Not The Politics Thread.

[Strokes]

2 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Given the national polls, I'd be surprised if Labour won any of West Midlands, Hartlepool and Tees Valley - and was pleasantly surprised by that Welsh poll (maybe the devolved Welsh Labour Govt is also getting a "vaccine bounce").

 

I don't follow W. Midlands politics but Street comes across well to me (as a non-Tory). I don't know much about Byrne, except that he was a Blair/Brown minister & the one who left that note at the Treasury in 2010 to say "sorry, all the money's gone" (silly joke, but I bet he can't believe how much that's been used against him). That W. Midlands vote might be close after vote transfers, though, as Byrne could get more of the 11% LD/Green votes than Street.

 

"Just a vaccine bounce" might be simplistic - and complacent from a Labour perspective. But I do think the shift in the polls - and probably in the May results - is down to a more optimistic public mood, which might not last. I'm not sure Labour or Starmer are doing much different compared to 2020. The difference is that in 2020, the main focus was the govt's shambolic response to Covid - and Tory/Johnson poll ratings suffered. In 2021, the focus is on vaccine success and the winding-down of lockdown - and Tory/Johnson poll ratings have benefited. 

 

What is complacent is for anyone to assume that the Tory "bounce" will inevitably be short-lived. It might be short-lived, if other important stuff goes wrong - and there's ample scope for that (economic problems, jobs, public services, Brexit issues, Covid resurgence etc.). But it's not inevitable. Important things might go well for the Govt, through luck or good judgment.

 

Some blame Starmer because he's dull or they're not clear what he stands for or he hasn't criticised the govt enough. That's mainly unfair, I think. I don't think voters would've been impressed if he'd spent the pandemic presenting dreams that could only be relevant once the pandemic was over or had slagged the govt much more than he did. The Govt had a very difficult political job, due to Covid, but the Opposition had an almost impossible electoral job due to Covid and then vaccine/lockdown success.

 

Assuming Covid fades into the background a bit, the next year will be crucial for both parties in the long-run (next general election). Johnson will need to somehow maintain the current optimism in what could be difficult times. Starmer will need to ensure people are clear what he stands for. I presume that his focus on "Tory sleaze" is playing a long game to counteract the idea that Johnson is somehow everyone's amusing mate and not part of the despised "corrupt privileged elite". I'm not sure that Labour tactic will work, unless a lot of worse stuff emerges, as rightly or wrongly voters already assume most politicians are dishonest or corrupt to varying degrees.

 

 

 

Wasn’t Liam Byrne the guy that left note saying no money left, when the coalition won office in 2010?

[Bellend Sebastian]

Didn't take long, did it?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/23/dominic-cummings-launches-attack-on-boris-johnson

[Lionator]

3 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Out of curiosity, what do you find awful about Sadiq Khan? Has he had particular policy failures?

As I don't live in London, I only have a superficial impression, but as with Street he comes across quite well to me, compared to many Westminster politicians of every party.

 

In West Mids, as well as the factors you mention and the current mood of vaccine optimism, maybe Labour is polling more poorly than you'd expect because it includes a number of "red wall" areas where the Tories got good swings in 2019 (Wolverhampton, Walsall, Dudley, Coventry etc.)?

The Metro Mayors in general have been pretty good. Burnham and Rotherham in Manchester and Merseyside have been great, for balance, Houchen in Tees Valley has delivered what he promised. Sadiq is also probably the best of the London mayors we've had so far against the poison he's faced.

 

Basically it's time to transfer more power away from Westminster and work towards a more federal England. Give local area's more say in their own political decisions.

[foxile5]

1 hour ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

Didn't take long, did it?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/apr/23/dominic-cummings-launches-attack-on-boris-johnson

Cummings is an unsavoury character. 

[Lionator]

47 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

Cummings is an unsavoury character. 

You play with feathers, you get your *rse tickled.

[CosbehFox]

3 hours ago, Strokes said:

Wasn’t Liam Byrne the guy that left note saying no money left, when the coalition won office in 2010?

Yeah blokes a nob. His posted campaign pamphlet is full of spelling errors and his staffers are leaving daily. 

[CosbehFox]

6 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

Both those mayoral elections were very close last time and took place when Labour were twice as far behind in the polls. Incumbency is a factor and certainly I’ve heard Andy Street is well liked across the spectrum, as you mention, but it still seems pretty poor to be that far behind, not taken seriously enough and poor candidate maybe.
 

Exactly the same the other way round with London, albeit with the fundamentals almost certainly worse there for the Cons.

Sadiq Khan is truly awful (I say that have voted for him last time) but the Cons have seemingly given up on London (something they can ill afford to do), chose a terrible candidate and made no effort

He’s done well on pushing on with the trams and the train services in Birmingham. In the process of opening up a new line through the city. Commonwealth Games boost as well. 
 

He’s earnt a lot of respect by not being showy. He’s a traditional politician rather than a culture war, tweeting egomaniac. 

[Kopfkino]

15 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Out of curiosity, what do you find awful about Sadiq Khan? Has he had particular policy failures?

As I don't live in London, I only have a superficial impression, but as with Street he comes across quite well to me, compared to many Westminster politicians of every party.

 

In West Mids, as well as the factors you mention and the current mood of vaccine optimism, maybe Labour is polling more poorly than you'd expect because it includes a number of "red wall" areas where the Tories got good swings in 2019 (Wolverhampton, Walsall, Dudley, Coventry etc.)?

 

15 hours ago, Dunge said:

Out of interest, what’s so bad about Sadiq Khan? You’re not the first person I’ve heard describe him as useless, but he’s kind of off my radar to the point where I don’t have any particular opinions of him. All I really remember when I think of him are the competing blimp balloons of him and Trump.

Fortunately I’m out of London now and hopefully won’t have to return so it’s likely to fall off my radar.
Since his first year when he brought in Night Tube and sorted out bus fares, he’s achieved nothing. He’s the very type of politician that CardiffFox is referring to that’s the opposite of Andy Street, spends loads of time on photo ops and orchestrating social media, swans off to Brussels and wherever else with little good reason, and blames anyone and everyone else for any problem. 

 

Lionator says he’s the best of London mayors so far, it’s like asking which of Peter Taylor, Craig Levein and Ian Holloway were the best. That they’re all so bad is probably representative of the fact the position is rather cushty and lacks real power and purpose. So actually maybe it’s unfair to call him ‘awful’ given it’s a trait of the office.   But I also compare him to Burnham, Sadiq was whinging on social media and in the ES last year about the tiers and London, whilst Burnham was headline news trying to get extra support from the government. Spoke volumes, ones a signaller and ones a doer.
 

The metro mayors are box ticking exercises for people to pretend we’re doing localism, the London mayor I believe has more it can do but they’re just glorified transport planners. Local politics is pretty woeful in this country isn’t it

 

[StanSP]

Indefensible. 

 

 

 

[RoboFox]

10 hours ago, StanSP said:

Indefensible. 

 

 

 

And Boris's army of dunces are suddenly calling the Mail out for printing bollocks. 

 

You couldn't make it up. 

 

Mind you, it's one of the very few of his promises he's fulfilled. 

 

Edited 26 April 2021 by RoboFox

[CosbehFox]

It’s interesting. A lot of his media supporters have turned against Boris. Rather than dismissing the claims, they have amplified them. Something is afoot. 

[Dunge]

2 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

It’s interesting. A lot of his media supporters have turned against Boris. Rather than dismissing the claims, they have amplified them. Something is afoot. 

I don’t think anything’s afoot as such other than that the guy’s incompetent and people are seizing their opportunity. The Daily Mail hasn’t actually supported Boris for a long time. They’ve spent most of the last year complaining that he’s locking down too much. I don’t quite know who or what the Mail want but they’ve looked like they want someone else in charge of the Conservative party ever since Paul Dacre left. That they’ve gone for Boris doesn’t surprise me. In fact, it’s that way with other right wing papers too. The Express are absolutely in bed with him but the Mail and the Telegraph really not so much.

 

I get the impression he’s a man who’s made a lot of enemies in the media, and indeed generally. And he’s running out of friends.

[Buce]

11 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

It’s interesting. A lot of his media supporters have turned against Boris. Rather than dismissing the claims, they have amplified them. Something is afoot. 

 

They're scared shitless over what Cummings might reveal - apparently he has kept audio files and documents from Cabinet meetings.

 

They'll be falling over themselves to distance themselves from him before the shit hits the fan.

[Sharpe's Fox]

I thought the Daily Mail was a shitrag whose stories were never to believed? I would always wait on stories like that to discern whether the source is reliable or is seconded, but then again I'm a consistent, non-reactionary observer unlike others.

[CosbehFox]

The Daily Mail has followed with this particular part of the story but the Sun and Times have both led with other parts of the leaks. The Sun in particular interesting as their politician correspondent Harry Cole was previously well in with this govt 

[Finnaldo]

14 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

I thought the Daily Mail was a shitrag whose stories were never to believed? I would always wait on stories like that to discern whether the source is reliable or is seconded, but then again I'm a consistent, non-reactionary observer unlike others.

Yeah it’s a very, very steep accusation to make, and I’d need to see a bit of development on the story before outright stating it as objective fact. 
 

Could I see Boris saying this? Given his history, yes.

 

Could I see Boris saying something a lot tamer that’s been massively caked up by the Daily Mail? Absolutely yes, it wouldn’t be the first time they’ve targeted Boris. 
 

It would be a shocking revelation if that’s true, but the Daily Mail doesn’t inspire complete confidence in me that it’s the reality.

[Sharpe's Fox]

9 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

Yeah it’s a very, very steep accusation to make, and I’d need to see a bit of development on the story before outright stating it as objective fact. 
 

Could I see Boris saying this? Given his history, yes.

 

Could I see Boris saying something a lot tamer that’s been massively caked up by the Daily Mail? Absolutely yes, it wouldn’t be the first time they’ve targeted Boris. 
 

It would be a shocking revelation if that’s true, but the Daily Mail doesn’t inspire complete confidence in me that it’s the reality.

Yep its entirely within his character to say something like that. I doubt it will have any affect though for entirely that reason. Crass man says something crass. Who cares?

[Finnaldo]

7 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Yep its entirely within his character to say something like that. I doubt it will have any affect though for entirely that reason. Crass man says something crass. Who cares?

It’ll probably get a short term reaction from the old’uns who are frit to death of Covid and will feel a bit sour, but apart from a bit of a drop in the polls for a couple weeks or so, they’re the Tory base and as you say, they won’t defect permanently over a crass BoJo comment will they?

[Sharpe's Fox]

6 minutes ago, Finnaldo said:

It’ll probably get a short term reaction from the old’uns who are frit to death of Covid and will feel a bit sour, but apart from a bit of a drop in the polls for a couple weeks or so, they’re the Tory base and as you say, they won’t defect permanently over a crass BoJo comment will they?

Think its more likely he will get some grief by liberals for a bit then they’ll move on to the next thing. As long as the Government is giving people what their base care about at the moment which is vaccines then no one will care. I think the Greensill thing is a bigger story but there is no smoking gun relating to Johnson.

[RoboFox]

Peston has confirmed that he understands the accusation to be true, and that Johnson DID say it.

 

 

[Bellend Sebastian]

2 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

It’s interesting. A lot of his media supporters have turned against Boris. Rather than dismissing the claims, they have amplified them. Something is afoot. 

I've seen a few fairly outlandish theories, including that the newspapers want Gove in, and that he's now writing Cummings' unusually coherent and targeted blog posts.

 

Obviously that's quite possibly complete bollocks but there does seem to be a gathering school of thought that when the 'vaccine bounce' wears off, Johnson will become a liability.  I'm fairly astonished at the amount of stuff that's come out without the great British public noticing/caring but the sheer volume of ammunition being stored up to fire at him in any sort of election would be hard to ignore.

 

I would agree, it's interesting. Something's afoot

 

 

[CosbehFox]

1 hour ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

Think its more likely he will get some grief by liberals for a bit then they’ll move on to the next thing. As long as the Government is giving people what their base care about at the moment which is vaccines then no one will care. I think the Greensill thing is a bigger story but there is no smoking gun relating to Johnson.

Don't disagree here. If you were in the opposition, you'd be pushing the flat refurb and Greensill over anything of this nature. 

[Jon the Hat]

Meh.  Is anyone surprised Boris makes even more inflammatory daft statement in private that he does in front of a camera?  Or that Cummings is cumming back to haunt him?

It all comes back to the fact that Boris is completely the wrong leader for this crisis, and one whose mainly libertarian leanings have been completely at odds to what he has had to do throughout.  The sooner we get out of the other side of this and he either gets to be the positive leader he intended, or moves on and lets someone else take over, the better.

[Jon the Hat]

35 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

I've seen a few fairly outlandish theories, including that the newspapers want Gove in, and that he's now writing Cummings' unusually coherent and targeted blog posts.

 

Obviously that's quite possibly complete bollocks but there does seem to be a gathering school of thought that when the 'vaccine bounce' wears off, Johnson will become a liability.  I'm fairly astonished at the amount of stuff that's come out without the great British public noticing/caring but the sheer volume of ammunition being stored up to fire at him in any sort of election would be hard to ignore.

 

I would agree, it's interesting. Something's afoot

 

 

We are definitely into Boris has to stay so he can take the fall territory.

[Sharpe's Fox]

8 minutes ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Don't disagree here. If you were in the opposition, you'd be pushing the flat refurb and Greensill over anything of this nature. 

The Greensill scandal looks worse for the civil servants than the politicians. David Cameron is involved which gives the story some edge but I don't think anyone is surprised he's an immoral slimeball. The opposition trying to pin it to Johnson is a bit pathetic.