Johnson's Downing Street considering an aggressive move to protect their short term interests without considering how it plays out even one step down the line? Stop me if you've heard this one before...
This wizard scheme comes to you courtesy of the same people who managed to engineer an entirely avoidable by-election last autmn by trying and failing to abolish the standards committee in order to protect an MP who then resigned
This magic ruse comes via the ten dimensional chess players who tried and failed to unseat the mildly critical chair of the 1922 committee, thus making an enemy of the man charged with the process of confidence votes in the PM
This genius gambit delivered by the grandmaster strategists who tried and failed to get Chris Grayling elected as a friendly Intelligence Committee chair, and tried repeatedly, and failed repeatedly, to get Paul Dacre appointed as head of OfCom.
All of these failures came when Johnson was a popular PM with a lot of political capital. Just imagine what the team can achieve now their boss's popularity and political authority has collapsed!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Labour holding a substantial lead as best party on immigration is a very unusual situation - Cons reputation as party of immigration control has given them solid leads on this issue going back to the late 1960s
The current Labour lead likely reflects confluence of two trends: 1. Cons lost their big advantage on imm control during coalition (failed "tens of thousands" pledge), never really regained it. 2. Steady and substantial growith in pro-imm electorate, who want *less* control
Conservative right's preference is to target (1) by going after refugees crossing the channel. Problem with this is twofold. First, it may fail to deliver as a policy, further hurting govt with strongly pro-control voters (as net migration pledge did duing coalition).
A short thread on all time low ratings for each Con and Lab leader in each Parliament covered by the IPSOS-MORI polling database (1977-date), to place Johnson's figures in some context
The highest ever Green share in general elections England and Wales was 4%. There are strong reasons to expect quite a lot of tactical squeeze of Green votes if Cons remain as unpopular as now. Could add several points to apparent Lab lead.
This is a mirror image scenario to Cons and UKIP in 2010-15 - Con position looked weaker than it was because of the "revolt on the right" in the polls - but a lot of the blue to purple rebels got squeezed back at election time (in part due to a referendum promise...)
Now its Labour who can apply the squeeze. An incumbent who is toxic on the liberal left will help with that, but negative views of Starmer might be a barrier among Green voters, not all of whom will be willing to vote tactically
Big news in one sense - he's the oldest liberal member of US Supreme Court, so his retirement will enable Biden to lock in the current ideological split while he still narrowly controls Senate
Assuming Biden appoints someone around 45-55 yrs old (as per recent picks), then could be a while until there's another seat vacant given high status professionals can expect to live well into their 80s.
IIRC two recent MPs have ended up losing their seats due to being caught speeding and then lying about it.
I also think most voters would (rightly) conclude that breaking lockdown and then lying about it is a more serious matter than running through a speed gun & lying abt it.
The personal sacrifices involved in following lockdown rules were far greater than those involved in following speed limit. I’m not sure voters who were separated from dying relatives or unable to attend funerals will buy “but this is a minor infraction, like a speeding ticket.”
Chris Huhne - Cabinet minister who lost his seat and went to jail for getting a speeding ticket, then lying about who was driving:
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