Jeremy's Den: The Last Straw?

Today, mediocre and quite ill-constituted men place themselves in the market square almost

with a good conscience and without any embarrassment and praise themselves as great men

(Friedrich Nietzsche, Die Wille Zur Macht, 1901)

Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason

(Mark Twain)

Remember: click on the embedded images to get the larger and easier-to-read original size

Two key by-elections have come and gone now. In the run-up to these, the metropolitan 'progressive' elite's fish-wrapper, aka The Guardian, wasted no effort making the case for some sort of pact of mutual support between Labour and the Liberal Democrats. Which does make sense when you consider such a pact could have switched 50ish seats in December 2019 and denied the Conservatives a tsunamish majority. But that would open the door to chaos and carnage, as the LibDems would argue they are the best-placed to beat the Tories even in seats where they finished third in 2019, and have North Shropshire, and now Tiverton and Honiton too, to prove it. I feel some popcorn days ahead for the nascent Progressive Alliance. Of these two by-elections, Wakefield was pretty much a shoe-in for Labour since day one, while Tiverton and Honiton was obviously an uphill battle for the LibDems. The results in both seats are quite interesting. Of course, Wakefield looks like a return to normalcy after a bizarre interlude. Until you notice it's a 12.7% swing from the Conservatives to Labour. If that was uniformly repeated all across England and Wales, it would switch 118 seats to Labour, including Boris Johnson's in Uxbridge and South Ruislip.

Tiverton and Honiton is obviously more interesting, as it is another example of middle-class rural England turning against the Conservatives. If the unprecedented 29.9% swing was repeated all over England and Wales, it would switch 69 seats from the Conservatives to the Liberal Democrats. Which won't happen, but it just illustrates how deep in shit the Conservatives are. And it's all of their own making. The English Government's big doggedness in carrying on with the Rwanda deportation scam may have solidified support from the loony wing of Conservatives, those who think Travellers should be sent to Rwanda too, and still haven't grasped why the UK is still part of the ECHR after Brexit. But it surely also alienated a number of centrist voters, who would never bring themselves to vote for Labour, but are perfectly happy with the LibDems. Trying to weaponise the rail strike against Labour didn't not work as well as expected either. Even before that, Wakefield was definitely seen as a lost cause by Boris Johnson himself, as he chose campaigning in Kyiv over campaigning in Doncaster. But Boris surely did not expect such a massive drubbing in True Blue Tiverton and Honiton, and his promise to keep on keeping on, no matter what, does sound like a bad reboot of Monty Python's most famous scene. But will backbenchers allow him, if throwing him under the bus is the only way to save their own seats?

When a regime has been in power too long, when it has fatally exhausted the patience

of the people, and when oblivion finally beckons, I am afraid that, across the world,

you can rely on the leaders of that regime to act solely in the interests of self-preservation,

and not in the interests of the electorate

(Boris Johnson, The Telegraph, 2011)

There is a theory which states that, if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened.

(Douglas Adams, The Restaurant At The End Of The Universe, 1980)

The surprising part in recent polls is that Boris Johnson's net approval rating has actually improved recently. It's flatlining around a commendable -30% after sinking below -40% at the beginning of the year. Obviously the knee-jerk flag-shagging reflex, after the criminal Russian invasion of Ukraine, boosted Johnson. And 25% to 35% of the British public still think he's one of the good guys. Go figure. Of course, one of the reasons for this is Johnson and his fan club starting one of their beloved culture wars, this time against the unions. It's quite standard practice for the loony right everywhere: insert the thin edge of a wedge between two tribes within the working class, and enjoy the show. Then the true measure of Johnson's popularity is not in the beauty contest polls, but in the best-in-show polls. The ones focusing on whom the public think would be the best choice for First Minister of England. Which, against all odds, keep on delivering pretty much a three-way split between supporters of Johnson, supporters of Starmer, and supporters of whomever is neither Johnson nor Starmer. That's where we were last night when the earthquake hit the fan, and made the point of such polling moot. Who'd have thunk, just yesterday at lunchtime, that Chris Pincher would be Johnson's Nemesis?

The weird part of last night's news update frenzy is that YouGov found the time to conduct no fewer than three flash polls within an hour. Which might be reliable, or not. Anyway they found that 56% of Brits think Rishi Sunak was right to resign. 69% think Boris Johnson should resign, but only 21% think he will. The novelty here is that even Conservative voters think BloJo should go, something that never happened before, even in the darkest days of PartyGate, FlatGate or SleazeGate. The fun part was of course that the mandatory reshuffle looked like a cross between musical chairs and a beginners' game of chess. Barclay moves from Lancaster to Health. Zahawi moves from Education to Treasury. Donelan moves from Universities to Education. Then tsunami struck thrice when Alex Chalk resigned as Solicitor General. The night started with two vacancies to fill, and around breakfast they had five after a couple more walkouts. Now it might be half the government payroll by suppertime, easy to lose count amidst the panic. So what next? The return of Chris Grayling? The whole farce just confirmed that you can't scrape beyond the bottom of the barrel when the talent pool has already been sucked dry. And now the serious game begins. Are Javid and Sunak a double act à la Blair-Brown? Or will they fight it to the last backbencher? In which case my tenner is still on The Saj. Expect more suspense and plot twists here than in Series Six of Line Of Duty. While the electorate keep indulging in some Platonic wisdom, the line that says to never give power to the ones who want it.

What is truth? It’s like love.

One man’s truth is another man’s… something or other

(Malcolm Frazer, Midsomer Murders: Secrets And Spies, 2009)

If ignorance is bliss, why aren’t there more happy people in the world?

(Stephen Fry)

British pollsters also love to field these benchmarkish surveys where they assess who's the public's favourite on an array of issues, Johnson or Starmer. We had two of these recently, one from Redfield and Wilton, which is actually a regular fixture of their weekly Monday poll. Then one from Kantar Public, who happen to poll politics at random when they have nothing better to do. The Redfield and Wilton survey is interesting as they have asked the same questions for about two years now, so anyone with too much time on their hands could translate that into a tracker of the fifteen items they survey. Interestingly, the results are not far from what they get from the 'Preferred Prime Minister' polling. Keir Starmer doing better than Boris Johnson on average, but with a third of the panel unwilling to choose. This fits with other polls that prove that most people don't see Starmer as a genuine 'Prime Minister in waiting'. But he's the only one Labour have. For now. Until Andy Burnham successfully transitions into New Corbyn, which seems to be his chosen path right now. We've seen weirder things happen, haven't we?

Keir Starmer does not have a massive advantage on topics you would consider to be traditionally 'left wing'. This is the natural consequence of Sly Keir having positioned Labour 'firmly on the centre ground of British politics'. His words, not mine. Which led to the well-documented ideological acrobatics, that are needed to secure a wide electoral base from London's Inner Commuter Belt to the industrial wastelands of the North East. And don't even get me started on Camden Town vs Stoke-on-Trent. Of course Keir can argue he's the only one who can achieve a balance between Jon Cruddas on the left and David Lammy on the right. Which actually says a lot about the sorry state of the Labour Party, when the ideological split is now between a reformed Blairite and an unrepentant Blairite. Then Kantar tested Bozo vs Keir on another array of issues, and their findings are not really better for either.

Kantar's results are probably to be taken with a grain of salt, as they don't have the level of expertise Redfield and Wilton have. And, more specifically, have not conducted that exact survey in the past. So we don't have any backstory for their current findings, and the enormous amount of 'neither' does not make them more credible. Despite these caveats, Labour still have a lot of work to do if they want to convince the electorate that they are not as divided and dysfunctional as the Conservatives. Because deep down they are, despite Keir putting on a brave forensic face when he is criticised for his lack of ambition and charisma. Which is in marked contrast with Andy Burnham opening for Paul McCartney at Glastonbury 2022. But Andy chose, probably wisely, not to push it too far with an actual appearance on the Pyramid Stage. Would have been disastrous PR if the chant of 'oh, oh, Jeremy Corbyn' had morphed into 'who? who? is Andy Burnham?', wouldn't it?

In the right hands, even a meaningless two-syllable name

can be made as frisky as a gay ferret in a pink blender

(Stephen Fry)

It has the look of a woman trying to unwrap toffee with her bottom

(Sandi Toksvig, QI: Nosey Noisy, 2016)

But the British public have way more important things on their mind than Boris Johnson's abilities, or lack thereof. Now the talk of the town is that 'Keir Starmer is boring'. If you had that on your 2022 Political Bingo Card, you're either a psychic or a fucking wanker with too much time on his hands, if you can sail past the oxymoronic feel of that description. Anyway, it looks like John Crace started that with one of his columns in The Guardian. And then an otherwise serious and respected pollster found that it was enough of an important issue, that they absolutely had to survey their panel about lt. Fucking hell. Aye, that's you, Redfield and Wilton. And with four fucking questions, no less. So let's start first with the basic principles behind that, and how they resonate with the usual demographics and politics of British polling. First question is about the kind of Prime Minister the public want. Entertaining or boring? And they definitely want him to be entertaining.

Clearly this is not a 'gendered' issue, but there is an interesting geographical divide. You have to wonder if there is such a lack of distraction in Wales, since all sheep got restraining orders, that they need an entertainer at Number Ten to compensate. Rob Brydon, anyone? Scots are definitely less enthusiastic about that, which is only natural when all you have to offer is Frankie Boyle and Janey Godley. Generation Z definitely want their Prime Minister to be entertaining. Then they're the lot who think James Acaster is a comedian, so why would we trust them with the definition of 'entertaining', or of anything else for that matter? Conservatives share that view, of course. They're the ones who elected an after-dinner joker in the first place, aren't they? So that's probably some sort of "we'd better suck it up and own it, for now" reflex, more than anything else. Then Redfield and Wilton switched to deep introspection, asking their panel if politicians need to be entertaining to appeal to voters like them.

Quite entertainingly, far fewer voters agree with that, than claimed they want an entertaining Prime Minister. That's probably when some reality check knocks at the door and people go 'err... wait... let's think that through now'. Again the Young 'Uns overplay it and a majority want to be entertained before they choose whom to vote for. Worst case scenario is that we get a whole generation of TikTok politicians. Slightly less doomsdayish is getting MPs who were invited on 'Hypothetical', and felt they had to laugh at James Acaster's jokes, though they hadn't the fuckiest scoobie what he was ranting about. Not that the options available to the older generations are any better, as it might imply they would favour someone who made a complete arse of themselves on 'Have I Got News For You?', or is daft enough to lose on 'Pointless Celebrities'. Though, when you think of it, it's not really worse than politicians who make fucking arses of themselves on 'Question Time', or is it?

The Labour leader has got the feel of someone who’d ask for your informed

consent before kissing you. You sense there’d be a waiver in the air.

(Marina Hyde, The Guardian, 2022)

I think for Keir Starmer, it is about making a big impression

He strikes me as the sort of person who would walk up to

The automatic doors at Tesco’s and they would not open

(Alex Brooker, The Last Leg, 2021)

Then Redfield and Wilton switched the focus to the quintessentially existential question that started it all. Do you agree or disagree with our basic premise that Keir Starmer is indeed boring? Now we're talking. A sizeable portion of the public are on the fence here, or it might just be that they don't give a fucking shit. This is definitely a 'gendered' thing, maybe because women are more likely to think 'serious' when men think 'pub bore'. And, quite appropriately, it's also an age thing, as most of Generation Z are likely to remember just David Cameron and Theresa May. Millennials probably remember Gordon Brown too, and obviously Sly Keir does not look that boring when compared to such benchmarks. Then, the older you get, the more likely you are to remember Tony Blair and Margaret Thatcher, who were such jolly good fellows, weren't they? Interestingly the 45-54s are the ones closest to the poll's average. Probably because John Major set the tone for them, ad he would definitely give Sir Keir a run for his money in the Pub Bore Of The Year competition.

Then there's the killer question, asked only those who do find Starmer dull as a dishwasher. Do they consider that to be a good or a bad trait for a potential future Prime Minister? It kind of goes full circle here, like a self-fulfilling prophecy wrapped in a syllogism. Aye, boring is bad, and we definitely need Sly Keir to hire better punchline writers. There is some semblance of consistency here, as there is a clear correlation between 'Keir is boring' and 'boring is bad' pretty much across all demographics. Then you realise that the parts of the electorate who agree the most with both statements are also the ones least likely to vote Labour. So Sly Keir should probably not give a fucking shit about all that, and carry on doing what he does best. Being beige. Or, if he wants to reframe his image to fit the Weltanschauung of the metropolitan cyan-haired hipstertariat, being taupe. Or is it puce?

Of course, I fully expect Redfield and Wilton to now offer a fair and balanced perspective on this key issue. With a second poll about 'Is Boris Johnson entertaining?'. With the obvious caveat: and we mean really entertaining, not like the third-rate after-dinner Benny Hill impersonator on an all-inclusive budget holiday package to Magaluf. Your move, mates.

Nicknaming him Keith has come to epitomise Starmer's beige banality

A man with all the charm of the pub bore

Who'd find himself outperformed by a talking potato sack

(Anonymous Labour staffer, Have I Got News For You?, 2021)

We do not need magic to transform our world

We carry all the power we need inside ourselves already

(J.K. Rowling)

Earlier this month, Savanta Comres conducted a very detailed poll about the cost-of-living crisis, and how the British public deal with it. There is a lot of information in that poll, and I will focus only on a couple of items. But it's worth reading the results in full, even if the data tables are not the easiest to read I've seen. With a sample of 4,011 UK-wide and eleven very precise questions, it's the most comprehensive poll I've seen on the issue so far. It conveys many inconvenient truths for Boris Johnson's government and avoids dabbling in general principles, focusing instead on very practical everyday concerns. It starts with the obvious big-tent question: are people worried about the cost of living, considering their own financial situation? And of course they are. Overwhelmingly.

People are worried across all possible demographics and geographics. Interestingly, Scots and English Northerners are the ones closest to the UK's average here. Sadly, we can't dig much further here as this poll does not include crosstabs with political affiliation. Would have been interesting to know if SNP voters and Labour voters think along the same lines, for example. Which I guess they do as both parties target pretty much the same demographics, but we'll never know. It's also quite enlightening to look at these results from another perspective, that of socio-economics. There is a clear and predictable correlation between the level of worry and the work status and pre-tax income of the respondents. It again highlights the fact that the most vulnerable people are also the ones with the lowest hopes. This is certainly not bound to change any time soon, as Conservative policies don't offer any perspective for anyone on low incomes or benefits. Quite the opposite, actually.

The crosstabs with the age of children in the household are quite interesting too. The older their children are, the more worried people are. Which sounds pretty much self-evident once you've seen the numbers, but is probably not as intuitively obvious as we think in hindsight. Personally, I would have thought that having younger children would cause more worry, as people would be more protective of the weeer bairns. But being more worried when you have older kids also makes sense, as they're the ones closest to leaving home and trying to make a decent life on their own. Something they will obviously find harder in the current economic situation, double-whammied by the government's complete lack of awareness of the real challenges real people are facing. Conservatives giving a whole new twist to 'no future'. Who'd have thunk?

Why is it that the British love dressing up at the slightest opportunity?

Is it because we lead such drab lives for the rest of the time?

(Joyce Barnaby, Midsomer Murders: Small Mercies, 2009)

Losing one glove is certainly painful, but nothing compared to the pain

of losing one, throwing away the other, and finding the first one again

(Piet Hein)

The worst part of the poll comes with the fifth question: How often, if at all, would you say you skipped meals specifically to save money in the last six months? That's when you discover that more than one third of Brits have done it, one in ten have been forced to do it often, and less than half have never done it. You have to combine this with another question in the poll, which reveals that 56% have reduced the amount of food they buy, and you come closer the full picture. Which also includes people choosing to change stores and buy cheaper food. I'm not saying cheaper food is necessarily and systematically of lower quality, but there is conclusive evidence that a lot of it actually is. So this is the double whammy for the most deprived: lack of proper financial resources leading to possible health hazards. Which is of course not a new concern, but successive governments have failed to fully address it. And bringing a Fortnum and Mason hamper to the Islington food bank may make some hipster feel good, but won't solve anything. Not in the slightest bit.

The demonstration in London on 18 June showed how much of a concern massive inflation has become for the British public, and it was certainly just the first of many before some sort of more radical action is undertaken. What people taking part in it had to say shows this is definitely the major issue all across the UK, regardless of social status, and that it can only get worse as the English Government's plan is to wait until it cures itself by magic. While doing what Conservatives always do best: stoking division within the working class because, ye ken, things would be so much better without those pesky oonions dong their job. The logical next step is to pass the buck to the councils, forcing them to make the proverbial 'tough choices', which will hit those harder, who have already been hit the hardest over the last couple of years. Of course, the English Government totally ignores the basic truth that even this mischievous legerdemain won't work, because the Councils are already broke beyond repair, a consequence of the government's policies and failure to address any serious issue with a serious solution. And that's not and England-only thing, even if The Guardian focuses on that part. Savanta Comres concluded their poll by asking their panel if they think their situation will be better or worse a year from now, and the verdict is quite clear too.

That's the proverbial situation where the light at the end of the tunnel is the train rushing towards you. The English Government has clearly not made tackling poverty a priority, and there are too many signs the cost-of-living crisis will get worse this year, and probably next year too. The Treasury is shrinking away from any serious measures, like a sharp increase of sub-standard wages, because of the alleged fear of a wage-price spiral, which is at best an unproven theoretical construct and has been disowned even by leading neo-liberal economists. Real people don't actually care about that, but about what's in their bank account at the end of the month, or what they can or can't afford to feed their kids at tomorrow's dinner. Remember this not some reboot of Little Dorrit, or a sequel to I, Daniel Blake. It's the real world and our here and now. In the allegedly sixth most powerful economy in the world. Which is also the one competing with Russia for the worst economic results of 2022 among the G20. They have a war and sanctions. We have Brexit and the Tories.

It is better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are a fool

than to open it and remove all doubt

(Mark Twain)

Not a wheel turns, not a phone rings, not a light bulb shines without the kind permission

of the working class. Once this enormous power is mobilised, no force on Earth can stop it.

(Ted Grant)

Fresh in everybody's memories is how the Conservatives dealt with the strike at Network Rail. Shifting the blame and trying to paint a trade union as solely responsible for massive chaos and disruption that was in fact the result of the English Government's policies and omnishambolic ineptitude in dealing with the situation. The best example being the ever irrelevant Grant Shapps again making a complete arse of himself in Commons, thusly prompting Mick Lynch to tell him to fuck off and do his fucking job. More or less. Clearly the Conservatives' narrative was that Boris Johnson vs Mick Lynch was a reboot of Margaret Thatcher vs Arthur Scargill. They just forgot that Mick Lynch is better at communication than Arthur Scargill ever was, as he demonstrated when he outfoxed and outwitted every Conservative sent against him on live TV. To be fair and balanced, Keir Starmer's threat of disciplinary action against Labour MPs who showed up at picket lines was as pathetic as the Tories' talking points. This is another example of Johnson and Starmer both failing to read the room, as was shown by a poll from Savanta Comres, fielded on the eve of the strike. First question is about the public's level of support for the strike, and the results are as unambiguous as Starmer's attitude is ambiguous.

The poll also found that 60% of the British public support the principle of industrial action while 35% oppose it. 70% also thought that the rail strike was just the beginning and that others would follow all along the summer. Recent announcements from various unions have definitely proved them right, which is something of a reality check for the English Government and Conservative MPs. We might not be heading for a general strike, but massive action across different sectors is definitely a plausible scenario. Which can only be made worse by Boris Johnson's plan to allow the hiring of agency staff, or mercenary scabs in plain English. Clearly Boris and his MPs have to admit that the public generally don't buy their anti-union rhetoric and its most disingenuous talking points. To support this, Savanta Comres tested the Conservatives' and Network Rail's key soundbite, that RMT is defending over-paid privileged moochers, only intent on harming the public for their own benefit. Which totally fell flat, as a majority, very similar to the one who supports the strikes generally, doesn't buy it and thinks that the strikes are justified.

The Conservatives obviously need to demonise RMT because there is a huge probability other strikes will follow, first in schools and then in the NHS. Even if a general strike is unlikely to happen, Boris Johnson certainly doesn't want large parts of the public to support the unions, and be 'on strike by proxy' because their own situation doesn't allow them to actually go on strike The British public totally understand that unions are on their side, Not Putin's as Tory dimwit Tobias Elwood claimed. Which is also why the Labour leadership should feel ashamed of themselves, and urgently reframe their attitude towards the movement. Now, if Boris Johnson has any doubt about where massive distrust and discontent can lead, he just has to watch what happened to Emmanuel Macron and his party at the French legislative election. More gory details about that down the line. The poll also shows that Keir Starmer's variant of triangulation puts him at odds with his own electorate. Labour voters overwhelmingly support the strikes and think they are justified. Say what you will about Jeremy Corbyn, but there's no doubt in my mind he would have visited picket lines and given Mick Lynch a big hug. While Not-So-Sly Keir keeps RMT at arm's length because he hasn't got a fucking scoobie what strong and determined unions mean to huge swathes of the electorate, and not just on the far left.

If you’re not bargaining, you’re begging, and the British working class should not have to beg

(Mick Lynch)

Let us insert some ninja into the appropriate orifices

And see if we can make the horses dance

(DCI Tom Barnaby, Midsomer Murders: Secrets And Spies, 2009)

The trends of general election polling are still confusing and not fully satisfactory for Labour. It definitely looks like someone cast a spell on Labour. Every time a poll credits them with a better than average performance, the next one credits the Conservatives with a better than average performance, despite the public being now fully aware of the UK's abysmal economic situation. In many ways though, Labour have only themselves to blame for that. They are very far from being an unstoppable force meeting that proverbial unmoveable object: the core Tory voters who still offer more support to Boris Johnson now than to John Major, the man who proved that boring is not winning, in 1997, William Hague in 2001 and even Michael Howard in 2005. New New Labour are clearly suffering from some sort of intellectual meltdown, far from the array of ideological certainties that drove New Labour 25 years ago. The latest example is Keir Starmer's stance on Brexit, basically proposing to cure some of the symptoms rather than address the core of the problem. Because 'unpicking' Brexit would be divisive, which is a bit rich coming from someone who is constantly appeasing the far more divisive gender ideology. But that's just me ranting again.

The truth is that Labour grandees have not really chosen the best soundbites to mobilise key voters all across the UK. You have to wonder why Keir Starmer came up with this weird idea that it was clever politics to ask Labour frontbenchers to stay away from picket lines during the rail strike. Or why David Lammy doubled down on it by refusing to support the strike of airline workers. Which, even for a Blairite, looks like one bridge too far. Or is it just that Labour's Ninth Circle don't give a fucking shit about unions who are not affiliated to the party? Though, to be honest, they don't seem to care much about those who are either. The good part of this PR disaster is that it did not go down well with some Labour MPs, who didn't have any problem saying it loud and clear. Another factor in the next election might very well be the growing realisation that Brexit has been an abject failure, and has set the UK back several decades. From that perspective, the Tiverton and Honiton by-election was also a massive warning sign: a constituency that voted 58% Leave gave 53% of its vote to the most strongly pro-European party on the ballot. Times change, and so do voters.

Lots of bacteria that cause human diseases use quorum sensing

They wait harmlessly inside us until they agree that there’s enough

And then they go, it’s a bit like social media, right?

(Sandi Toksvig, QI: Quintessential, 2019)

Born Again Cretin © Robert Wyatt, 1982

Shipbuilding © Declan MacManus, Clive Langer, 1982

One person tweets but then it is repeated and repeated and repeated

Until it goes viral and you have enough to make it a story for a lazy journalist

(Sandi Toksvig, QI: Quintessential, 2019)

My new Poll'O'Polls totally reflects what you might have already deduced from the trendlines. It includes the last three published polls, fielded from to 29 June to 3 July. Super-sample size is 5,606, with a theoretical margin of error of 1.31%. As a dog returns to its vomit and a washed sow goes back to wallowing in the mud, almost a third of the British electorate want to keep the Tories in charge of SW1 and dependencies, in spite of all the harm they've done in the past 12 years. Quite interestingly, they're credited right now with a slightly higher share of the popular vote than they bagged in 2005. Which, as you know, is my magic number when it comes to assessing what we can expect from the next general election. But who can really say what will happen next? It's a rather amusing, though odd, situation, where the future of the UK might well depend on the result of the incoming elections to the 1922 Committee. Now that the Wee Dogs have been unleashed and run free, these will most probably bring in a full slate of angry backbenchers, hell bent on changing the rules and ousting Johnson. Who might now outlast Theresa May in office, but quite plausibly not James Callaghan. Then all bets and seatbelts are off as the New Big Dog will certainly feel the urge to call a snap general election to secure a personal mandate. And put and end to everybody's misery by losing it.

With new data in, it looks like something new in voting patterns has emerged and then disappeared just as quickly: the ferocious return of tactical voting, even in the absence of any deal between the opposition parties. In a few recent polls, the Liberal Democrats rose to 15% and counting, and even past 25% in the South of England where tactical voting is the most relevant. It was not the result of any reluctance to switch directly to Labour, but the visible part of massive tactical voting being already put into practice by the electorate. Then it died down, with the Liberal Democrats pretty much crawling back to their 2019 vote share. There are nevertheless some residual traces in the regional crosstabs of polls I use, instead of relying on the antiquated mechanics of uniform national swing. But we'll come to that later.

If you don't stand up for anything, you end up on your knees

(Mick Lynch)

Bono pulled out of Glastonbury once because he had done his back in

Which is fair enough, because I imagine my own back would be really sore

If I’d spent the last twenty years with my head up my own arse

(Jack Whitehall)

My current seat projection again supports fears on the Conservative backbenches, that their party will lose big at the next election, and even the big beasts are not safe. It's once again of the 'not quite there yet, but fucking close' variety for Labour, who would scrape a couple of seats past their performance at the 2005 election in England and Wales, and a handful shy of a working majority. Which, as you surely remember from earlier episodes, is 322 and not the proverbial 326. On such numbers, Keir Starmer could possibly be willing to gamble on a minority government, who could probably pass meaningful legislation with little, if any, opposition. Then there is the safer option of a Lab-Lib Pact, which would deliver a 43-seat majority. That would obviously suit Sly Keir, as he's making his best to make New New Labour indistinguishable from the Liberal Democrats. Except, of course, that wee thing about 'making Brexit work'. Which is as credible as making James Acaster funny, but never mind. Surely Ed Davey could accept that, as long as the only other visible difference between the Labour and Liberal Democrat manifestos is the logo on the cover.

It's not the best Labour can do, obviously. Some recent polls had them leading by double digits and bagging an outright majority all by themselves. Full national polls in Scotland and Wales, as well as the regional crosstabs for England, say that Labour probably have more than four aces up their sleeves. But we'll come to that in a wee while. One of the questions Keir Starmer will have to answer is how far he is willing to go to help the Liberal Democrats or the Greens secure a few more seats, in the name of a 'progressive alliance', without jeopardising Labour's chances of an outright majority. And even this point can become moot soon, if the next batch of polls deliver double digits leads for Labour continuously. Guess we will not have to wait long for that, as I can safely predict a new wave of polling frenzy after last night.

We are not interested in the possibilities of defeat, they do not exist

(Queen Victoria)

Show me a man that gets rich by being a politician and I’ll show you a crook

(Harry S. Truman)

Interestingly, we are still in this situation where voting intentions make the next round of Tory gerrymandering ineffective. It would cost Labour, and mostly the Liberal Democrats, some seats, but not enough to turn the election results around. Under current polling and the proposed boundaries, a Lab-Lib Pact would still bag a 13-seat majority. A bit too close for full comfort, but still workable. Furthermore, polls are now quite close to the tipping point where gerrymandering transitions into dummymandering. Most accidents waiting to happen are located in the South of England, from the Outer Commuter Belt to some unexpected ones in the West Country. This is where the Boundary Commission for England recarved the landscape not too subtly, with many seats close to the lower limit of the permissible electorate, to maximise the number of Conservative seats. Now a lot of these have turned into marginals as both the Labour and LibDem predicted vote shares are increasing faster than average. More marginal new seats are somewhere in the South than in the North and Midlands combined, and there are enough of them to deliver a Labour majority with even a wee additional swing away from the Conservatives.

There is now a plausible scenario when this point too becomes moot. It depends solely on how soon the 1922 Committee kicks Johnson out, and the Conservatives pick a new leader. It's safe to assume this will happen before the end of summer, presumably during the Commons recess, so that the new First Minister of England can start afresh with a Queen's Speech of their own at the next State Opening of Parliament. With the obvious temptation to call a snap general election and secure a mandate of their own on a real manifesto. If that happens, which could be a fucking dick move, the snap election would have to be fought on the current boundaries as the new ones can't possibly be enforced before the fourth quarter of 2023. Or New Big Dog might choose to play it safe and wait until the end of 2024, close to the natural end of the current term, hoping there won't be more by-election meltdowns along the way. Can't wait for the answer to that. No shit.

If Sod’s Law doesn’t exist, I’m sure this government will introduce it fairly soon

(Clive Anderson)

Queen Victoria smoked in the Highlands to keep the midges away during picnics

(Gyles Brandreth, QI: Advertising, 2003)

As you know by now, my benchmark, to assess Labour's success or failure at the next election, is 2005 when they bagged 315 seats in England and Wales. Of course that does not work for Scotland, which was then dominated by Labour in a way that is very unlikely to happen again. So my Scotland-only benchmark is 2017, when the SNP suffered a significant setback and Labour enjoyed a moderate success. Interestingly, the trend of recent polls says that the SNP is heading for a mediocre performance, while Labour is gaining back some lost ground. So the next election might very plausibly see the SNP get away with a passable result only because of the weaknesses of some of the oppositions. Labour's surge in 2017 was mostly a subsample of the Corbyn Effect all across the UK. This could be repeated at the next election if Labour are smart enough to make it about whom people want in charge in London, and tiptoe around the bigger issue of independence. Thus, even pro-independence Scots might give them their vote, to get an immediate result and oust the Tories. The SNP have now decided to make the next general election a plebiscite about independence if all other options fail, which is undoubtedly a risky strategy. Besides the obvious threat of the pro-independence-yet-Labour vote, there is also the question of how the SNP would handle the Alba Party vote, if they needed it to push the pro-independence vote past the 50% hurdle. Would they still refuse a helping hand from 'far-right bigots'? Anyway, here is where we stand now, based on my current Poll'O'Polls.

Despite a massive loss of votes nationally, the regional crosstabs of Full Scottish polls say that the Conservatives still have something of a base in the North East and the South. Despite that, the SNP would snatch half their seats, unseating Oor Doogie Ross, Wee Andy Pandy Bowie and Alister Union Jack. Another key to the election is how many votes Labour will be able to snatch from the Conservatives and hold until the election. The Liberal Democrats are not such a threat to Labour in Scotland as they are in some regions of England. Labour and the LibDems are not in a one-on-one logic in any region of Scotland, where the fault lines are like a split between SNP-Con, SNP-Lab and SNP-Lib battlegrounds. Labour might actually welcome the LibDems doing well in the Highlands and Edinburgh, as their own voter base is weaker in both, and it might help keep some seats out of reach of the SNP. Conversely, the SNP have a vested interest in the LibDem vote being as low as possible. Their three mainland seats could potentially become easier gains, and compensate for some of the seats lost to Labour. In the current state of polls, that would be Airdrie and Shotts, Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Motherwell and Wishaw. While the SNP would only snatch Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross from the LibDems.

Sometimes we rewrite our past to protect ourselves

Until we’re strong enough to deal with it

(Nikki Alexander, Silent Witness: History, 2022)

The UK won't accept a world in which a powerful neighbour can bully or attack

their neighbours because we believe all people have the right to live safely and

choose who governs them or bodies they want to cease being part of

(Boris Johnson, 2022)

We also have just had the results of the latest instalment of Savanta Comres's Scottish Tracker for The Scotsman. This is the sixth time they have conducted this survey since the last Scottish Parliament election, out of 17 Holyrood polls and 27 IndyRef polls overall in the same timeframe. So that offers us some sort of backlog to assess changes in the electorate's mood. This latest instalment was fielded between 23 and 28 June, so almost entirely before Nicola Sturgeon's announcement of her plan for an Independence referendum on 19 October 2023. There is no doubt that Sturgeon's announcement has all the potential to be a major game-changer, even if it could be just the start of a really bumpy ride. This poll will thusly serve as a very useful Point Zero, against which all subsequent changes in the Scottish public's attitude can be quantified and assessed. Right now the trends of IndyRef voting intentions, with this new poll added at the end, haven't moved much this year. Of course, Yes just 2% behind is a better place to start than where we were in 2012, but we should never under-estimate the fallout of a hugely negative unionist campaign. We should hone our arguments on every issue, including those that seem irrelevant, because the other side will throw everything at us without any second thoughts.

But we also have a new Gold Standard now. That the next general election for the House of Commons of the United Kingdom of England and Colonies will be a Plebiscite Election on Independence. That we deserve Independence if we get past 50% of... err... wait... checks notes... something. Have to forgive John here, becoming Acting Finance Secretary has not made him better with numbers or abstract concepts. Anyway, let's assume for now it's 50% of the popular vote going to openly pro-independence parties. Whatever Josh Mennie's Stonewall-validated working definition of 'pro-independence' is. Because there is an interesting twist to the story. As you can see below, the pro-independence parties bagged a majority only twice: 2015 and the 2021 list vote. The SNP never cleared the hurdle on their own. And in 2021, you needed the Alba Party list votes to scrape just past it. Ouch. Look who needs a helping hand from the 'evangelical fascist bigots' now. Fucking karma.

Now is definitely the time for a major mobilisation of all Yes supporters, without second guesses, anathemas or fantasy 'code of conducts' designed only to exclude those whom the Stirling Uni mob don't like. The first obvious reason is to keep the pressure on during the summer months, when both the Scottish Parliament and the Supreme Court are in a lengthy recess. This is also the right moment to take advantage of the unionists' unease, as they have been wrong-footed by the scope of the announcement. Clearly nobody expected Sturgeon to go directly to the Supreme Court, even before the Scottish Parliament has voted on the Referendum Bill. I certainly did not, and we can only welcome such a pre-emptive strike, even if it's not a sure winner. But also remind everybody that it's pretty much what Joanna Cherry, Angus MacNeil and Chris McEleny proposed two or three years ago, and was flatly rejected by the SNP's conference following Nicola's decision to dismiss it as non-valid. And also what Martin Keatings wanted to achieve with his People's Action On Section 30, which the Scottish Government knowingly sabotaged. Fortunately, now we will get some help from the Conservatives, if they have nothing better to campaign on than ' what about once-in-a-generation?'. And also from Labour if they have nothing better than 'what about James Callaghan?'. Thank Dog for small mercies.

In Glasgow, perhaps the least healthy food ever sold is the deep fried pork sausage kebab.

You take a pork sausage, wrap it in doner kebab meat, coat it in batter and deep fry it.

(Stephen Fry, QI: Cummintonite, 2005)

It’s 1,000 of your best calories and 46 grammes of fat.

But if you called it saucisson en croute avec un coulis superbe, you could charge 25 quid for it.

(Stephen Fry, QI: Cummintonite, 2005)

Savanta Comres have also tested the voting intentions for the next Holyrood election, and the most remarkable thing is that the headline results are remarkably similar to their previous poll, fielded in late April. Only the different regional crosstabs introduce some differences in the seat predictions. The overall result is again mediocre for the SNP, whichever seat projection you use. And also, for a fair and balanced view, fucking disastrous for the Scottish branch office of the Conservative and Unionist Party. Now matter how hard they try and distance themselves from the Boris Johnson Fan Club in SW1, they still have their very own Doogie Ross to drag them down. There's nothing similar going on with the Labour branch office, as both Anas Sarwar and Keir Starmer have almost good favourability ratings. More on that later. Of course it translates into votes and seats for Labour, who would easily come back as the second party, and again do quite well in their old turf in Auld Strathclyde. Food for thought for the SNP.

Uniform national swing says that only one constituency would change hands: East Lothian from the SNP to Labour. My model says that Labour would gain three: the aforementioned East Lothian, Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, Uddingston and Bellshill. The Liberal Democrats would also gain Caithness, Sutherland and Ross from the SNP. Finally, the SNP would gain Aberdeenshire West from the Conservatives, who remain quite solidly entrenched in their other seats, despite a massive loss of votes nationally. The SNP would also bag just one list seat in Highland and Islands, and lose one in the South where both Labour and the LibDems are doing unexpectedly well and obviously snatching some of the anti-Tory vote that would have gone to the SNP in a different context. Interestingly the list votes in that poll again confirm that the 'Both Votes SNP' mantra is dead for good. It's just mildly distressing that the bulk of the split votes is SNP-Greens and not SNP-Alba. Which leads me to what the poll says about the political figures' favourability ratings. And there are some fun results in there.

The Scottish Government's favourables pretty much match the SNP's voting intentions while Nicola Sturgeon's go quite beyond. Not sure of what it actually proves, though. It's quite sad to see that Alex Salmond's ratings are still abysmal, thanks to the relentless smear campaign waged against him by the Scottish Taliban, oops... sorry... Scottish Greens, and the SNP. Who would be more credible if their parliamentary group hadn't been so incredibly lenient towards Patrick Grady for months, only to dump him after Nicola herself intervened to tell them to get their fucking act together. Then the interesting part is about the two joint leaders of the Scottish Witch-hunt Party, oops... sorry... Scottish Greens. Lorna has the same level of favourables as Alex Cole-Hamilton, and Patrick has the same as Oor Doogie Ross. Which is totally absofucking hilarious as it shows how few people actually take the Scottish Khmer Vert seriously. Interestingly both Lorna and Patrick have lower favourables among women than among men. Guess that's the price to pay for being a dedicated supporter of men-doing-womanface's rights. Can't wait now for the next edition of that Scottish Tracker, probably five or six weeks away.

Carlisle is, in a sense, Hadrian’s sliding patio door, isn’t it?

(Stephen Fry, QI: Campanology, 2005)

I’ve been to Manchester and there’s loads of queens, darling

(Sandi Toksvig, QI: Quirky, 2019)

Current polling shows Labour doing extremely well in the North of England, probably even beyond their own expectations. The 2019 Red Wall Debacle is erased from memories as Labour climbs back to the heights they reached in 2005 and higher. 133 seats out of 162 then, 136 out of 158 predicted now. Interestingly the Eurosceptic vote comes back to bite the Conservatives in the arse, with Reform UK strongly increasing their vote in regions where they stood in almost all seats already in 2019. If you want a reason for Keir Starmer's definitely un-Labourish position on Brexit and Europe, look no further. There aren't many Tory big names on the fatality list here, as most of the losers would be from the 2019 intake. Graham Brady, the current Chair of the 1922 Committee stands out though, predicted to lose his seat of Altrincham and Sale West in Greater Manchester after holding it for 25 years.

But massive success in the North only compounds Keir Starmer's dilemma: how to successfully square the circle between the conflicting aspirations of wholly different parts of the electorate, when he needs to solidify support from all simultaneously. This is again my 'Stoke-on-Trent vs Camden Town' image. And I do know Stoke-on-Trent is not is the North, it's just an allegory. The Guardian devoted a whole column, in the aftermath of the Big Dog Debacle, to an emerging political tribe they dubbed the Wands. Which has nothing to do with Harry Potter and, aye, you will have to read it to know what it's all about. Let's just say they are pretty much a more elaborate version of the infamous Workington Man, and appear more likely to favour Labour at the next election. So we have a massive group of voters here, who could strengthen or jeopardise Sir Keir's Reconquista Del Norte, and have barely anything in common with the Waitrose-fed Inner Hipstershire lot, except being roughly in the same age brackets. But one tribe would certainly consider the other to be shallow wankers who can't tell a Cumberland from a Greggs Roll, while the other tribe would call the first one uneducated bigots because they don't give a fucking shit about pink-and-blue zebra crossings. And intersectionalism won't help Keir getting the votes of both. Good luck with that.

Lobsters communicate with each other by urinating

Rather like the people of Doncaster

(Stephen Fry)

It’s not a fashion parade, it’s not a gentlemen’s club, it’s not a bankers’ institute

It’s a place where the people are represented

(Jeremy Corbyn)

Recent polls show that Labour is still the dominant party in Wales, and by a wide margin, despite a rather high volatility in voting intentions. Plaid Cymru are credited with their second best result ever at a general election, after 2001, though they still squarely hit the usual Slate Ceiling of five seats. Interestingly, the LibDem surge is more visible in Wales than in neighbouring regions of England. Nevertheless, they're not in a position to reclaim Ceredigion, where even a seasoned and astute politician like Mark Williams had to concede defeat to Plaid Cymru in 2017. But the Conservatives' poor performance means the LibDems are predicted to snatch back Brecon and Radnorshire, which they briefly held after a surprise by-election victory over the Conservatives in 2019.

In mid-June, YouGov also surveyed voting intentions for the next Senedd election, to be held in 2026. As you probably expect after seeing earlier such polls, it does not send the same message as Westminster polls. Here, Labour are facing a stronger challenge from Plaid Cymru, more in line with the recent Council elections than with any past or future general election. The Conservatives are also likely to suffer losses to the minor right-wing and anti-devolutionist parties, who don't count for much in a general election, if they even bother to stand. The seat projection, factoring in the regional crosstabs of the poll, predicts Labour losing their current working majority by one seat. I guess we would then see a Lab-Lib-Green coalition, which would be Mark Drakeford's preferred option especially if a similar kind of agreement had been reached in SW1 at the earlier general election.

There is indeed a Welsh paradox, that is something of a mirror image of the Scottish paradox. Labour in Wales, just like the SNP in Scotland, are not predicted to bag an exceptionally high share of the popular vote, quite the opposite in fact. But both benefit from the weaknesses of their oppositions. There is a major difference though. Plaid Cymru are not likely to stage a major challenge to Labour in Wales. While Labour in Scotland are definitely more and more likely to be a massive thorn in the SNP's side. Besides there is a more favourable context for Labour in Wales, as their losses in 2019 were part of the Red Wall debacle and now the tide is turning, so they are gaining back more than they lost and matching their 2005 result. Conservatives are now predicted to lose half their seats to Labour: Aberconwy, Bridgend, Clwyd South, Delyn, Vale of Clwyd, Vale of Glamorgan, Wrexham. Plus one more to Plaid Cymru, the three-way marginal Ynys Môn, and the aforementioned Brecon and Radnorshire to the Liberal Democrats.

It’s a biblical reference, Leviticus, from the Bible

Every schoolboy’s favourite dirty book

(DCI Tom Barnaby, Midsomer Murders: A Tale Of Two Hamlets, 2003)

The government can’t keep focusing on how it’s failed in the past

It’s busy failing now and it needs to focus on that

(Phil Wang, Have I Got News For You?, 2022)

In marked contrast to the North, Labour are still struggling to recoup past losses in the Midlands. Interestingly, current polling predicts Labour would get more votes than the Conservatives in both regions, but fewer seats. Which is not a unique situation. Something similar has happened at UK level several times in the past. In 2019, the Conservatives also got more votes than Labour, but fewer seats, in Yorkshire and The Humber. There have been many changes in demographics and political affiliations in the Midlands over the last 15 years, and now Labour are struggling to get back on the saddle outside the most obvious urban areas like Stoke-on-Trent, Northampton or West Bromwich. As in the North, more recent Conservative gains like Derby North or Bolsover, from the 2019 intake, will be easier to take back. But there are just fewer here as the Blue Wave first hit in 2010 and has not really receded since.

The fatality list here would include some names on the government payroll like Tom Pursglove, Amanda Solloway, Maggie Throup, Michael Ellis and Robin Walker. Or rather, some who were on the government payroll yesterday around lunchtime, but may not be right now. Plus some backbenchers of more or less dubious reputation like Gary Sambrook, Daniel Kawczynski and Jonathan Gullis. No big trophies to hang on Starmer's office wall, though.

Choosing a partner is a lot like choosing a Portaloo

You might end up wishing you’d just done it in the woods

(Sandi Toksvig, QI: Quintessential, 2019)

The four most overrated things in the world are lobster, champagne, anal sex and picnics

(Christopher Hitchens)

Labour are also predicted to do extremely well in the South, which will probably earn the title of Key Battleground at the next election, instead of the Midlands. Here too, Labour are matching their 2005 results with a predicted 49 seats. Which triggers a massive list of A-list fatalities: Dominic Raab, Chloe Smith, Alok Sharma, Grant Shapps, George Eustice, Alex Chalk, Conor Burns. Plus a procession of lesser players who still have made a name for themselves in the media: Tobias Elwood, Will Quince, Maria Caulfield, Iain Stewart, Stephen McPartland, Steve Baker. There would definitely be some sense of an ironic tectonic shift if the center of gravity of English politics actually moved towards the Leafy South. But the Conservatives could only blame themselves for that, as they have done their best to alienate both the Outer Commuter Belt and the rural parts of the Home Counties. Karma, mates, karma.

I mentioned the ebb and flow of tactical voting in crosstabs for the South earlier. One particularly spectacular example of that was the Redfield and Wilton poll conducted on 22 June, which had the LibDems coming out first in the South West of England. The very region where Tiverton and Honiton is located, quite non coincidentally. There was a clear double tsunami as a result: LibDems overtaking Labour in seats where they came third in 2019, and then wiping out a fuckload of Conservative MPs in allegedly safe seats. That's the poll that predicted that Jacob Rees-Mogg and Liam Fox would both lose their seats in Somerset. If you think that won't happen, remember that the LibDems wiped the Conservatives out of power last year in the Bath and North East Somerset council, which includes Rees-Mogg's seat, with Jake's own councillor now being a Liberal Democrat. And then this year in the new unitary Somerset Council, which includes Fox's seat. It's less likely to happen now, as later polls have reverted to more classic patterns. But it would be quite fun if it did happen after all.

I give my dinner guests a pork pie or anything by Fray Bentos

Whichever I can defrost the quickest

(Princess Anne)

One wants everyone out of the house by 9:15pm at the latest

For pudding, I pass them a choc ice to eat in the car

(Princess Anne)

Current polling says that the Conservatives would lose a lot of votes in London, oddly to Reform UK in a generally Europhile and 'progressive' region. Which the multiplying factor in FPTP translates into a severe decline of their number of seats. But this is quite an ambiguous situation where Labour and the Liberal Democrats would also lose a few, with a handful of voters switching to the Greens. Again, the arcane workings of FPTP allow some parties to benefit from their opponent's weaknesses, rather than from their own strengths. Labour would thusly snatch Chingford and Woodford Green, Chipping Barnet, Kensington. The LibDems would snatch Carshalton and Wallington, Wimbledon. Among the Conservative past-A-list, that means Iain Duncan Smith, Theresa Villiers and Stephen Hammond losing their seats. But Boris Johnson is still predicted to hold his in Uxbridge and South Ruislip, even if one poll every now and then says he would lose it. Current polls nevertheless say BloJo's majority would be cut by two thirds, which makes his seat an obvious top-tier target. One that could be gained if the Greens and Liberal Democrats both stood down and campaigned for the Labour candidate. Just saying.

Despite these excellent overall prospects, all is not guns n'roses for Labour in London. An upset might very well come from where they least expect it to, but should be expecting it since the last Council elections. Tower Hamlets. In 2005, George Galloway snatched Bethnal Green and Bow, which covers the northern half of the Borough, from Labour, as a candidate for the radical whatever Respect. This year, Aspire has snatched control of the Council and gained the Mayoralty from Labour. For all intents and purposes, Aspire is pretty much Respect 2.0, with some era-specific and area-specific fine tuning. Last May's results by ward show that they also have a strong voter base in the southern half of the Borough, the Poplar and Limehouse constituency, which has been a Labour seat continuously for exactly 100 years in various incarnations. Not that it makes Labour immune to a challenge from the self-identifying 'democratic socialist' left, weirdest things have happened. Ironically, all the arguments that Labour could have against a not-too-inclusive not-too-diverse fringe party would probably backfire as 'racist', and all those alluding to some law-breaking past would probably be painted as 'smear' by the owenjonesian faction of the loony left. Barring any major industrial accident, these two seats have real pop corn potential for the next election.

I know that men don’t wash their hands after they’ve been in the toilet

I was once at Wembley Stadium, and I went to wash my hands

When I got to the sink, there were three penises urinating into the sink

(Alan Davies)

The thirty seconds of silence at the end are part of the song, in Robert Wyatt's own words:

"A suitable place for those with tired ears to pause and resume listening later"

It’s hard to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if it’s not there

(Dmitry Peskov)

There's been a lot of talk recently about the way public opinion has been evolving about the Ukraine war, possibly losing interest and offering weaker support after four months, the proverbial 'Ukraine fatigue'. To enlighten us about that, YouGov fielded their 'Ukraine Conflict' poll again this month, nearly three months after the previous instalment. The questions are the same that YouGov have been using since the first time they surveyed the same topics, on the eve of the Russian invasion, so it's easy to spot what has changed and what hasn't. The reassuring part is that, when dealing with the underlying principles, nothing really has. At least not significantly, when you compare the results on the day after the invasion, in mid-March and in early June. YouGov tested six items right from the start of this tracker in late February, and added two more in early March. I opted for an abridged version of the results here, including only the initial point, where we were when YouGov discontinued the tracking three weeks after the invasion, and now.

So, on the principles alone, there is no real sign of fatigue in the British population. Of course, Boris Johnson says there is, because almost hyperbolic support for Ukraine offers him an opportunity to shine and wipe domestic issues under the rug. Plus the added pleasure of potentially rubbing Macron's nose in it, whatever 'it' is, and making France look like yellow-bellied appeasers. Johnson clearly did not expect Macron to alter his stance after Russia crossed a red line by dragging Belarus into the war as a de facto co-belligerent. Then he managed to spin that as a personal success, the result of his 'bromance' with Macron, which sounds fairly ridiculous in the current situation. Which is not about scoring cheap points at a G7 summit, but about securing public opinion's support for a tough response to Russia, which is not actually faltering. And it shouldn't, because Putin's brain works just like Hitler's or a male-rights-activist's. The more you give him to appease him, the more he demands and it never ends. Quite significantly though, YouGov also regularly surveyed the changes in the level of support for sanctions against Russia, when the consequences in our everyday life are spelt out. Below is the sequence of results since February, which shows a significant increase in support after the criminal invasion started, and until the polling was discontinued in mid-March. Then it changes.

The data from the June poll show that levels of support have significantly gone down in three months, and are pretty much back to where they were immediately after the invasion. But nobody should feel entitled to pass judgment based on these results, or shame anyone for it. Especially not the Waitrose-fed virtue-signalling £5k-a-column metropolitan punditariat. Remember the panel here are people who are suffering from the worst cost-of-living crisis in 50 years, and also face various shortages labelled as Brexit benefits in Tory NewSpeak. It's definitely a moment when I'm willing to see only the half-full part of the story. Despite all the hardships they've already been through, 40% of Brits, give or take, are still willing to endure more if it can help the people of Ukraine. That's the message the government should hear, not the narrative about an alleged fatigue. This is today's true Blitz Spirit, and not listening to it would be falling into Putin's trap when he tries and sows the seeds of division. We certainly can't allow that to happen, not after Russia deliberately committed yet another unforgiveable war crime against Ukrainian civilians.

We know they are lying, they know they are lying, they know we know they are lying,

We know they know we know they are lying, but they are still lying.

(Alexander Solzhenitsyn)

Politics is the art of postponing decisions until they are no longer relevant

(Henri Queuille)

The French legislative election has been quite a show. Already on election night after the first round, there was a controversy about the results and who had actually won. The Ministry of the Interior, which is French for Home Office, had its own numbers, while newspaper Le Monde, which is French for The Guardian, had theirs. Which both showed the Macronist coalition Ensemble and the left-wing coalition NUPES neck to neck, but didn't agree on who came first, by less than 1%. Turned out both made slight mistakes, as they failed to assign some candidates to the proper 'nuance', which is French for political affiliation, so I did my own calculations from available sources, mostly to make this year's results directly comparable to 2017's. Which might not be 100% accurate either, but that does not change the key result: NUPES and Ensemble finishing elbow to elbow, which is French for neck and neck, and Macron on his way to being denied a parliamentary majority, a first for a newly elected or re-elected President since 1988. This did not really come as a surprise, as the first round polls were quite accurate. They correctly predicted Ensemble and NUPES finishing within a hare's breath of each other, and the very last poll even had the 1% lead for Ensemble right. They also all had the far-right National Rally and the big-tent-right The Republicans swapping third and fourth place, compared to the previous election in 2017.

As I said earlier, seat projections for a two-round first-past-the-post election are notoriously difficult, but French pollsters tried it anyway as soon as they had the exit poll on election night, or based on polls fielded later in the week. Just after election night, two pollsters switched from estimates by coalition to estimates by party for the NUPES candidates only, which were made possible because everybody knew exactly which candidates were standing in which constituencies for the second round. But all then switched back to the safer option of projections by coalition. The first round results were not without additional surprises. The worst surprise for Emmanuel Macron was obviously that his coalition allies, the historically centrist MoDem and the centre-right Agir and Horizons, had done relatively better, compared to their number of incumbents, than his own party La République En Marche. The obvious explanation is that the Macronist camp have suffered heavy losses on their left flank, while solidifying their right flank. This resulted in many incumbents, who had originally come from the left and relied on the 'moderate left' vote, finding themselves in the danger zone facing NUPES candidates. While those from the right had more solid electoral bases in constituencies with a weaker left-wing vote.

The sequence of seat projections along the last week, compared to the state of the National Assembly after the 2017 election, shows that the Macronists' fearmongering drive against NUPES did not really work as planned. Ironically, it helped the right-wing parties more than Ensemble. Pundits were quick to point at the many layers of paradox and contradiction in the Macronist campaign. They had literally begged Mélenchon's voters to back them in the second round of the presidential election, to defeat Marine Le Pen. Then pretty much asked far-right voters to help them defeat NUPES candidates in battleground constituencies. While keeping totally quiet about policy proposals that might alienate 'moderate left' voters, like the very controversial reform of state pensions. The campaign pretty much amounted to having it both ways and eating it too, which was probably not the most clever way to gather momentum. Even their attacks on Jeremy Corbyn travelling to France to campaign for NUPES fell flat. Probably because nobody in France remembers who Corbyn is, and the handful who do don't give a fucking shit what he's up to.

Politics is not about solving problems, it's about silencing those who pose them

(Henri Queuille)

There is no problem that a lack of solution does not end up overcoming

(Henri Queuille)

Nunc factus est, and it's not a pretty sight for the Macronist coalition. I am quite sure that Emmanuel Macron now wishes he had listened to his close advisers, who have more political flair than him, and urged him to dissolve the National Assembly just after the presidential election. He could then have had an early legislative election just 20 days after dissolution, or something like around 20 May. When NUPES had yet failed to gather momentum, and polls and seat projections predicted the Macronist coalition would have held a majority of seats, albeit a reduced one. When later polls conclusively showed that this ship had bolted out of the station, every trick in the book was worth using. As the best example of that panic, Emmanuel Macron quite transparently used a much-awaited visit to Kyiv as a way to boost his party's chances in the election. And the results of the second round did not disappoint, with Ensemble and NUPES bagging fewer seats than expected, and the National Rally bagging far more. The comparison with the previous election in 2017 shows how massively the tectonic plates have moved. With this odd result that the only real winner is Marine Le Pen, while both Emmanuel Macron and Jean-Luc Mélenchon failed. One to hold a majority, and the other to become Prime Minister. That promises some interesting moments ahead.

As someone with dual citizenship of France and the United Kingdom, and despite self-identifying as a libertarian socialist, I'm quite happy that the country of my birth said 'No Pasarás' to the flea-market Chavez, who wanted to enshrine 'gender freedom' in the French Constitution, basically the right to self-identify as any 'gender' at any time at will, without the weeest safeguard. The linked article is in French, but Google Translate will get most of it right. The interesting part is that Mélenchon hasn't the fuckiest scoobie what gender self-identification actually entails, something he would have known if he had bothered to look at what's happening next door in the UK. Fortunately nobody took the bait, and the gender voodoo did not become an issue either in the presidential campaign or in the legislative campaign. The funniest, or most appalling part, of Mélenchon's ideological acrobatics is that he has fully endorsed the most extremist talking points of the American loony woke Left, while also being rabidly anti-American and a dangerously unquestioning supporter of Putin until 24 February. Compared to all this, technocratic social liberalism definitely looks like the lesser of two evils. Back to the matter at hand, this election confirms the deep geographical divide already seen at the presidential election.

On the right are the parties topping the vote on the first round, and on the left the parties who bagged the seats on the second round. Yellow for Ensemble, red for NUPES, blue for The Republicans and associates, brownish for the National Rally. For over 60 years, common wisdom in France was that the results of the first round were a reliable predictor of the second round. This was proven badly wrong this year, as the relative strength of the four main tribes made the second round much more unpredictable than ever before, with transfers from eliminated candidates going all over the place. The location of the National Rally and NUPES seats clearly shows a France of discontent, fuelled by a mix of actual deprivation and feelings of neglect. The main difference is that NUPES bagged most of its seats in metropolitan areas, especially around Paris, while the National Rally extended its influence way beyond its traditional heartlands in the post-industrial North and North East, and along the Mediterranean coast. The far right now has a legitimate claim to being the true representative of deprived rural France, those who were at the core of the Yellow Vests protests four years ago. And that alone is a very bad omen for anyone who is in charge in Paris.

History travels down the same paths as geography

(François Mitterrand)

Discovery is not seeking new lands, but seeing with new eyes

(Marcel Proust)

In the aftermath of this election, it's interesting to look at how the votes for the main political tribes have evolved over the last 50 years at the first rounds of legislative elections. Which is different, and sometimes significantly, to how they evolved at presidential elections. We're going back to a time when the radical left was the Communist Party, once devout Stalinists and later Brezhnevists, and the dominant political tribes were a not-batshit-crazy traditional right and a mostly social-democratic historic left. It is interesting to compare this evolution to what happened at presidential elections, which I included in an earlier article. The evolution between 2017 and 2022 is markedly different. The centrist tribe was slightly stronger at the 2022 presidential election than in 2017, but noticeably weaker at the legislative election. While the far right and the radical left both progressed significantly more at the legislative election than at the presidential election. Which pretty much triggered the political earthquake France has witnessed since 19 June.

The breakdown of seats in the French National Assembly has evolved over the last 50 years in a way that exaggerates the changes in the popular vote. The electoral law, the unique two-round first-past-the-post, is only partly responsible for that. The ability of parties to sign up into an electoral alliance was another major factor, as it allowed parties to bag votes at the second round well beyond their first-round voter base. It has worked against the Communist Party before 1972, when they struck an electoral deal with the Socialist Party that lasted until 2007. Since the 1980s the system also worked strongly against the National Front and then the National Rally, as nobody else wanted a formal alliance with them. Before this year, the rise of the far-right in the popular vote translated into a meaningful number of seats only at the 1986 election, which was the only one since 1956 to be held under proportional representation. Otherwise, the tweaked FPTP built into the two-round system kept them on the outside looking in.

Until 2017, the two-round FPTP system delivered exactly what it had been designed for, a convincing majority of seats on a third of the votes at best. This year, it totally imploded and pretty much gamed itself, because the popular vote was quartered between three big poles and a smaller one. And the end result is disturbingly close to what proportional representation, based on the second round votes, would have delivered. This is a totally unprecedented situation since the beginning of the French Fifth Republic., the exact kind of industrial accident the primeval incarnation of the Constitution of 1958 was designed to avoid. This has led some in the French political punditariat to compare it to the Fourth Republic, a proverbial example of governmental instability, triggered by a purely parliamentary regime where 15ish parties competed for seats. Which is a bit of a stretch, as the election may have weakened Macron, but has not removed his extensive constitutional powers, including the quasi-regal prerogative to dissolve the National Assembly and call a snap election. Which he probably won't use in the immediate future, as it would most likely deliver the same result. But that's a potent weapon that could be used about a year from now, at the most opportune moment when Macron can claim he has tried everything to make things work, but the pesky opposition parties wouldn't let him. So let's reboot the fucking thing. Then and only thus, he could come back a winner. Mark my words.

What the world needs is more geniuses with humility, there are so few of us left

(Oscar Levant)

Jeremy's Den

06/07/2022

The Last Straw?

No comments:

Post a Comment

We Must Be Dreaming