Another eventful 24 hrs. Quick thread on some of the reasons why, despite the first Con to Lab defection since the Blair years, and first call for Johnson to resign from a senior figure (David Davis, former Brexit secretary and leadership contender), Johnson looks more secure 1/?
The defection paradox: Having an MP join the opposition looks even worse than having an MP call for your resignation. But it isn't. MPs calling for a change of leader can see this as loyalty to party over leader. But defection to the opposition is betrayal, pure and simple
The stories have dried up: As far as I can see there have been no new revelations of parties since late last week. The most destabilising events this week have been reactions to stories already out there - Cummings' accusation, Johnson's interview with Beth Rigby
Lots of excitement last night, but in the cold light of a wet Manchester morning I'm still a little sceptical that the confidence vote in Johnson will arrive immediately. Feels like we've been here before, with Theresa May, in autumn 2018
Five reasons for scepticism: 1. Main contenders for the job don't seem to want a contest right now (and will presumably have some sway over many of their followers) 2. Delay always easier than decision and ST reason to wait is available - "lets wait for Sue Gray report"
3. There is medium term reason to delay too - better for new leader to have April's energy price rises and May's potentially bad local election results out of the way before taking office
Perhaps "the people partying in Downing Street were massively out of touch with what lockdown was like for everyone else " works as an explanation for what happened.
It certainly doesn't work as a defence - this (along with lying & hypocrisy) is what people are angry about.
It might also be pointed out that another way in which "Whitehall's pandemic was markedly different" is that senior policymakers knew far more about the horrible conditions NHS workers were enduring in this period. It might be hoped this knowledge wld influence their behaviour.
To be clear - I'm not saying Seb or any of those quoted are offering a defence of this behaviour in this article.
Looks like there will be a report on academic freedom shortly, presenting results of a survey of 650 academics including 300 professors from UK, Aus, US, Canada. One of those professors was, I think, me. Here's what I thought of the survey in June 2021
I don't know if they completed the survey (as I did) but provide some further illustration that those with survey research expertise issues with the question wordings used in this survey at the time
I think Cummings is right here - this is a faulty inference from social media, where there are two very active "sides" with intense and increasingly entrenched prefs. Polling shows public aren't like that at all on Covid though - instinctively cautious & responsive to new info
This is also what we would expect from incentives. Brexit encourages expressive preferences signalling tribal affiliation because stakes are v low for most people. COVID incentivises accuracy and responsiveness because stakes are high (literally life & death
I also don't think there's much meaningful read-across from Brexit to COVID attitudes, again due to incentives. Leave elites have tried to push libertarian, anti-mask, anti-lockdown messages. Fallen flat w/Leave voters (older, poorer) who don't buy into ideas that cld kill them
The puzzling thing about this is that many of Corbyn's advisors correctly diagnosed the 2019 launch of ChuK/TIG as a doomed enterprise given the electoral system and Labour's profile and organisational dominance. Why would they assume a Corb/PJPP would do any better?
On the one hand, there probably is a more geographically concentrated radical left-Corbyn sympathetic vote, and Corbyn is a higher profile figure than any of the TiGgers. On the other hand, the strongest seats for a Corb/PJPP would be seats where Lab is *very* dominant
Main impact of ChUK-TIG was to remove a number of Labour MPs who were never on board with Corbyn's leadership. Most were replaced with pro-Corbyn (or at least Corbyn-accepting) MPs. Would be ironic if Corbyn himself now performed the same service for his successor