Bob Jenrick Defects to Reform

 

I apologise for including this picture of these two Not Great people.  No, I don't.  You deserve it.

Title says it all.  Bob the Bloke - who never saw a cheap publicity grabbing stunt he didn't like - has had the whip withdrawn for plotting to defect to Reform, and promptly defected to Reform.

This may actually be good for Badenoch.  Jenrick was a continual threat to her leadership.  Now he gone off to become a continual threat to Nigel Farage's.  This has likely extended her leadership.   There aren't any more clear leaders-in-waiting in the (very thinned) ranks of the Conservative Party.  Presumably, Jenrick was looking at the recent slight recovery in the polls and realised his chances of usurping her were fading.

Keir Starmer is probably weeping bitter tears and wondering why Kemi is so lucky and why none of the various thorns in his side don't piss off and join Your Party.

Electoral Disfunction

I know it may seem an odd and obvious thing to break a year's worth of radio silence over, but how come the British Conservative Party MPs (and to be fair, the Labour Labour Party, when they have their leadership shenanigans) get to use a different and better way electoral process than the British people use for choosing MPs? 

Instead of a 'winner' takes all system, where whoever get the most votes in a single ballot, no matter how miniscule that total is, they get to use a series of run offs, with a dwindling pool of candidates - effectively Alternative Vote.

(To answer the question posed in the opening paragraph - the British electorate had a referendum on Alternative Vote a few years back and rejected it because they were uncomfortable with counting to five.  Which begs the question(s) - first, have they changed their mind now 63% of MPs represent Labour, based on a feeble 33% of the vote - the most unrepresentative result in British electoral history?  And second, if the answer to the preceding is "No" - can we take that as an admission they think their MPs are just lots cleverer than the British people? )

Had MPs been required to use the same antiquated, nonsensical First Past The Post as the rest of us, Robert Jenrick would have elected leader quite some time ago, based on a whopping 23.7% of the vote; or if they had continued the idiosyncratic "Members get to choose from the final two" concept, the options would have been Jenrick or Badenoch - a very grim choice for anyone who isn't outright bonkers.

Another day of bonkers GNUmours (again, sorry)

First, almost a score of Labour MPs seem to have sent a letter to the EU basically begging them to accept a deal - any deal - just so Britain can get the Heck on with Brexiting instead of being trapped in limbo:

To avoid no deal, deliver on the ref outcome and break the deadlock we have sent the letter below to Juncker and Tusk #Brexit pic.twitter.com/xnvEbLFlmI

— Emma Lewell-Buck MP (@EmmaLewellBuck) 8 October 2019

They are literally asking the EU to accept a Conservative Prime Minister's hopeless deal, rather than try to gain power and sort out a better deal for Britain. They are effectively enabling and extending an even-more-dangerous-than-usual Tory government, rather than trying to bring it down.

(The even scarier thing is they aren't even the maddest Brexiteers in Labour - you won't see Kate Hoey or John Mann's name on that list. It's far too diluted for them. They like their Brexit neat, if that isn't some sort of oxymoron.)

This is why I think a non-Corbyn GNU will struggle to get across the line. That's 19 votes that probably won't be available for an alternative candidate, whereas they probably would be available for Corbyn. Basically, they cancel out the Lib Dems. Assuming those 19 - and Hoey and Mann - refused to support a non-Corbyn GNU, and all the other Labour MPs did (a huge assumption) then then it would be at 283, still needing the pro-Remain Independents to support en masse. Possible, but difficult.

Where as Corbyn, the SNP, the Lib Dems, Plaid and the Greens can probably get there, or very nearly there, as he can expect his MPs to support him.

But wait, there's more ... According to the Financial Times, in a sort of exchange student MP deal, fifty MPs, including three cabinet ministers have threatened to walk out in Johnson makes a No Deal Brexit an election commitment:

Several prominent ministers would find a no deal manifesto problematic to support, including Julian Smith, Nicky Morgan and Robert Buckland. Same for plenty in the junior ranks too. https://t.co/GUbXW77Kir

— Sebastian Payne (@SebastianEPayne) 9 October 2019

Obvious the problem with this story is ... Tories. Until they actually walk out the door, assume they will do the opposite of what they say they will do. But it does suggest the antipathy towards Johnson's 'dead in a ditch' approach is growing.

(It also suggests the 50, particularly the cabinet ministers, are pretty dimwitted, as an fule could see from years ago (well, a few weeks back) that Johnson hadn't the slightest interest in a deal. If they actually thought they were assisting other than a Titanic style Brexit, they were clearly rather hopeless - which raises the worrying possibility that their resignations might leave the Johnson administration brighter and more dangerous, by some strange alchemy.)

So, yeah, just another day of lunacy in Brexitland.

Inside the Downing Street bunker

James Forsyth at The Spectator (I know, I know) has tapped one of his contacts inside Number Ten for an insight into the Johnson administration's thinking and strategy.

It is fascinating, unsettling and quite, quite mad.  Some key points:

• Negotiations have stalled and the Johnson administration are keen to blame the EU: "Varadkar was keen on talking before the Benn Act when he thought that the choice would be ‘new deal or no deal’. Since the Benn Act passed he has gone very cold ..."; of course, it has nothing to do with the Johnson administration wasting everyone's time, acting in bad faith and proposing a ludicrous alternative to the vexed Irish Backstop.

• It is all the fault of the Germans Boche and the French Frogs: "There are quite a few people in Paris and Berlin who would like to discuss our offer but Merkel and Macron won’t push Barnier unless Ireland says it wants to negotiate." This is like reading the story of Brexit as re-told by Commando Comics; which, now I think about it, is a very apt description of how the Johnson administration is approaching the whole thing.

• The Euro-meanies and the Remoaners are conspiring to Do Britain Down, but they will be shown up in time by British pluck and cold hard steel, which has always seen of their Continental guile: "Ireland and Brussels listen to all the people who lost the referendum, they don’t listen to those who won the referendum and they don’t understand the electoral dynamics here."

• The Johnson administration really is intent on going full steam ahead into the iceberg, because they are more scared of Nigel Farage than they are of ruining the country: "To marginalise the Brexit Party, we will have to fight the election on the basis of ‘no more delays, get Brexit done immediately’."; never mind the arguments about 17.2 million voters, this is about one man. Oddly, their plan for stopping him is to do exactly what he wants, which seems a bit silly, but they aren't interested in what is better for Britain here - it is simple psychopathic careerism. Cock up, blame everyone else and hope that people will fall for it so you don't lose your job.

• The Johnson administration intends to Subvert the 'Benn Bill' to prevent delaying Brexit: "Our legal advice is clear that we can do all sorts of things to scupper delay which for obvious reasons we aren’t going into details about."; one wonders if this 'legal advice' springs from the same mind that told them proroguing parliament for five weeks was legal, and that they could win court cases without presenting sworn affidavits?

• They will use bribes and threats to try to get the EU to vote against offering a further extension: "We will make clear privately and publicly that countries which oppose delay will go the front of the queue for future cooperation — cooperation on things both within and outside EU competences. Those who support delay will go to the bottom of the queue."; so,having failed to win any intellectual arguments, they will resort to bullying - "within and outside EU competences" is particularly ominous.

• The EU offering something that has been requested by the British PM acting on the instructions of the British parliament is "hostile interference in domestic politics, and over half of the public will agree with us"; presumably they will apply the same 'logic' to any attempt to form treaties or agreements in the future. And the cynical statement that the public will agree with them reveals they are intent on plunging even further down the Faragist populist bullshit rabbit hole. All, you know, to stop Farage.

• They actually still think this is all about them: "We will also make clear that this government will not negotiate further so any delay would be totally pointless. They think now that if there is another delay we will keep coming back with new proposals. This won’t happen." Hate to break it to you, guys and girls, but people are now hoping that it won't be "we" coming back with new proposals.

• They will take their toys and go home: "Any delay will in effect be negotiated between you, Parliament, and the courts — we will wash our hands of it, we won’t engage in further talks, we obviously won’t given any undertakings about cooperative behaviour, everything to do with ‘duty of sincere cooperation’ will be in the toilet, we will focus on winning the election on a manifesto of immediately revoking the entire EU legal order without further talks, and then we will leave." Yes, gentle reader, they actually think the courts and parliament are somehow irrelevant obstacles in all this, not the things that give them legitimacy. Heads up! If the courts say your are doing illegal stuff, it means lack legitimacy; if parliament refuses to back you, you lack legitimacy. You will not have the authority to put anything in the toilet. And for all their eager talk of elections, there is one simple way to get one - request an extension so an election can be held without the country falling out of the EU by default. But the Fear of Farage is overwhelming, and they can not bring themselves to do that Very Obvious Thing.

• They are deluded: "Those who pushed the Benn Act intended to sabotage a deal and they’ve probably succeeded." No, your bad faith negotiations, posturing and hopeless alternative' to the Irish Backstop killed a deal. Which you probably knew all along it would. The ferocity of the pro-No Deal language in this whole message reveals the lie in this weak attempt to pass the blame.

It is worth keeping in mind this might be what the 'strategic geniuses' WANT us to think they are planning.

But, nah.  I'm going with this actually being what they are planning - for want of a better word.

Guardian: Poll shows DISASTER for Corbyn and the End of Times

The Guardian - ever eager to forewarn of doom and disaster on the left - are leading with a new poll from Opinium, which puts the Conservatives 15% clear of Labour.

Con 38% +2
Lab 23% -1
Lib Dem 15% -5
Brexit 12% +1
Green 4% +2

This isn't good news, and it would be very bad news if it wasn't Opinium; they consistently give the Conservatives large leads; the largest, indeed.  Looking at recent polling (i.e. September to present moment), here's how the different companies compare:

Large Tory leads (6% or over in majority of included polls):

• You Gov (leads range from 7% to 14%, 7 polls included)
• Opinium (Leads range from 10% to 15%, 5 polls)
• Kantar (Leads of 14%, 1 poll)
• Ipsos Mori (Lead of 9%, 1 poll)

Small Tory Leads (5% or less in majority of included polls):

• Panelbase (Lead of 3%, 1 poll)
• ComRes (Leads range from TIE to 4%, 5 polls)
• Survation (Leads range from 3% to 5%, 2 polls)
• Deltapoll (Lead of 3%, 1 poll; BUT a poll released 31/8 gave a Conservative lead of 11%!; make of that what you will.)

(BMG are also included in Britain Elects' table but don't seem to have released a September poll.)

So, from that, what can we conclude?  Nothing.  The polls are all over the place but at least individual pollsters seem to be finding fairly consistent results.  Someone is definitely wrong, and it is just about possible everyone is.

A bad couple of days for the Conservative Party

In - what, 48 hours? - a Tory MP assaults a female demonstrator, a Tory MP verbally abuses a female colleague via twitter, a Tory MP is recalled for corruption, and a Tory MP (and likely future PM) has the police turn up at their door at 2am because his girlfriend was screaming "Get off me!"

With regards the last instance, I'm trying to be fair and imagine circumstances where a woman screaming "Get off me!" at 2am in the morning is okay.

Nope, can't think of any.

The Conservative Party - home of corruption and toxic masculinity.

May's bracelet

It has been observed that Theresa May unaccountably took to the stage for her big speech to the Conservative conference wearing a bracelet featuring art work by Frida Kahlo, communist artist and (because women must always be defined by who they sleep with) occasional girlfriend of Leon Trotsky.



After being handed a P45 mid-speech by an audience member, a chronic coughing fit and then having the sign behind her fall to bits, it might seen a minor faux pas.

The Telegraph, heroically, tries to justify it:

After divorcing her husband Diego Rivera, Kahlo painted Self Portrait with Cropped Hair in 1940. The picture, showing her wearing a black suit and with a very short haircut, was widely interpreted to mean that Kahlo was sending a strong message to men: I am independent and I don't need you.

Might Mrs May have been willing the 'naughty boys' in her party to understand the very same?

I prefer a simpler explanation.

I imagine she wore it because she had little idea who the artist was and just thought it looked stylish and interesting. If she had a clue, I doubt she'd have been so silly as to wear it for the biggest speech of her life.

Just another fail in a day - a whole conference - of fails.

Iain Duncan Smith resigns, immolating George Osborne in the process

It's a sign of how mental George Osborne is that even IDS has quit rather than impose his plans to harvest organs from beneficiaries and put taxes on breast milk:

Iain Duncan Smith has resigned from his role as Work and Pensions Secretary complaining of Treasury pressure to make cuts to benefits.

In a statement to the media, Mr Duncan Smith said he "incredibly proud of the welfare reforms that the Government has delivered over the past five years" but said he is "unable to watch passively whilst certain policies are enacted in order to meet the fiscal self imposed restraints that I believe are...distinctly political rather than in the national economic interest".

Even Scrooge can't stomach what Osborne intends for the proles!

it is an impressive piece of political shafting by IDS.

IDS might have been a dreadful leader, an awful minister ... but quitting like this just days after the budget, and calling the budget a piece of ideologicaly motivated national sabotage must have put paid to Osborne's leadership hopes.

Nothing in his political life became him like the leaving of it, as Shakespeare almost said.

Tory Leadership Slow Motion Apocalypse Underway

Get in now for front row seats as the Best Show On Earth After The American Election And Most Other Shows Even Cats gets underway.

Who will replace the red faced non-entity bumbler when he finally buggers off the political scene, having accomplished nearly nothing other than squandering a recovery, prolonging a recession and making Britain look stupid for the whole of Europe - even Greece (GREECE?!) - to laugh at?

Will it be Boris, effectively upping the buffoon quotient?

Or George 'Why did 80,000 people boo him' Osborne?

Or someone thing else?

Who will turn out to be the brightness in this dullness of Tories? The fastest in this loiter of sloths? The sternest in this gutter of wet bus tickets?

Relevant stuff:

Earlier this week there was a new YouGov poll of Conservative party members in the Times or, more specifically, two new polls of Conservative party members: YouGov polled the same party members before and after Boris Johnson came out in favour of leaving the EU to see what impact it had on the leadership race. Results are here.

At the simplest level Boris was ahead before, and was ahead afterwards, but there were some interesting shifts. Boris’s approval rating among Conservative party members dropped significantly after he came out (from 83% approval to 76% approval), but his position in the leadership race improved. Presumably he annoyed some members who saw his actions as disloyal or disagreed with his stance, but he consolidated the support from those who did not.

Almost unavoidably Boris coming out was going to upset some members – he has carefully avoided having many fixed political opinions over the years, so I expect many pro-European members would have assumed Boris agreed with them, many anti-EU members would have assumed Boris agreed with them. For once, he is forced off the fence and forced to upset some people – so his overall approval rating among Tory party members fell. However, in the race to be the next Tory leader his position has improved. 

43% now say they’d back Boris, up from 38%, with support falling for Theresa May and Sajid Javid, both of whom were seen as potential “outers” and both of whom ended up supporting Remain. Asked how they’d vote in a match up between Osborne & Boris the figures don’t change as much (Boris 55%, George 36% before, Boris 56%, George 38% after) – the broader balance between those party members who want Osborne as the next leader and those who don’t hasn’t changed much, it’s just Boris is now more clearly the “not-George” candidate.

Only a quarter of Tory party members said that the leadership candidates’s stances on the EU were an important factor in picking the next leader – 4% said they wanted the next leader to be someone who had campaigned for the UK to stay, 20% wanted the next leader to be someone who campaigned to leave, three-quarters picked other criteria as their main considerations. Far and away the most widely picked criteria was someone who will make a competent PM, picked by 67%, followed by someone who has a good chance of winning the next election on 52%.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, but if only Anthony Wells was a girl and there was a sort of heterosexual equivalent of being Gay Married, I'd do that with him in an instant.