aren't going to happen.
you're a remainer, as well as all of the ERG are.
I think a good deal is possible as is no deal. Yes remaining is better than May's deal.
In the referendum between remain and a poor deal, we'll be on the same side
I don't know why you think Ed Davey is such a positive force for "being involved in Government" and Jo Swinson isn't but that's your view to which you are entitled.
Jo served in the Coalition Government as well but "being involved in Government" next time won't be the same. I merely point out the lessons of the 2010-15 experience haven't been lost on the LDs. If of course you see the LD role as simply being there to prop up Conservative Government ad infinitum you are going to be disappointed and perhaps a prolonged spell in Opposition may be no bad thing as your Party looks tired, divided and lacking in any kind of meaningful direction.
The LibDems have drawn the wrong lessons from the coalition experience. They should celebrate it - which shouldn't be hard, given that it was the best government for decades and better than anything we're likely to get in the years to come. Instead they seem to think it was a disaster. It's a really bizarre way to try to get votes, even at a time when Labour and the Tories are shovelling votes in your direction.
On topic: The choice for the LibDems is simple. If they want to feel good about themselves as a party of protest, they should choose Jo Swinson. If on the other hand they want to be part of a realignment in politics which could lead to them having a significant role in how the country is governed, they should choose Ed Davey. I expect they want the former.
It's always nice to hear the Conservative perspective on these things.
Given our experience of "having a significant role in Government" last time, you'll forgive me if I take the view the spoon isn't long enough for the Party to sup with either your lot or Corbyn but if circumstances compelled otherwise, I'd demand STV implemented for all elections without a referendum before any kind of negotiation.
The prospect of having to deal with Johnson, Corbyn or Farage is truly stomach-churning but be assured the next time the LDs find themselves with the balance of power the price of our support will be higher than you can possibly imagine.
Please, please, please next time take at least a month to draw up a legally binding coalition contract for the whole parliamentary term. Don't be dazzled by the bright headlights of power and essentially sign away power to the major party.
Don't listen to the right wing press who will say the country is in a rudderless crisis. The previous government functioned perfectly well for the 6 weeks with no parliamentary support during the GE campaign and can easily cope with another couple of months with no new legislation.
Centrist leaders operating within the remit of being outside the EU was all most leavers wanted out of the referendum I'd have thought. But they couldn't compromise
If we are going to persist with centrist governments implementing nothing of substance that could not just as easily have been done as an EU member there seems little point in leaving the EU. It will have been an enormous waste of time and resources.
OTOH, if we move to either (i) small state, deregulated laissez faire, or (ii) big state, egalitarian socialism - that is quite a different matter. Then we would genuinely be using our new found 'freedom'.
This is all hypothetical, of course, if Labour win a pre-Brexit election and Remain wins the resulting 2nd referendum. Which is eminently possible IMO.
Amazing this is dismissed as hypothetical, when leave won three years ago, while the actual hypothetical is "eminently possible"!!!
I'll add my thanks to Dr Fox for the update and good to see @Icarus still with us,
I still haven't decided - there is the veritable cigarette paper between Jo and Ed on most issues. Both are tainted by the Coalition as some would see it but in a Party where three quarters of the membership joined after 2015 that doesn't have the resonance it seems to so with some (and notably the anti-LDs) on here.
Choosing Ed would mean the three parties would all be led by London MPs which sends a message of sorts to the rest of the UK and while that's not a good reason for choosing Jo it wouldn't be a bad reason.
Likewise, I'm an undecided voter looking for a killer reason to go for one or the other. Would be happy with either.
I'd assumed I'd support Jo; great communicator, passionate speaker and she seems ready after a gaffe-free stint as deputy.
Jo won a seat that should never have been Lib Dem; Ed won a more natural seat but with naff all central support. Both impressive achievements, and I admire their sticking power to come back from 2015. However it does seem that Lib Dem priorities have changed from simply "get noticed" which it's been since 2015. Not yet ready to form a Government but I'm now thinking more seriously about policy, who could build alliances and negotiate deals if needed.
Still leaning Jo, I simply think that she can take opponents apart more easily. She sliced Barry Gardiner into pieces on the local election results show this year and I've no doubt she could do the same to Corbyn. My main fear was that she'd turn the Lib Dems into the 'gender neutral bathroom' party which would be a big turn off for me - but she seems rooted in Brexit, green economy and anticipating tech changes to the workplace which seem the right priorities. I can't see Ed having quite the same impact against opponents, does he have the star quality that is needed in a Lib Dem leader? Is he Jeremy Hunt to Swinson's Rory Stewart?
But Ed is having a stronger leadership campaign than I'd anticipated. Still 60:40 for Jo but that's closer than it was a fortnight ago.
I disagree re- Swinson's performance on the Local Election results programme. Thought she was very unimpressive and lightweight - indeed more so than Tim Farron.
I don't know why you think Ed Davey is such a positive force for "being involved in Government" and Jo Swinson isn't but that's your view to which you are entitled.
Jo served in the Coalition Government as well but "being involved in Government" next time won't be the same. I merely point out the lessons of the 2010-15 experience haven't been lost on the LDs. If of course you see the LD role as simply being there to prop up Conservative Government ad infinitum you are going to be disappointed and perhaps a prolonged spell in Opposition may be no bad thing as your Party looks tired, divided and lacking in any kind of meaningful direction.
The LibDems have drawn the wrong lessons from the coalition experience. They should celebrate it - which shouldn't be hard, given that it was the best government for decades and better than anything we're likely to get in the years to come. Instead they seem to think it was a disaster. It's a really bizarre way to try to get votes, even at a time when Labour and the Tories are shovelling votes in your direction.
Davey looks the more heavyweight of the 2 but both seem C list compared to the A list Chuka and now he has joined the party this leadership contest mainly seeks to be a warm up for his succession
There is something in that. Chuka'a a big player but he needs be fully integrated into the LDs before he can think of leadership and we don't know yet how successful that will be.
What qualities do you see in Chuka?
I see someone indecisive, with bad judgement, unable to lead.
I think Chuka may have blown it back in 2015, when he decided not to run for Labour leader. Wasn't there some ideas at the time that he might have skeletons in the closet that would be aired in a leadership contest?
I also can't see him being leader of the Lib Dems anytime soon either. He's been in four 'parties' (okay, three and independent) this year alone and that's going to count against him. He's giving Winston McKenzie a run for his money at this rate, and his many past tweets dissing the LD will be brought up time and time again.
Exactly. But doubtless it would require a poll of LibDem members before HY reaches the same conclusion!
It's always nice to hear the Conservative perspective on these things.
Given our experience of "having a significant role in Government" last time, you'll forgive me if I take the view the spoon isn't long enough for the Party to sup with either your lot or Corbyn but if circumstances compelled otherwise, I'd demand STV implemented for all elections without a referendum before any kind of negotiation.
The prospect of having to deal with Johnson, Corbyn or Farage is truly stomach-churning but be assured the next time the LDs find themselves with the balance of power the price of our support will be higher than you can possibly imagine.
You make my point for me perfectly. That is why you will probably choose Jo Swinson, as an expression of distaste for actually being involved in government. Seems a strange motivation for being a member of a political party, but it takes all sorts I guess.
Huh? That would be Jo Swinson the studiously loyal coalition minister for the whole 5 years? An argument you could just about carry for Tim Farron but it doesn't ring true for Jo at all.
I don't know why you think Ed Davey is such a positive force for "being involved in Government" and Jo Swinson isn't but that's your view to which you are entitled.
Jo served in the Coalition Government as well but "being involved in Government" next time won't be the same. I merely point out the lessons of the 2010-15 experience haven't been lost on the LDs. If of course you see the LD role as simply being there to prop up Conservative Government ad infinitum you are going to be disappointed and perhaps a prolonged spell in Opposition may be no bad thing as your Party looks tired, divided and lacking in any kind of meaningful direction.
The LibDems have drawn the wrong lessons from the coalition experience. They should celebrate it - which shouldn't be hard, given that it was the best government for decades and better than anything we're likely to get in the years to come. Instead they seem to think it was a disaster. It's a really bizarre way to try to get votes, even at a time when Labour and the Tories are shovelling votes in your direction.
That is a very Conservative way of looking at it.
Not really. The LibDems had been saying for yonks that they wanted a new sort of politics, parties working together, that the sum would be better than the parts, that they didn't like governments to be formed with the support of only 35% or 40% of the electorate etc etc. That was the LibDem pitch, not the Conservative one. So, having finally got what they wanted after many decades, wouldn't you expect them to be pleased and positive about it?
You say unicorn I say normality. I used to live in Australia and have family in Canada. I compare us to them and say we should be like them. Independent nations with an FTA. What is unicorn about that?
How long did it take for Aus and Canada to negotiate their FTAs? And notice the use of the plural, you need an FTA with each major trading Nation/Block. Without a WA-Brexit the UK will be on WTO tariffs for years.
I don't know why you think Ed Davey is such a positive force for "being involved in Government" and Jo Swinson isn't but that's your view to which you are entitled.
Jo served in the Coalition Government as well but "being involved in Government" next time won't be the same. I merely point out the lessons of the 2010-15 experience haven't been lost on the LDs. If of course you see the LD role as simply being there to prop up Conservative Government ad infinitum you are going to be disappointed and perhaps a prolonged spell in Opposition may be no bad thing as your Party looks tired, divided and lacking in any kind of meaningful direction.
The LibDems have drawn the wrong lessons from the coalition experience. They should celebrate it - which shouldn't be hard, given that it was the best government for decades and better than anything we're likely to get in the years to come. Instead they seem to think it was a disaster. It's a really bizarre way to try to get votes, even at a time when Labour and the Tories are shovelling votes in your direction.
The Tories have drawn the wrong lesson, seeing it and their partners as something to be killed off. If the Tories had celebrated it, we and they might all be in a much better position right now
I don't know why you think Ed Davey is such a positive force for "being involved in Government" and Jo Swinson isn't but that's your view to which you are entitled.
Jo served in the Coalition Government as well but "being involved in Government" next time won't be the same. I merely point out the lessons of the 2010-15 experience haven't been lost on the LDs. If of course you see the LD role as simply being there to prop up Conservative Government ad infinitum you are going to be disappointed and perhaps a prolonged spell in Opposition may be no bad thing as your Party looks tired, divided and lacking in any kind of meaningful direction.
The LibDems have drawn the wrong lessons from the coalition experience. They should celebrate it - which shouldn't be hard, given that it was the best government for decades and better than anything we're likely to get in the years to come. Instead they seem to think it was a disaster. It's a really bizarre way to try to get votes, even at a time when Labour and the Tories are shovelling votes in your direction.
That is a very Conservative way of looking at it.
The 'why can't a woman be more like a man (or at least proud to be associated with men)' outlook, not uncommon among the committed supporter.
With regards to Corbyn and Election be Brexit, I don't see how he is vindicated if we are moving towards an election. The pressure on Brexit for a referendum isn't because they want the Labour Party to be campaigning for leave. Which is what Corbyn will be arguing for in a general election campaign.
Corbyn and his supporters bang on about an election because they think he won in 2017 and will definitely win next time. He won't - compare and contrast the Labour message of "renegotiate then leave in a way that leave supporters don't consider to be leave" with Brexit / Boris Tories leave immediately, and with progressive parties Remain. Labour and Corbyn will get absolutely smashed. At which point Skwarkbox and McCluskey will first declare moral victory. Then attack everyone who isn't still pledging fealty as to blame
An interesting positive straw in the wind for the Roryites hoping he'll make the 33 threshold has been the slow or lack of further endorsements for the second ballot of his rivals.
Gove and Rabb have added one and Javid and Hunt none. Stewart has added four and he significantly outperformed his declared backers last time. He needs to do so again to progress.
Yes, I think he'll probably make the 33.
I'd certainly like to see Stewart in the next round. He's shaken the race up and taken other candidates out of their comfort zone.
What I thought was instructive last night was the reaction of the other candidates. They couldn't understand why Stewart wasn't following normal debate tactics and were off balance as he poured forth and took the audience with him. Hunt eventually realized this and improved through the debate.
On Hunt I've been surprised by his lack of traction. Low first round total, indifferent campaign and little momentum.
Comments
There are many voters who dislike die Linke, because of the old but fading connections with the DDR-party (SED). There are also many in the SPD/Greens who are against forming coalitions with die Linke.
But many eastern German voters are, on the whole, left voters and agree with many of the policies that die Linke have. Don't be fooled by British media that all East Germans hated life under socialism. They hated the Stasi, not being allowed free travel and the chronic shortage of imported goods. There were many other areas such as housing, employment, male/female equality and childcare which took a big jump backwards when taken over by the BRD.
Trying to burn bridges even further won't work.
Also a poor showing if he can win 17.4 million votes in the country, but not 130 in his own party...
There are no unicorns.
I doubt we'll get an extension (and Boris doesn't want one).
So I guess you want no deal?
The SPD certainly won't collapse completely in the next few years, as they have such a strong infrastructure and ground support.
https://twitter.com/RoryStewartUK/status/1140550811510091777
The Labour pivot to Remain is coming. And soon.
If he did make it through tomorrow though, I think he'd be on a fairly level playing-field with the others remaining in the pack, come the next round.
Good deal > No deal > Remain > Bad deal
Backstop is a bad deal.
Crowding out simply says that if a government body increases the level of demand for fixed pool of assets those assets will increase in price. This will result in some private sector operators being unable to compete - they have been crowded out. I don’t think it’s particularly ideological
In the BBC’s terms, even more simply, because they don’t need to generate an equity return for investors they can afford to pay higher prices for employees. Hence they have a competitive advantage.
This was particularly noticeable when they tried to expand their website into local micro sites. (I think the CMA even got involved?) They put huge pressure on local newspapers and news sites - the BBC saw it as a service/traffic driver so was happy to run at a loss.
What the MPs are doing is choosing the person who will go to the membership along with Boris. The suspicion has to be if that is anyone other than Rory then we may once again have a coronation because the person chosen may concede defeat.
I think Boris needs to be properly tested. Anointing May hid her manifest deficiencies as a campaigner until it was too late. Boris' weakness is more on the policy side but again should be tested by an actual contest. Stewart would test those weaknesses severely as would Gove in fairness. The others, not so much.
you're a remainer, as well as all of the ERG are.
I'd assumed I'd support Jo; great communicator, passionate speaker and she seems ready after a gaffe-free stint as deputy.
Jo won a seat that should never have been Lib Dem; Ed won a more natural seat but with naff all central support. Both impressive achievements, and I admire their sticking power to come back from 2015. However it does seem that Lib Dem priorities have changed from simply "get noticed" which it's been since 2015. Not yet ready to form a Government but I'm now thinking more seriously about policy, who could build alliances and negotiate deals if needed.
Still leaning Jo, I simply think that she can take opponents apart more easily. She sliced Barry Gardiner into pieces on the local election results show this year and I've no doubt she could do the same to Corbyn. My main fear was that she'd turn the Lib Dems into the 'gender neutral bathroom' party which would be a big turn off for me - but she seems rooted in Brexit, green economy and anticipating tech changes to the workplace which seem the right priorities. I can't see Ed having quite the same impact against opponents, does he have the star quality that is needed in a Lib Dem leader? Is he Jeremy Hunt to Swinson's Rory Stewart?
But Ed is having a stronger leadership campaign than I'd anticipated. Still 60:40 for Jo but that's closer than it was a fortnight ago.
I suspect he will wait until he is done making money and then retire to the Lords
future leadership?
https://twitter.com/thomasmessenger/status/1140540856723746816
https://twitter.com/rorystewartuk/status/1140551406610452481?s=21
Or are the opinion poll budgets fairly empty after recent political excitement?
The problem is that the MPs chose two people who were unsuited for the job - even if it had got through to the members' vote, they would have had Hobson's choice.
The MPs should contemplate whether they should make that same mistake again.
In what way is he a “big player”?
* excluding Brexit because there are lots of other big names who have arguably been more effective than him on his side of the argument
Scenario - Javid, Rabb, Stewart and Gove all fail to pass the 33 vote hurdle. Hunt barely improves and Boris is streets ahead :
Boris - 152
Hunt - 48
........................
Gove -32
Stewart- 31
Rabb - 25
Javid - 25
There has been a lot of talk about the next leader being a woman as well.
Meanwhile, the buffoon who declared himself unfit to lead his party 2 years ago is a shoo-in for the job.
Funny old game.
But a new PM getting the gig with the support of less than half the MPs, and then having to do something controversial? That seems... brave...
(Plus it is too short IMO)
Tend to think that Hunt is more likely to lose support than Gove. Hunt has really struggled to make a compelling pitch, and he was short of the numbers in the first round that would have made the case for him.
Traditionally the PM was offered an earldom but since life peerages it has become the norm for former PM's to take that route should they desire.
Thatcher recommended Macmillan and Speaker Thomas for a viscountcy and Denis got a baronetcy.
What Labour can do is oppose a Tory Brexit (any Tory Brexit) and try to force the only thing that will allow them to enter government and take over the Brexit process - a general election. At which point there is not a shadow of a doubt that they will make a commitment to Ref2. The Labour position is, has been for quite some time, perfectly clear, perfectly reasonable. The bottom line is that the referendum comes only with a Labour government. And a Labour government comes with the referendum.
Way I see things (possibly) panning out:
1. Boris wins autumn general election and we Brexit.
2. Jezza resigns. Labour elects a more centrist leader.
3. Boris loses 2024 general election.
4. Rory Stewart becomes Con leader.
Suddenly by 2025 we're back Lab and Con being center left and center right parties and the previous ten years seems a bit like Pam's dream in Dallas.
Given our experience of "having a significant role in Government" last time, you'll forgive me if I take the view the spoon isn't long enough for the Party to sup with either your lot or Corbyn but if circumstances compelled otherwise, I'd demand STV implemented for all elections without a referendum before any kind of negotiation.
The prospect of having to deal with Johnson, Corbyn or Farage is truly stomach-churning but be assured the next time the LDs find themselves with the balance of power the price of our support will be higher than you can possibly imagine.
The Good Friday agreement means that there will be no borders between the UK and EU
No Referendum without PM Corbyn.
No PM Corbyn without the Referendum.
That is the essential political algebra.
I also can't see him being leader of the Lib Dems anytime soon either. He's been in four 'parties' (okay, three and independent) this year alone and that's going to count against him. He's giving Winston McKenzie a run for his money at this rate, and his many past tweets dissing the LD will be brought up time and time again.
If there's no Farage Boris pact then all bets are off, the huge vote split would leave many Remainers feeling more comfortable denying Corbyn their vote, and we could see scenarios playing out like all the recent yougov polls.
Gove and Rabb have added one and Javid and Hunt none. Stewart has added four and he significantly outperformed his declared backers last time. He needs to do so again to progress.
OTOH, if we move to either (i) small state, deregulated laissez faire, or (ii) big state, egalitarian socialism - that is quite a different matter. Then we would genuinely be using our new found 'freedom'.
This is all hypothetical, of course, if Labour win a pre-Brexit election and Remain wins the resulting 2nd referendum. Which is eminently possible IMO.
Jo served in the Coalition Government as well but "being involved in Government" next time won't be the same. I merely point out the lessons of the 2010-15 experience haven't been lost on the LDs. If of course you see the LD role as simply being there to prop up Conservative Government ad infinitum you are going to be disappointed and perhaps a prolonged spell in Opposition may be no bad thing as your Party looks tired, divided and lacking in any kind of meaningful direction.
Don't listen to the right wing press who will say the country is in a rudderless crisis. The previous government functioned perfectly well for the 6 weeks with no parliamentary support during the GE campaign and can easily cope with another couple of months with no new legislation.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1140569652705341440
Corbyn and his supporters bang on about an election because they think he won in 2017 and will definitely win next time. He won't - compare and contrast the Labour message of "renegotiate then leave in a way that leave supporters don't consider to be leave" with Brexit / Boris Tories leave immediately, and with progressive parties Remain. Labour and Corbyn will get absolutely smashed. At which point Skwarkbox and McCluskey will first declare moral victory. Then attack everyone who isn't still pledging fealty as to blame
What I thought was instructive last night was the reaction of the other candidates. They couldn't understand why Stewart wasn't following normal debate tactics and were off balance as he poured forth and took the audience with him. Hunt eventually realized this and improved through the debate.
On Hunt I've been surprised by his lack of traction. Low first round total, indifferent campaign and little momentum.