Conservative leadership election

[beesley]

So which candidates are against No Deal and which are for it?

Explicitly favour of a no deal or 'managed exit.'

Esther McVey
Andrea Leadsom

Hopeful for a deal but prepared for a no deal in order to leave on 31st Oct

Boris Johnson
Dominic Raab
Sajid Javid

Hopeful for a deal and would extend A50 in order to see it happen, but not ruling out no deal

Michael Gove
Jeremy Hunt

Have their own plan to avoid no deal but not opposed to no deal if said plan fails

Mark Harper
Matt Hancock

Explicitly opposed to no deal - if nothing can be achieved they will only leave on Theresa May's deal

Rory Stewart

Dominic "ABOLISH PARLIAMENT" Raab is gung-ho for no deal shurely?

There's a difference between him  and McVey - he wants to seek a deal but doesn't find no deal a problem at all, whereas McVey won't even bother renegotiating.

[beesley]

 

Final declarations/estimate - add a few MPs to each candidate for an accurate reading. 15 mins we'll see how right we were!

[beesley]

Hancock has indeed withdrawn, but appears not to have endorsed anyone else.

Sajid was really coveting that endorsement. I suspect his support will splinter between the non Boris/Raab candidates.

[beesley]

From a British perspective:

Johnson = Biden (biggest frontrunner, gets all the attacks, but he's actually unstoppable and everyone should rally behind him because only he will defeat our evil opponents!)
Hunt = Warren (all about delivering things, electability concerns, no apparent voter base but still doing well)
Gove = Klobuchar (not the best past, not an especially engaging or impressive figure to the wider electorate, but a middle of the road candidate)
Raab = Booker (one of the first to declare, was seen as absolutely amazing for about a day, otherwise not gained any traction, very limited selection of food eaten.)
Javid = Harris (adopting the 'least successful frontrunner' role)
Stewart = Buttigieg (look how great this guy nobody had ever previously heard of is)
Hancock = Beto (uses technology for everything, 'young and dynamic,' but in reality is not the person anybody is looking for)
McVey = Bernie (undecided on how revolutionary they are, pretty polarising, underperforming)
Harper = Ryan (is the candidate who 'hasn't been a part of all the failings of leadership', kinda liked but pretty average)
Leadsom = Inslee (talks about climate change, generally liked by all, just not enough, but will still do slightly better than expected)
Malthouse = Bennet (sort of in the middle of everything, and he may not be the frontrunner, but he's actually what we're looking for, apparently)
Cleverly = Ojeda (military figure, claimed to have millions of supporters, but then dropped out, because they weren't actually doing well)
Gyimah = Delaney (minor figure, opposes the direction of the party completely, pretty unremarkable)

How far do you agree with me?

[beesley]

I'm not a Sanders groupie but blimmin eck, comparing him with McVile is HARSH.

It had to be someone I guess. Not a stan for any of the candidates, but I still appreciated her coming last, although it was kind of expected after 'yeah I'll sack everyone.'

[beesley]

Gyimah = Tulsi, weird ideology, parts of which are very out of line with the party, both the establishment and the base, not kicked out because they're a minority

Despite the fact we chose completely different people for him, they're both awful candidates who have no reason to be running.

The deselection bid against him seems to have faded.

[beesley]

In Canadian Consaervative terms, Rory Stewart = Mike Chong?

To an extent - both are the moderate voice trying to soak up the 'second most common view' base, but Chong is not as exciting or outspoken as Stewart. Considering that parties in Canada are far more united, we probably won't see any of the dynamics.

[beesley]

In Canadian Consaervative terms, Rory Stewart = Mike Chong?

To an extent - both are the moderate voice trying to soak up the 'second most common view' base, but Chong is not as exciting or outspoken as Stewart. Considering that parties in Canada are far more united, we probably won't see any of the dynamics.

Yes

Yeah "token wets".

Though to a small degree, Boris = Maxime Bernier.

Yes - especially because I can imagine Boris flouncing off and shouting from the sidelines if he lost.

[beesley]

Ahead of the second ballot - under these numbers Saj, Raab and Rory would be eliminated.

[beesley]

So who are Raab voters most likely to go to?

Of the public ones, only four are remainers, so Boris Johnson is the most likely. They're also mostly hard leavers like David Davis, Tom Pursglove, Andrea Jenkyns, Chris Green etc. or more libertarian Conservatives (if you can describe them as such) like Geoffrey Clifton-Brown and John Baron. All of them should favour Boris, but considering none of them backed Boris, they may not be so warm to him and go to Gove instead.

Sajid's people say he's in it to win. Dude, why not just drop out?

Why not stay in until you are eliminated? Its about building a profile for the likes of him now.

He wants to be Chancellor I hear.

[beesley]

Post second-round estimate

[beesley]

Out of curiosity, I wonder who May's been voting for? One would presume Hunt but when your own deputy, arguably your closest ally, endorses Rory, it's not hard to wonder.

I've been told she voted Rory - the biggest safeguard to her legacy.

[beesley]

her legacy.

That's the point - because Rory supports the deal she negotiated, theoretically if he got it passed (Lol) she could claim she had achieved something.

[beesley]

So what kind of MPs voted for Stewart in the 2nd ballot but not in the 3rd ballot?

Boris Johnson supporters who wanted Raab to be eliminated ahead of the debate, plus the odd person who switched to Hunt. As a Conservative Party supporter who was considering, I'm glad Stewart was voted out - he's a good guy but I don't think he's right for the job at the moment.

[beesley]

So sad about Rory

 

I'm glad Stewart was voted out - he's a good guy but I don't think he's right for the job at the moment.

This is very cruel and insensible!

More seriously, are you implying Boris Johnson and the others fit for the job, at this moment or at any time? I would consider someone with experience in the MI6...

Cruel? Give over. I have a higher opinion of Rory than most other Tory supporters. Rory Stewart's Brexit plan was the least feasible given the situation in Parliament, and he's had the least experience in government compared to the remaining four. None of them are particularly perfect but I would feel more comfortable being led by them, having lived in the UK for sometime now, I've formed my own opinions on them. I'd certainly prefer one of them to a Corbyn government with a lot of Lib Dems and Brexit MPs, which is not impossible.

[beesley]

Gove backer Mel Stride saying he doesn't believe Team Boris engineered things.

So he was kind of like the British John Kasich?

The analogies only go so far.
Every last Republican would be considered a frothing madman in the UK.

The Tories are right of center and closer to the Dem party than Labour. GOP is Brexit party, but that doesn't make for convenient comparisons.

How about the Republicans being like the DUP?

Well, they have certain tendencies which you find in the Republicans but not so much in other UK parties, mainly those associated with the Christian Right, but overall Northern Ireland politics is sufficiently weird that comparisons don't work that well.

IMO most British Conservatives would be Republicans if they'd launched a US political career, and most US Democrats would either be Labour or Lib Dem in the UK, and would adjust their positions on issues where the countries are particularly different politically (guns, healthcare, Christian Right stuff).  I'm sure there are exceptions but in general I think Democrats aren't motivated by the same sorts of things as Tories and vice versa, except of course where they're mainly motivated by whatever suits their own careers best.

I agree with you. I'd argue it would be far easier for a British politician to gain mild success in America than vice versa. The sort of US politicians who could climb their way the British ladder are the low-key but relatively high-quality moderates - .e.g. Greg Walden for the Republicans, and quite a few Democrats - someone like Denny Heck or Mike Quigley would fit in well as an average Labour MP. Things like gun control in the US are purely circumstantial and only in the case of someone like Justin Amash (who would have no hope here) could you argue for gun rights in the UK to the extent they would in the US, so I'd ignore them.

[beesley]

As a Conservative supporter (not a member), I really hope Jeremy Hunt wins the election. Not because I'm one of the remainer Conservatives, but because I think he'd be a far better PM. He'd be more likely to get an improved Brexit deal, plus he'd lead the Conservatives so we get some reasonably effective governance for longer, rather than the next chapter of the Boris Johnson story. He might fail to unite them, but there are still a lot of Conservative MPs opposed to Boris too. You might disagree to the extent of Jeremy's achievements, but the idea that Boris has had so many great accomplishments is fantasy - he simply gets all the credit for things that happened during his term. - many good executives at TfL for example left at the end of Boris' mayoralty/at the beginning of Khan's mayoralty (partly due to dissatisfaction with the awful job Khan's doing.) His term as foreign secretary was not a great success. Hunt actually is prepared to be held to account, showing up to these debates and delivering more detailed policy ideas. He's also a family man and doesn't have all the domestic troubles - I know it's private, but it's still a quality. Unfortunately, I'm not sure Hunt can pull it off - there's a good chunk of the membership whose only idea of Brexit involves Boris Johnson, but who knows, it is British politics after all.

[beesley]

As a Conservative supporter (not a member), I really hope Jeremy Hunt wins the election. Not because I'm one of the remainer Conservatives, but because I think he'd be a far better PM. He'd be more likely to get an improved Brexit deal, plus he'd lead the Conservatives so we get some reasonably effective governance for longer, rather than the next chapter of the Boris Johnson story. He might fail to unite them, but there are still a lot of Conservative MPs opposed to Boris too. You might disagree to the extent of Jeremy's achievements, but the idea that Boris has had so many great accomplishments is fantasy - he simply gets all the credit for things that happened during his term. - many good executives at TfL for example left at the end of Boris' mayoralty/at the beginning of Khan's mayoralty (partly due to dissatisfaction with the awful job Khan's doing.) His term as foreign secretary was not a great success. Hunt actually is prepared to be held to account, showing up to these debates and delivering more detailed policy ideas. He's also a family man and doesn't have all the domestic troubles - I know it's private, but it's still a quality. Unfortunately, I'm not sure Hunt can pull it off - there's a good chunk of the membership whose only idea of Brexit involves Boris Johnson, but who knows, it is British politics after all.

There is going to be no better Brexit deal. It is not happening. Patience with the British has run out in europe, even in this country where our government has traditionally been very open to british demands. Our papers are full of editorials essentially calling for Britain to **** off without a deal and let us move on. Even our infuential anglophile business associations are saying the Integrity of the Single Market is far more important than any British market. Europe is not exactly happy about a no deal but it has been preparing for it for more than a year. It can take no-deal, and will call the British bluff, if necessary. Any British politician telling you they will magically force consessions from the EU is selling you a pipe dream.

Otherwise full agreement with your post.

I mean, I'm as fed up with the British procrastinating as any political observer but EU diplomats have apparently been privately saying that, while the EU remains resistant to reopening the WA, they could still add to it in addition to potentially rewriting the political declaration on a future relationship & wrapping the whole thing up in a new umbrella deal, so it's hypothetically not out of the realm of possibility that we could see something that's marketed as "an improved Brexit deal" emerge out of all of this.

Exactly. I understand that this leadership contest is taking far too long, but the resulting pressure to do something in the last few months should be spent doing something meaningful and attempting to change the circumstances. The pressure of no deal does exist now, and although it should be kept as an option, wouldn't it be at least better to aim for a new deal? If the EU don't budge on a deal, then they know what's coming. But if we at least want the chance to do better, we should at least pick a Prime Minister who has a chance of doing so.

[beesley]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen.

What is the logic behind preferring No Deal to a Withdrawal Agreement that was both popular in Parliament and in the country at large?

[beesley]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen.

What is the logic behind preferring No Deal to a Withdrawal Agreement that was both popular in Parliament and in the country at large?

1) it isn't popular in parliament or in the country.

2) If you're going to exit the EU, exit the EU. Withdrawal is Brexit in name only.

3) Get the issue over with. If you do fake Brexit, no matter what happens, Remainers and Brexiteers can claim that the economy failed/didn't fail because their option won out. If you do a real Brexit, there is no question. If the economy tanks, it unambiguously means Brexit was wrong and Tories should be punished. If nothing happens (and it probably will) then it unambiguously means that the Remainers are hysterical children who should never be trusted with power.

I was referring to any withdrawal agreement, not the existing withdrawal agreement. I'm not stupid enough to think that May's deal was popular in Parliament or the country...
I do live in the UK and I understand the political issues. You haven't given me any practical reasons why a no deal Brexit would be preferable to any improved deal for the economy and trade etc. if such a deal were to be achieved. And in regards to your third point, a new point of division a la the referendum is not a tenable option of the country as a whole wants to 'get this over with' and move on to other things.

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen.

What is the logic behind preferring No Deal to a Withdrawal Agreement that was both popular in Parliament and in the country at large?

1) it isn't popular in parliament or in the country.

2) If you're going to exit the EU, exit the EU. Withdrawal is Brexit in name only.

3) Get the issue over with. If you do fake Brexit, no matter what happens, Remainers and Brexiteers can claim that the economy failed/didn't fail because their option won out. If you do a real Brexit, there is no question. If the economy tanks, it unambiguously means Brexit was wrong and Tories should be punished. If nothing happens (and it probably will) then it unambiguously means that the Remainers are hysterical children who should never be trusted with power.

Number 1's importance isn't even comparable to the other two. The Overton Window has shifted so much these past three years (Thanks to Farage and Tory incompetence) that recently a poll found close to 40% of the country supported No Deal. That's not just a overwhelming majority of Leave voters, it's a majority so large that if a politician claims to represent Brexit these days it's required to support No Deal in some form.

Also, a no-deal Brexit wouldn't come close to getting the issue 'over with'. As soon as the UK approached the EU for talks on a new arrangement (FTA, Canada +++, whatever), the EU will make a precondition of talks that the UK accept the WA in full - backstop, payments, citizens rights. A no-deal scenario would be far more politically untenable and (overconfident assertions to the contrary notwithstanding) economically painful for the UK than the EU, so it is virtually certain the UK will end up having to accept the EU's offer, if only to staunch the self-inflicted bleeding of no-deal.

Indeed.  

[beesley]

Interesting Conservative Home poll - Johnson 72, Hunt 28.

[beesley]

I supported Hunt, and I've voted for both the Lib Dems and the Brexit Party this year, but I'm willing to give Johnson a chance. He may just confound as all.

[beesley]

I've said this before, but now it's official: the UK has had its three worst Prime Ministers in history all serve consecutively. I'm calling that now. History will recognize this decade as the Kingdom's most embarrassing.

Really? Worse than Chamberlain & Eden?

Arguably. Chamberlain and Eden are overly criticised, Cameron unduly lauded.

[beesley]

I supported Hunt, and I've voted for both the Lib Dems and the Brexit Party this year, but I'm willing to give Johnson a chance. He may just confound as all.

Your voting patterns have confounded us all.

The Lib Dem vote was for my local councillor, and the Brexit Party was my option in the EU. Of those the lib dem vote was the one I had more conviction about - my local council has been a disaster under the Conservatives - partly as a result from cuts under Cameron.