UK General Discussion:The Rt. Hon Alex Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Populist Hero

[EastAnglianLefty]

Meanwhile the Business Secretary is self-isolating after displaying coronavirus symptoms at the dispatch box.

So does that mean that BoJo is gonna have to self-isolate for 2 weeks again? Because one can obviously still spread it through contact regardless of one's immunity.

Hard to tell. Initially Tory sources were reporting it wouldn't be a problem anyway, because everybody was more than 2 metres apart. Which a) isn't actually true and b) is not what the self-isolation guidelines say, but then again why would either of those 2 things be a surprise any more?

[CumbrianLefty]

The media was definitely out to get Corbyn, but he and others had an knack of handing them the ammunition to do it, as well as never managing to deal with it effectively.

They adopted a policy of 'ignore first' with any negative press, especially if it came from agitprop rightwing outlets. That probably wasn't the worst approach, especially when, as you rightly point out, they were never going to let him get a win no matter how he played it. Sadly, it also meant that legitimate criticism went unaddressed, to their immense detriment in the long run.

As for them giving ammunition, I think the point is that Corbyn's actions, no matter how banal, were treated as if they were potential ammunition. It's a category error to use the metaphor of ammunition/defense to understand the dynamic.

Yes, in hindsight it is obvious the Corbyn leadership had two options with the generally hostile media - either use the few people in it who *weren't* reflexively totally negative to get out their message as best they could, or alternatively find some genuinely convincing way of bypassing it totally.

In the event, neither happened.

[Serenity Now]

Meanwhile the Business Secretary is self-isolating after displaying coronavirus symptoms at the dispatch box.

So does that mean that BoJo is gonna have to self-isolate for 2 weeks again? Because one can obviously still spread it through contact regardless of one's immunity.

Hard to tell. Initially Tory sources were reporting it wouldn't be a problem anyway, because everybody was more than 2 metres apart. Which a) isn't actually true and b) is not what the self-isolation guidelines say, but then again why would either of those 2 things be a surprise any more?

This reminds me of something very messed up I read in this New Statesman article from the other day. Allegedly the Conservative MP, Robert Halfon (who has cerebral palsy and needs to shield, meaning he is effectively disenfranchised if he cannot vote remotely) spoke directly to Jacob Rees-Mogg about his situation and was simply told: "parliament should be back, it’s got to go back to normal, and to vote in parliament you’ve got to be there.” Totally obstinate attitude.

[CumbrianLefty]

Whoever could have imagined that JRM would be such a blinkered obstinate prat?

[Serenity Now]

Whoever could have imagined that JRM would be such a blinkered obstinate prat?

I'm as shocked as you are..

[DaWN]

Three new polls tonight, all of which show a Tory lead in the region of 2/3 points. The tide has clearly shifted from a few weeks ago - will it shift any further?

[Oryxslayer]

Three new polls tonight, all of which show a Tory lead in the region of 2/3 points. The tide has clearly shifted from a few weeks ago - will it shift any further?

I noticed this earlier as well. Is this just Cummings plus some new leader goodwill for Starmer, or is there something more going on? Either way, it would be funny if in a years time we are in another Blare situation where Labour is well ahead in the polls, but can't capitalize on those numbers for a several years.

[Pericles]

Three new polls tonight, all of which show a Tory lead in the region of 2/3 points. The tide has clearly shifted from a few weeks ago - will it shift any further?

I noticed this earlier as well. Is this just Cummings plus some new leader goodwill for Starmer, or is there something more going on? Either way, it would be funny if in a years time we are in another Blare situation where Labour is well ahead in the polls, but can't capitalize on those numbers for a several years.

That would be an absolute monster swing if it occurred in an election result. Even the swing the Tories received in 2010 against Labour wouldn't be enough for Labour to win the popular vote. On a uniform swing too even a Blair level swing might not be enough for a Labour majority. However if Labour does get such a large swing it would probably be larger in some target seats, though how exactly such a swing would end up playing out is pretty unclear at this early stage.

[brucejoel99]

Three new polls tonight, all of which show a Tory lead in the region of 2/3 points. The tide has clearly shifted from a few weeks ago - will it shift any further?

I noticed this earlier as well. Is this just Cummings plus some new leader goodwill for Starmer, or is there something more going on? Either way, it would be funny if in a years time we are in another Blare situation where Labour is well ahead in the polls, but can't capitalize on those numbers for a several years.

Just wait until the public inquiry. Things aren't gonna get better for the Tories.

[CumbrianLefty]

Three new polls tonight, all of which show a Tory lead in the region of 2/3 points. The tide has clearly shifted from a few weeks ago - will it shift any further?

I noticed this earlier as well. Is this just Cummings plus some new leader goodwill for Starmer, or is there something more going on? Either way, it would be funny if in a years time we are in another Blare situation where Labour is well ahead in the polls, but can't capitalize on those numbers for a several years.

That would be an absolute monster swing if it occurred in an election result. Even the swing the Tories received in 2010 against Labour wouldn't be enough for Labour to win the popular vote. On a uniform swing too even a Blair level swing might not be enough for a Labour majority. However if Labour does get such a large swing it would probably be larger in some target seats, though how exactly such a swing would end up playing out is pretty unclear at this early stage.

In practice (as you alluded to yourself) it almost certainly would be though.

(in part because it is hard to see them not winning a big swathe of Scotland back in that scenario)

[Antonio the Sixth]

Three new polls tonight, all of which show a Tory lead in the region of 2/3 points. The tide has clearly shifted from a few weeks ago - will it shift any further?

I noticed this earlier as well. Is this just Cummings plus some new leader goodwill for Starmer, or is there something more going on? Either way, it would be funny if in a years time we are in another Blare situation where Labour is well ahead in the polls, but can't capitalize on those numbers for a several years.

That would be an absolute monster swing if it occurred in an election result. Even the swing the Tories received in 2010 against Labour wouldn't be enough for Labour to win the popular vote. On a uniform swing too even a Blair level swing might not be enough for a Labour majority. However if Labour does get such a large swing it would probably be larger in some target seats, though how exactly such a swing would end up playing out is pretty unclear at this early stage.

Relevant:

Swing as a meaningful metric is just a myth at this point, honestly (if it was ever worth anything to begin with). Every election is a blank slate.

If you have a situation in which a large majority of the electorate has a strong affinity with either of the two major parties, then swing tends to be very useful as a gauge in that sense; after all, when that is the case then there is a hard limit on the extent to which public opinion can actually shift. When that is not the case (i.e. now, but also before the 1950s) then, yes, every election is a blank slate.

[Blair]

The real canary in the coal mine is the personal ratings of both Starmer & Johnson; Starmer is seen as more competent than Johnson & I can't remember what the specific one personal rating where Starmer was the first Labour Leader for 13 years to be ahead.

I've generally always thought that the personal ratings of the leaders are an equal if not better metric of an election; of course this has just convinced me that they'll ditch Bojo either this year or the next & bring in Rishi (someone who was this time last year a parliamentary under-secretary of state for local government)

[Silent Hunter]

Rishi Sunak could be used in a similar way Major was in Tory electioneering: "What have the Conservatives ever done for British Asians? Made one Prime Minister."

[Corbyn is (no longer) the leader of the Labour Party]

The real canary in the coal mine is the personal ratings of both Starmer & Johnson; Starmer is seen as more competent than Johnson & I can't remember what the specific one personal rating where Starmer was the first Labour Leader for 13 years to be ahead.

I've generally always thought that the personal ratings of the leaders are an equal if not better metric of an election; of course this has just convinced me that they'll ditch Bojo either this year or the next & bring in Rishi (someone who was this time last year a parliamentary under-secretary of state for local government)

Do you really think they'll ditch Boris?

[Blair]

The real canary in the coal mine is the personal ratings of both Starmer & Johnson; Starmer is seen as more competent than Johnson & I can't remember what the specific one personal rating where Starmer was the first Labour Leader for 13 years to be ahead.

I've generally always thought that the personal ratings of the leaders are an equal if not better metric of an election; of course this has just convinced me that they'll ditch Bojo either this year or the next & bring in Rishi (someone who was this time last year a parliamentary under-secretary of state for local government)

Do you really think they'll ditch Boris?

Yes 100%.

Boris doesn't have a loyal followling in the Commons; he was able to get so many MPs to support him in 2019 because a lot of important people in the party saw him as the best vehicle to hitch their wagon to & people backed him while explicity saying he was unfit to be PM- 'he's a sh**t but he's going to win' was I believe the quote from a now cabinet minister.

When you add in the cummings saga which really cut through to Tory MPs, the failure at PMQs & the upcoming economic hit you have a perfect storm- the moment that Tory MPs see this translate into a defeat at the polls they will cut him lose- especialy when Brexit is 'done' after this year.

Governments rarely get more popular in their own party as they go on; MPs miss out on promotion, they see others getting promoted, cabinet members get sacked- it's why by 2005/2006 Tony Blair had a huge group of rebels who weren't actually ideologically against him- they just resented him. We're already seeing that in some of the rebels...

I don't think it will happen via a vote of no-confidence (these were infamously botched under May & he has enough support in the pretty large 2019 intake) but I'd be surprised if he fights the next election.

[Lumine]

While in government the Conservative Party is about as ruthless as it gets when it comes to retaining office by any means, and that absolutely means ditching (the brutality and willingness of it varies) any Prime Minister that is eventually percieved to be an electoral liability, regardless of how successful the PM in question has been, and certainly regardless of whether they won a landslide or not.

They did it to Thatcher after three victories when she became a liability, missed doing the same to Major by three votes (plus the alternatives were likely to do worse, not better), would have done it to Cameron had he not resigned (no matter how much some pretended to lament his resignation), and they only failed to do it to May much earlier out of a combination of A. plotter incompetence; B. May being so incredibly stubborn; C. a number of "lucky" coincidences preventing May from being ejected right after 2017.

Long story short, the moment Boris is percieved to be a permanent electoral liability - and he seems to be doing an excellent work in that area - they'll ditch him about three seconds with no remorse and no regret whatsoever. Whether they get away with it this time is probably going to depend on whether the Tory brand becomes tainted "Black Wednesday" style by the pandemic response, since from the looks of it they won't have an incompetent opposition to work with.

[Former President tack50]

The real canary in the coal mine is the personal ratings of both Starmer & Johnson; Starmer is seen as more competent than Johnson & I can't remember what the specific one personal rating where Starmer was the first Labour Leader for 13 years to be ahead.

I've generally always thought that the personal ratings of the leaders are an equal if not better metric of an election; of course this has just convinced me that they'll ditch Bojo either this year or the next & bring in Rishi (someone who was this time last year a parliamentary under-secretary of state for local government)

I remember an interesting factoid (might be incorrect though) that the only time that a party has won while losing the "Preferred PM" polls was in 1979 or something like that; while every other time the party who won the preferred PM polls won.

Of course there is a lot of correlation but still interesting to see no splits on that

[Former President tack50]

Also regarding Johnson's abrupt end to his Prime Ministership remember, there are almost 4 and a half years left until the next election, there is certainly plenty of time for Johnson to correct course, or to become more popular or something.

Fun Fact: Prime Minister Milliband's first term would have ended only one month ago

[IceAgeComing]

I am going to create a thread for the Scottish Parliament Elections but I thought I'd post this here just now because I think it says something.

Panelbase did another poll earlier this week for some pro-independence blog (so keep that in mind - but Panelbase are a trustworthy firm so I feel comfortable posting this) which is pretty grim reading for, well, everyone bar the SNP.  All changes are from last month

Westminster Voting Intention:

SNP: 51% (+1)
Con: 21% (-5)
Labour: 19% (+2)
LD: 6% (+1)
Grn: 2% (nc)

(on a uniform swing: would lead to SNP: 58 Lab 1 Con+LD 0 but that wouldn't happen in reality)

Scottish Parliament Voting Intention (constituency/list)

SNP: 53% (nc)/48% (nc)
Con: 21% (-2)/19% (-3)
Lab: 16% (+1)/16% (+1)
LD: 6% (+1)/8% (+1)
Grn: 3% (nc)/7% (+2)

Would result in 72 SNP seats (+9), 25 Con seats (-6), 19 Labour seats (-5), 8 Lib Dem seats (+3) and 5 Greens (-1); an SNP overall majority of 15 in a parliament with PR

Independence Referendum voting intention:

Yes: 52% (+2)
No: 48% (-2)

With Don't Knows:

Yes: 48% (+2)
No: 45% (-1)
DK: 7% (-1)

If that was the result in the Scottish Parliament pro-independence parties would both clearly have a majority of the votes (56%/55%) and seats (60%) and it'd be incredibly tricky, with what they've said before, for the Westminster government to block a second independence referendum.  Would be the best SNP election performance ever; the worst Labour performance ever and the Greens end up losing seats despite gaining votes because of the SNP winning almost every constituency which raises the effective threshold.

I don't think its that surprising though: the Tory performance in 2016 and 17 was all Ruth Davidson; and now she's gone Carlaw is invisible and so the face of the Tories in Scotland is Boris who is, well, about as popular as the Coronavirus.  The almost universal position is that the Scottish government response has been better than the Westminster one; I think that Brexit has done a good job at helping to eliminate the hesitation that some voters had to voting SNP in the past, and I think that broadly being a stable government for the last few years has done a very good job at making them appear very reasonable while Westminster has lurched from election to crisis to crisis to election with three PMs in four years.

[Former President tack50]

If that was the result in the Scottish Parliament pro-independence parties would both clearly have a majority of the votes (56%/55%) and seats (60%) and it'd be incredibly tricky, with what they've said before, for the Westminster government to block a second independence referendum.  Would be the best SNP election performance ever; the worst Labour performance ever and the Greens end up losing seats despite gaining votes because of the SNP winning almost every constituency which raises the effective threshold.

Uh, how would it be hard to stop a 2nd independence referendum? It is up to Johnson to authorize one so if he says no, that is final and there is nothing the Scottish people can do until 2024, if not longer.

If the Sturgeon tries to do one without permission, see: Catalonia 2017.

[DaWN]

It also must be said that the election is in nearly a year's time, there's no telling what state the economy or the job market will be in and how much of that is perceived to be Holyrood's fault, never mind the fact that a strong campaign by either of Labour or the Tories could change things within weeks. There's also the fact that the only time since 2015 Labour have done well in Scotland was 2017, was when they were seen as credibly and seriously challenging for power nationwide. If Labour have a healthy lead in the national polls by then, who knows what could happen.

Also, am I the only one who thinks its really pathetic for Yes that despite everything that's happened, Brexit, Corbyn, Boris, etc. that they can only manage a 4-point lead? I think if indyref2 did happen it would have serious potential to backfire quite significantly on the SNP. We can only hope.

[Former President tack50]

Come to think about it and given the current Scottish polling numbers, an interesting scenario is what happens if the SNP loses its majority and the Greens do not make it in.

Do they lead a minority government regardless? Do they seek confidence and supply from Labour? Or do they go with the Lib Dems?

In any case those all kill Indyref 2 of course.

[EastAnglianLefty]

While in government the Conservative Party is about as ruthless as it gets when it comes to retaining office by any means, and that absolutely means ditching (the brutality and willingness of it varies) any Prime Minister that is eventually percieved to be an electoral liability, regardless of how successful the PM in question has been, and certainly regardless of whether they won a landslide or not.

They did it to Thatcher after three victories when she became a liability, missed doing the same to Major by three votes (plus the alternatives were likely to do worse, not better), would have done it to Cameron had he not resigned (no matter how much some pretended to lament his resignation), and they only failed to do it to May much earlier out of a combination of A. plotter incompetence; B. May being so incredibly stubborn; C. a number of "lucky" coincidences preventing May from being ejected right after 2017.

Long story short, the moment Boris is percieved to be a permanent electoral liability - and he seems to be doing an excellent work in that area - they'll ditch him about three seconds with no remorse and no regret whatsoever. Whether they get away with it this time is probably going to depend on whether the Tory brand becomes tainted "Black Wednesday" style by the pandemic response, since from the looks of it they won't have an incompetent opposition to work with.

The bold attempt in the second paragraph notwithstanding, this take has not survived contact with the May government.

There is a very good chance that Johnson does not fight the 2024 election, but if that happens it's because he decides that he doesn't want to put in the hard work and/or is scared of the reputational damage from losing. If there's a party coup, it will do enough damage to the party that any replacement is going to be tarnished anyway.

The golden age of the men in grey suits is over. It worked with Thatcher because she had some idea of duty to the party. It didn't work with May, but she took the view that "l'état, c'est moi" and it won't work with Johnson because he has no sense of duty to anybody.

[CumbrianLefty]

The real canary in the coal mine is the personal ratings of both Starmer & Johnson; Starmer is seen as more competent than Johnson & I can't remember what the specific one personal rating where Starmer was the first Labour Leader for 13 years to be ahead.

I've generally always thought that the personal ratings of the leaders are an equal if not better metric of an election; of course this has just convinced me that they'll ditch Bojo either this year or the next & bring in Rishi (someone who was this time last year a parliamentary under-secretary of state for local government)

Sunak's stock is perhaps as high now as it will ever be, however.

A big economic downturn could yet sink him.

[Corbyn is (no longer) the leader of the Labour Party]

The SNP has been in government for 13 YEARS, are they showing any drop in support as almost all governments that outstay their welcome do?