Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[najaB]

Owen Jones always seem angry all the time and it's not healthy. JOB is similar as well.

I can't say that I've listened to Owen Jones much, but James O'Brian comes across as constantly bewildered and frustrated, rather than the professionally outraged over everything that's rather particular to US media. Certainly, a lot of the clips that I watch on YouTube seem to be him asking people to explain and support the positions that they espouse.

I mean, the last clip I watched as him trying to get people to justify the actions of Israel in Gaza which have lead to the deaths of at least 20,000 civilians. I can't see him being up in arms if our PM wore a tan suit or asked for Dijon mustard.

 

[bspahh]

I can't say that I've listened to Owen Jones much, but James O'Brian comes across as constantly bewildered and frustrated, rather than the professionally outraged over everything that's rather particular to US media. Certainly, a lot of the clips that I watch on YouTube seem to be him asking people to explain and support the positions that they espouse.

I mean, the last clip I watched as him trying to get people to justify the actions of Israel in Gaza which have lead to the deaths of at least 20,000 civilians. I can't see him being up in arms if our PM wore a tan suit or asked for Dijon mustard.

Judging anyone from the clips that get shared on Twitter isn't a good idea.

On his podcast https://www.globalplayer.com/podcasts/42KqCF/ James O'Brien is a lot less ranty than the common clips from his radio show. He doesn't hide his personal views, but it is not all about him. He often asks if people have the "look at me" gene, and implicitly, he accepts that he does.

 

[jfollows]

The Fabian Society, reported by ITV last night I believe, has published a report (which I attach, from https://fabians.org.uk/wp-content/u...ing-the-Mountain-embargoed-0001hrs-25-jan.pdf) which reports greater than average swings towards Labour in the key 150 seats it is targetting at the next election.

Essentially the national figure is 46% Labour vs. 22% Conservative.
In the "key 150" seats it's 52% Labour vs. 18% Conservative.

But in the face of this sort of barrage of negative information, the parliamentary Conservative party seems more interested in bickering, plotting, and jockeying for position in a self-fulfilling opposition party in the near future. Clearly anyone with any sense should have given up by now, but equally anyone interested in minimising the party's impending losses should be behaving differently.

 

[najaB]

Judging anyone from the clips that get shared on Twitter isn't a good idea.

Indeed. I very rarely log on to X/Twitter. I do follow the LBC channel on YouTube since they tend to post longer excepts of the show (typically 10 to 20 minutes).

 

[edwin_m]

The Fabian Society, reported by ITV last night I believe, has published a report (which I attach, from https://fabians.org.uk/wp-content/u...ing-the-Mountain-embargoed-0001hrs-25-jan.pdf) which reports greater than average swings towards Labour in the key 150 seats it is targetting at the next election.

Essentially the national figure is 46% Labour vs. 22% Conservative.
In the "key 150" seats it's 52% Labour vs. 18% Conservative.

This could be explained (in England) by supporters of LibDems choosing to vote tactically for Labour in seats where Labour is the main challenger. However, the survey appears to give people a straight choice between the two parties or neither, so those who would still vote LibDem will have to give an answer that doesn't reflect that intention. Hence, the likely effect of tactical voting may be over-stated here.

 

[nw1]

What's interesting is that 04/20 peak, as many local government seats which were won by the Tories then are now up for reelection this year, that's going to lead to a lot of lost seats unless the Tories turn it around in the next 5 months (and not just enough to regain their lead, from 26% to 40%, but actually get back to those sort of values of over 50%).

Next 3-and-a-bit months of course; local elections are presumably on 2 May.

 

[jfollows]

Next 3-and-a-bit months of course; local elections are presumably on 2 May.

Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_local_elections) thinks so, and points out that the elections were last held in 2021 - delayed by Covid from 2020 but with significant gains by the Conservatives. Also, they'll be elections requiring photo ID, which was controversial for some and not a resounding success for others - Jacob Rees-Mogg I think it was who thought that it ended up reducing the grey-haired pro-Conservative vote last time.

 

[Typhoon]

Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_local_elections) thinks so, and points out that the elections were last held in 2021 - delayed by Covid from 2020 but with significant gains by the Conservatives. Also, they'll be elections requiring photo ID, which was controversial for some and not a resounding success for others - Jacob Rees-Mogg I think it was who thought that it ended up reducing the grey-haired pro-Conservative vote last time.

Possible upside for the Conservatives of big council seat losses - there is no money in local government so the difficult decisions would have to be made by Labour/ Lib Dem/ other. If the government hangs on to the autumn, there might be enough time for them to point at local councils and blame 'financial mismanagement' for cuts and suggest that that would be replicated nationally if we failed to put our cross by the oak tree.

 

[nw1]

Possible upside for the Conservatives of big council seat losses - there is no money in local government so the difficult decisions would have to be made by Labour/ Lib Dem/ other. If the government hangs on to the autumn, there might be enough time for them to point at local councils and blame 'financial mismanagement' for cuts and suggest that that would be replicated nationally if we failed to put our cross by the oak tree.

The councils could of course always delay cuts until the autumn, if they are forced to make them.

And the other parties could have course point out that councils' financial problems are due to being deprived of money by the Conservative Government.

 

[DC1989]

Tories are almost certainly toast

The state of the country is so bad that even modest improvements in stuff like NHS, immigration numbers, GDP growth should see Labour win a second term with a much reduced majority in 2029 (Unless there are some major global events like WW3)

 

[jfollows]

Tories are almost certainly toast

The state of the country is so bad that even modest improvements in stuff like NHS, immigration numbers, GDP growth should see them win a second term with a much reduced majority in 2029 (Unless there are some major global events like WW3)

“them” being Labour?

 

[nw1]

I also think that for the last 20 years or so people get incensed about what others say, not just about what they do. Marriages split because of differences of opinion over things like leaving the EU.

I can understand that. I could not be in a relationship with a hard Leaver (as in, someone who not only voted to leave at the time, but still believes in it today), sorry to say.

People don't have to agree on all matters, but I think that big ideological differences such as this would cause a problem. Likewise I could not be in a relationship with a strong Conservative (again, someone who enthusiastically supports them rather than someone who voted for them once in 2010 because they were concerned about the competence of the Brown government).

 

[Typhoon]

The councils could of course always delay cuts until the autumn, if they are forced to make them.

And the other parties could have course point out that councils' financial problems are due to being deprived of money by the Conservative Government.

First point - true; I was trying to find some silver lining. When my local council changed hands, within weeks we had a barrage of situations that members of the defeated party (Conservative) said they coped with better when they were in power (fly tipping, bin collections), anyone who believed them had short memories (no short term change).

Second point - while this may be true, I can think of quite a few media outlets that may well fail to report any such a response.

 

[DC1989]

“them” being Labour?

Yes ! Edited for clarity - thank you

 

[nw1]

Tories are almost certainly toast

The state of the country is so bad that even modest improvements in stuff like NHS, immigration numbers, GDP growth should see Labour win a second term with a much reduced majority in 2029 (Unless there are some major global events like WW3)

"Improvements in immigration numbers" might, of course, for some of us mean more liberal immigration rules of course. Unlike the NHS, this is very much a polarising issue and we're not all anti-immigrationists, despite what many on (sorry to say) both sides of the House would have you believe.

So Labour should absolutely not try and take a hardline attitude on immigration. They should focus on other issues instead; if there is any movement on immigration, it should be reversing some of the hardline policies introduced under Braverman and Cleverly. If they adopt an immigration-hostile position, liberal voters - who will vote Labour this time because the Tories are so bad - might drift away from them next time, towards the Lib Dems or Greens for example who are both more inherently internationalist. Result: the non-Tory vote is split and - hey presto - the Tories get back in come 2028/29.

 

[Richard Scott]

Tories are almost certainly toast

The state of the country is so bad that even modest improvements in stuff like NHS, immigration numbers, GDP growth should see Labour win a second term with a much reduced majority in 2029 (Unless there are some major global events like WW3)

I very much doubt Labour will have any success with these either?
Not exactly a competent opposition, lots of 'we wouldn't do it like that', very little of what they suggest should be done.
I'm sure lots of people will comment that's rubbish and willing to be proved wrong but bet if we're having this discussion in 2029 I won't be.

 

[najaB]

Not exactly a competent opposition, lots of 'we wouldn't do it like that', very little of what they suggest should be done.

There's some merit to that bit, by the same circumstance, it's not up to them to crow about solutions which they have no power to implement.

 

[Richard Scott]

There's some merit to that bit, by the same circumstance, it's not up to them to crow about solutions which they have no power to implement.

Afraid an effective opposition should be offering solutions; I'd have much more respect for the opposition party if they did this. Can I honestly think of one that has, well, no!

 

[najaB]

Afraid an effective opposition should be offering solutions; I'd have much more respect for the opposition party if they did this. Can I honestly think of one that has, well, no!

I agree that, in a perfect world, that's what to opposition would do. But the problem with that is that by providing the government with solutions, they pretty much guarantee that they'll remain the opposition.

Or, to paraphrase, never interrupt your enemy when they're busy making a mistake.

 

[The Ham]

"Improvements in immigration numbers" might, of course, for some of us mean more liberal immigration rules of course. Unlike the NHS, this is very much a polarising issue and we're not all anti-immigrationists, despite what many on (sorry to say) both sides of the House would have you believe.

So Labour should absolutely not try and take a hardline attitude on immigration. They should focus on other issues instead; if there is any movement on immigration, it should be reversing some of the hardline policies introduced under Braverman and Cleverly. If they adopt an immigration-hostile position, liberal voters - who will vote Labour this time because the Tories are so bad - might drift away from them next time, towards the Lib Dems or Greens for example who are both more inherently internationalist. Result: the non-Tory vote is split and - hey presto - the Tories get back in come 2028/29.

All Labour (or for that matter the Tories) need to do is tweak the rules so as to reduce the overall numbers down a little. However probably not all that much as something like 80% of international students return to their home country within 5 years, so many of those coming for study last year will likely to have left before the next election, so long as there's not ongoing growth in the overall numbers. As the numbers have increased significantly in the last few years.

Focusing on illegal immigrants when the numbers coming that way are a small fraction of the total number isn't that helpful.

 

[birchesgreen]

I agree that, in a perfect world, that's what to opposition would do. But the problem with that is that by providing the government with solutions, they pretty much guarantee that they'll remain the opposition.

Or, to paraphrase, never interrupt your enemy when they're busy making a mistake.

Yes the Tories have already stolen a few Labour policies over the last few years.

 

[Richard Scott]

I agree that, in a perfect world, that's what to opposition would do. But the problem with that is that by providing the government with solutions, they pretty much guarantee that they'll remain the opposition.

Or, to paraphrase, never interrupt your enemy when they're busy making a mistake.

But reverse also true, if they decide not to implement it then assured they won't remain in power for long. Has two sides to it.
At the moment opposition is pointless and aren't giving me any reason to vote for them.
It seems we're currently in situation USA was in around 2016 where you vote for least worst option.

 

[edwin_m]

It seems we're currently in situation USA was in around 2016 where you vote for least worst option.

I'd say 2019 in the UK was worse in that respect.

 

[Enthusiast]

James O'Brien, mostly known for hosting a phone-in on LBC radio.

That's not quite correct. Mr O'Brien hosts the "James O'Brien Show" wherein he takes the occasional phone call from a member of the public if there happens to be a gap that needs filling between one of his many anti-Tory, anti-Brexit diatribes and the adverts.

 

[AM9]

That's not quite correct. Mr O'Brien hosts the "James O'Brien Show" wherein he takes the occasional phone call from a member of the public if there happens to be a gap that needs filling between one of his many anti-Tory, anti-Brexit diatribes and the adverts.

He's a call-in target for many right-wing bigots, who he usually makes mincemeat out of. They really ought to get the bigotry sources and scripts ready before taking James on.

 

[Mikw]

That's not quite correct. Mr O'Brien hosts the "James O'Brien Show" wherein he takes the occasional phone call from a member of the public if there happens to be a gap that needs filling between one of his many anti-Tory, anti-Brexit diatribes and the adverts.

JOB who famously was labelled a "Terrorist sympathiser" by Nadine Dorries, who then bombarded his employers with demands he lose his job. She was interrogated about it in a select commitee and couldn't provide any evidence he was actually what she said he was.....

I think he'll end up on the right side of history

 

[baz962]

I can understand that. I could not be in a relationship with a hard Leaver (as in, someone who not only voted to leave at the time, but still believes in it today), sorry to say.

People don't have to agree on all matters, but I think that big ideological differences such as this would cause a problem. Likewise I could not be in a relationship with a strong Conservative (again, someone who enthusiastically supports them rather than someone who voted for them once in 2010 because they were concerned about the competence of the Brown government).

A question regarding what you say. Ok you might divorce someone based on that or leave if not married. What would you do if it was a mother or father or brother/sister or your child.

 

[Richard Scott]

I'd say 2019 in the UK was worse in that respect.

I think Trump or Clinton were a far worse prospect, particularly Trump. We have no-one who's as bad as him, in my opinion. As much as I dislike Johnson he's not in Trump's league.

 

[edwin_m]

I think Trump or Clinton were a far worse prospect, particularly Trump. We have no-one who's as bad as him, in my opinion. As much as I dislike Johnson he's not in Trump's league.

I don't see quite what problem a lot of people had with Clinton, though I agree many seemed to. So I see 2019 in the UK as the worst recent case of a choice between two pretty unattractive options. But 2016 is a warning about treating the progressive candidate as no better than the populist just because they don't seem to be offering as much as some would like.

 

[nw1]

A question regarding what you say. Ok you might divorce someone based on that or leave if not married. What would you do if it was a mother or father or brother/sister or your child.

I think the ideological differences would be apparent well before it gets to that stage.

For example, if you were socially liberal and went out with someone who started going on about immigrants in a disparaging way (personal experience), or singing the praises of Donald Trump, I think it would be time to nip it in the bud, so to speak.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Jan 2024 ==

I don't see quite what problem a lot of people had with Clinton, though I agree many seemed to. So I see 2019 in the UK as the worst recent case of a choice between two pretty unattractive options. But 2016 is a warning about treating the progressive candidate as no better than the populist just because they don't seem to be offering as much as some would like.

In 2016 (US) it was clear to me that one of the candidates was very much worse than the other. But I suppose it was only when he became president that it became apparent quite how bad he was, and even more so in the closing days of his presidency.

In 2019 (UK) I would argue that one candidate was clearly less bad than the other, though the difference was not as stark as in 2016 - no-one is quite in the league of Trump. However said candidate was the target of a hatchet job by the right-wing media and Conservative MPs.