UK Politics: What about a Masquerade?

[Derfel Cadarn]

8 hours ago, Werthead said:

The Sunday Times has another piece on an apparently growing movement in government to consider following the Trump model of re-opening the economy early. Michael Gove and Chancellor Rishi Sunak are apparently now in favour of opening the economy before the numbers fall to a safe level, and Dominic Raab is apparently open to the argument. Matt Hancock is vehemently opposed on the not-unreasonable grounds that it's lunacy.

No decision likely to be made before Johnson returns to duty and the lockdown has been extended into May anyway, but that sounds like a recipe for disaster. I can't see it flying.

Lots of reports hurling around about The Times breaking ranks and effectively attacking Johnson today, with rumours that Murdoch has lost faith in Johnson and wants Gove to replace him. Not sure how exposing the early-exit strategy helps in that case, as the lockdown retains broad public support for the moment. Replacing Johnson with Gove - if even possible, given how many Tory MPs know they're in power almost solely down to Johnson's profile - would also ensure they lose the next election very handily. Possibly Murdoch is losing it, or thinks in a worst-case scenario Starmer as PM would be infinitely preferable to Corbyn, or a Johnson he is no longer on good terms with.

Just think of all the money we’d save on elections if we just cut out the middle man (the electorate) and let Murdoch just pick the government directly.

[Which Tyler]

9 hours ago, Werthead said:

My condolences, very sorry to hear that.

 

6 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

My deepest condolences to you and all your family, Which Tyler.

Thank you both.

She was a fairly distant aunt (actually, my step-mother's aunt-in-law... Though I saw her most years) and I'm sure others have lost closer relatives, and I wouldn't be surprised if we've lost a board member personally.
I was down when I heard the news (and posted) but was more interested in the point about Covid not even being considered as the cause of death in an 87 year old obese diabetic with a mystery, likely-non-bacterial chest infection that involved a new and persistent cough, temperature over 38*, muscle ache and anosmia, when the virus is known to be elsewhere in her nursing home (including a couple of staff members in self-isolation).

Now, I don't know what her death certificate will say, but I got the impression that it wouldn't even record "pneumonia" - I'm more angry, than sad this morning.

[Werthead]

Reports this morning that Johnson is dead-set against lifting the lockdown too early, so it sounds like battle lines are being drawn.

Quote

I'm not sure why Murdoch would think Gove would win a leadership contest even if Johnson stepped down given that his last two leadership bids both flopped.

On terms of broad public popularity, which will translate into Tory ranks to some degree, Matt Hancock would probably win quite handily. Gove I think it is really a busted flush and I can't see Raab doing well either. Sajid Javid I think would throw his hat into the ring again.

I think it's a fairly academic point. Most Conservatives know that Boris was a key part of their victory last time and without him, with any other leader in place, they will struggle against a Labour Party which it is hard to imagine will be far less disunited and in turmoil as last time.

The Tories would also have an awkward problem in that they have been fairly consistent in holding elections have voting in a new leader mid-term (or in this case very early-term). They held elections in 2017 and 2019 after getting a new leader in, and were vitriolic on the point of Brown taking over from Blair in 2007 without an election. There would be strong calls for a new general election to be held if a new PM was installed, and they would have to be cautious about doing that and also about refusing to do it.

[Spockydog]

They wouldn't dare risk an election. Even if Bozo relapsed and died, we wouldn't go to the polls until 2024.

[Werthead]

2 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

They wouldn't dare risk an election. Even if Bozo relapsed and died, we wouldn't go to the polls until 2024.

It would depend if a new leader was going to tear up the 2019 manifesto and instituted broad policy changes which had not been approved of in the election. The bigger the changes, the more difficult it becomes to implement without going back to the country, especially if the new PM walked back on the promises to massively invest in northern towns and cities and to boost the NHS (especially now).

The Conservative Party has immense, numerous and long-standing faults but to its credit it has never gone as completely off the deep end into open hypocrisy as say the Republican Party (although it has been getting closer every year). If such a situation arose, it would be interesting to see if they finally committed to losing their last shreds of dignity and went down that same path.

[mormont]

8 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Most Conservatives know that Boris was a key part of their victory last time

It's a moot point as long as they believe he was a key part of their victory last time, but I'm not so sure he actually was. He certainly had a pretty dismal campaign.

ps bet your last pound that in the unlikely event of a vacancy, Priti Patel will be sounding out colleagues with a view to running.

[Heartofice]

6 minutes ago, mormont said:

It's a moot point as long as they believe he was a key part of their victory last time, but I'm not so sure he actually was. He certainly had a pretty dismal campaign.

ps bet your last pound that in the unlikely event of a vacancy, Priti Patel will be sounding out colleagues with a view to running.

He personally didn't do much on the campaign trail that was helpful, but it was basically irrelevant because the change that won him the election had already happened by that point. Compare and contrast his leadership with May and his handingly of Brexit and that's where his key role in he election victory happened. 

Anyway, any talk of a leadership contest right now is hilariously misjudged. The Tory lead right now is still massive, Boris' approval ratings have been shooting up. 

[ljkeane]

31 minutes ago, Werthead said:

with any other leader in place, they will struggle against a Labour Party which it is hard to imagine will be far less disunited and in turmoil as last time.

I doubt it. The SNP taking their formerly safe Scottish seats has really fucked Labour's chances for the forseeable future. It'd have to be an absolute disaster performance from the Tories for them to outright lose an election to Labour. Not completely beyond the realms of possibility but I don't think we're anywhere close to that at the moment.

[Spockydog]

35 minutes ago, Werthead said:

It would depend if a new leader was going to tear up the 2019 manifesto and instituted broad policy changes which had not been approved of in the election. The bigger the changes, the more difficult it becomes to implement without going back to the country, especially if the new PM walked back on the promises to massively invest in northern towns and cities and to boost the NHS (especially now).

The Conservative Party has immense, numerous and long-standing faults but to its credit it has never gone as completely off the deep end into open hypocrisy as say the Republican Party (although it has been getting closer every year). If such a situation arose, it would be interesting to see if they finally committed to losing their last shreds of dignity and went down that same path.

Broken manifesto promises mean absolutely nothing to the Tories. And the vast majority of the people who vote for them. We all know that.

With Starmer in place, and with every passing day looking more and more like PM in waiting, there is no way these chumps are going to risk it.

Even if the Tories broke every single manifesto promise, there is no legal or constitutional recourse for voters, and nothing at all to force them to call another election. That's how democratic our nation is. 

[Spockydog]

22 minutes ago, ljkeane said:

I doubt it. The SNP taking their formerly safe Scottish seats has really fucked Labour's chances for the forseeable future. It'd have to be an absolute disaster performance from the Tories for them to outright lose an election to Labour. 

Fair point, but you also have to factor in the Tories having to hold onto their nice, freshly painted Blue Wall.

Does anyone seriously believe Bozo will fulfil his promises to those voters?

 

 

[Maltaran]

4 hours ago, ljkeane said:

I doubt it. The SNP taking their formerly safe Scottish seats has really fucked Labour's chances for the forseeable future. It'd have to be an absolute disaster performance from the Tories for them to outright lose an election to Labour. Not completely beyond the realms of possibility but I don't think we're anywhere close to that at the moment.

Labour not winning outright doesn't mean the Tories can't lose, it just means there's a higher likelihood of either a minority government or a coalition involving the SNP.

[ljkeane]

1 hour ago, Maltaran said:

Labour not winning outright doesn't mean the Tories can't lose, it just means there's a higher likelihood of either a minority government or a coalition involving the SNP.

Which would probably make things even worse for Labour in the long term. It's pretty much a no win situation for them.

[williamjm]

7 hours ago, Werthead said:

Reports this morning that Johnson is dead-set against lifting the lockdown too early, so it sounds like battle lines are being drawn.

I saw a quote in the report that one of the things he was worried about was the economic impact of letting the virus surge back and then having to re-impose a lockdown. That feels a very Tory way of looking at the problem, maybe it's the best way to get through to some of those who might be agitating for lifting the lockdown early.

On terms of broad public popularity, which will translate into Tory ranks to some degree, Matt Hancock would probably win quite handily. Gove I think it is really a busted flush and I can't see Raab doing well either. Sajid Javid I think would throw his hat into the ring again.

I'd think Jeremy Hunt as the runner-up last time might among the favourites as well if there was a contest. He might face some pointed questions about his record as health secretary when it comes to preparedness but the others could also face questions about more recent issues.

That said, I agree with you that it's academic for now as long as Boris recovers enough to take up his position.

[polishgenius]

If that all scans, then I mean seriously.

[Heartofice]

3 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

If that all scans, then I mean seriously.

Never heard about this but look at her profile blurb! 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Talking about the outcomes of the unlikely scenario of Johnson getting offed by the Tory party with that seriousness here, is the unrefutable evidence for our boarders qualification as politicians.

[A wilding]

To go back to that link HoI posted yesterday to some spin that the government put out on gov.uk defending their handling of the pandemic:

One of the authorities they quoted in their defence was Richard Horton, editor of the prestigious medical journal The Lancet.  He has come out today accusing the government of quoting him out of context and of "deliberately rewriting history in its ongoing COVID-19 disinformation campaign."

https://twitter.com/richardhorton1/status/1252183975893884933

Somehow I am not surprised ...

 

[Heartofice]

To go back to the conspiracy that Polish*genius* posted by some crank on the internet that the government was creating false accounts on twitter to support the government (seeming to not notice the obvious parody nature of those accounts in the first place). This has been strenuously denied and been labelled as dangerous disinfomation. 
 

 

[Raja]

11 hours ago, A wilding said:

 

One of the authorities they quoted in their defence was Richard Horton, editor of the prestigious medical journal The Lancet.

 

Yeah, I saw this thread. The blog also consistently talks about the the WHO declaring covid 19 a pandemic very late, but it fails to mention that on Jan 31st, the WHO declared it a public health emergency of international concern.

Even if you buy that, there's also this bit

( Edit - I'm not one of those who thinks that questioning the WHO is out of bounds, but that blog post was as poor as it gets, in my opinion)

[polishgenius]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

To go back to the conspiracy that Polish*genius* posted by some crank on the internet that the government was creating false accounts on twitter to support the government (seeming to not notice the obvious parody nature of those accounts in the first place). This has been strenuously denied and been labelled as dangerous disinfomation. 
 

 

 

It's interesting that I mentioned the if it turns out to be true in my post, something you've conveniently ignored when trying to mock me, but the moment the govt has come out with a denial - a denial with absolutely no specific rebutal of any of the things he claimed - you're desparate to swallow it.