Conservative leadership election

[cp]

I think there will be quite a large number of 'also rans' like Soames in this race, rather like the GOP in 2016 and the Dems in 2020, most of whom will drop out after the first ballot.

Since no one has done it in this thread yet, I'll repeat the well-worn 'analysis' that the putative leader in Tory leadership races rarely ends up winning.

The timetable published by the 1922 committee is roughly this:

June 10th: Leadership race begins
June 20th-30th: Beginning of successive rounds of voting by Tory MPs, with lowest scoring contender being knocked off.
July 1-20: Final two candidates canvas Tory members (approx 125K of them, extraordinarily unrepresentative of the country, who must have joined the party >3 months earlier)

Final results will be released prior to the parliamentary summer recess (around July 21st).

[cp]

Are any of the candidates supporting May's deal?

No, or at least not explicitly. The contenders proposing a new/different deal are, in effect, offering to keep most of May's deal except for some part of it they don't like, usually the backstop. Thing is, because the EU won't renegotiate, any candidate who isn't advocating for 'no-deal' is tacitly arguing for May's deal (or a general election and/or referendum, but they've all denounced that path as suicide for the party)

[cp]

Who on earth gets the cops called on them literally days before a vote to make them prime minister? I would never break plates and laptops in my home when my wife makes me angry. But I would REALLY not do it when I am a week away from being PM.

A man convinced of his invincibility.

On the subject actually, how likely is it he is elected PM only to lose a No Confidence vote almost immediately?

It's certainly possible, though at this point I wouldn't say likely. For the new PM to lose a VONC he would need to state unequivocally that the government was going to either go for 'no-deal' or go for a revocation/referendum, i.e. something that would be unacceptable to a good chunk of the Tory party.

I've heard people hypothesize about the new Tory leader not gaining the confidence of the House due to the precarious numbers (Tories+DUP = majority of 3 right now), but unless there is a big move like I described above, I don't think that will come to pass. Convention and caution will probably convince enough MPs to give the new Tory leader the chance to holder the office of PM. What happens next is anyone's guess.

[cp]

Yesterday I watched a video regarding prorogation as a way to get no deal passed.

However, there is a much simpler way to get no deal if a PM wanted. Why not just run out the clock?

Tell the EU to not give any extensions and just run out the clock. Put maybe a final "meaningful vote" on May's deal at 23:59 in the last day of before no deal. If it does not pass, it's no deal as the time has run out.

If May of all people got what, 2 days close to the deadline? Boris can easily just run out the clock on purpose.

Yes, but he doesn't get to do this in a vacuum - opponents of no deal (not least in his own party) will be trying everything possible to stop it happening.

Yeah, the point of prorogation is to prevent parliament from bringing down a government intent on running out the clock.

If Boris has a plan, I suspect it's something like:
try to renegotiate the WA -> refuse to extend -> bait parliament into blocking or revoking -> snap election -> unite leavers on a no deal platform -> win big majority -> use it to pass the WA

That seems like a really risky plan. Though I guess Boris doesn't care

That part is the crux and probably the most likely reason such a gambit would fail. For all their bluster, the Tories' support for no deal when they've had to record a vote on it is ambivalent at best. They split almost in half on the no-deal indicative vote back in March and only 34 or so voted against May's deal the third time around, which ostensibly would have resulted in a no-deal if May hadn't asked for an extension (I know it's not that straightforward, but still).

A Tory Party pursuing no deal would likely see a few dozen MPs refuse to stand or pledge to oppose the manifesto, possibly leading to their deselection. Unless they made some arrangement with the Brexit Party (I think this is highly unlikely), it could produce a 'Canadian PCs in 1993' kind of meltdown.

[cp]

Indeed. Unless one is inclined (or paid to) disbelieve everything the EU says and imagine the UK/Johnson can get what they want automatically, it's quite clear there's going to be no change in the Withdrawal Agreement.

Johnson may get a boost from winning the leadership race, but he's getting beaten up in the press pretty badly. He's also boxing himself in really tightly by stating over and over again that he can get a deal with the EU and that it will all be sorted by the end of October. That is totally unrealistic.

As for the likelihood of a 93-style meltdown, obviously it's just one potential outcome, but I think it's much more likely than Johnson getting a renegotiation, winning an election, and staying (becoming?) popular.

If nothing else the past few months have shown the people who have abandoned the Tories since March (remember, they've dropped from 40% to 18% in 12 weeks) will only flock back if 'Brexit gets done'. That only happens with a WA, which only happens with a backstop/payments/citizens rights guarantee, which a decent chunk of the Tory party - and all the DUP - will see as 'betrayal'. Johnson's probably smart enough not to bother trying that or trying for a no-deal exit on the 31st of October, so that only leaves an election ... without Brexit being 'done'.

If you had to imagine the scenario for a true Tory catastrophe in an election, this would be pretty close to fitting the bill.

[cp]

I'm really not sure where this stuff about Boris bring popular comes from. He really isn't the Great Tory Saviour. Sure, he'll get a honeymoon period but it'll probably be short and the backlash brutal.

Of course, they also won't end up being the Canadian PCs for a number of reasons, chiefly that Jeremy Corbyn is no Jean Chretien.

If it turns out that way, I'd say the more likely reason a Tory meltdown doesn't reach PC-93 proportions is because of structural factors in the party's vote rather than the personality of the opposition leader.

The PC's in 1993 had no equivalent of the Home Counties and rural/countryside seats the Tories currently hold and that aren't being challenged by the Brexit Party (who are mostly challenging seats in the East, Midlands, and post-industrial North) or the Lib Dems (who are mostly challenging seats in the West and urban areas). There's probably a core of about 50-75 Tory seats that wouldn't fall to any other party, unless they sank to single digits nationally.

It's also worth keeping in mind how little regard Jean Chretien received in the non-francophone press before becoming PM. Like Corbyn now, a lot of the people supposedly in the know and close to power completely wrote him off.

[cp]

I think the easiest solution for the tories would be a new election with either the WA or no deal in their manifesto, so they can deselect any member unable to support the manifesto plan and possibly hatch out a pact with Farage.

Easier said than done. A manifesto with the WA in it would be unsupportable by a significant portion of current MPs and a poison pill for any pact with Farage. A manifesto with no deal in it *might* win over Farage (I think he's too vainglorious to agree to anything but the most cosmetic of electoral pacts), but it would certainly alienate the remaining moderate wing of the party. The Tories could, theoretically, emerge the largest party from such an election, but it's very difficult to see how they could get a majority in the House.

[cp]

Gosh, Oryxslayer, that's a lot to take in. You're right that there's a great deal of flux in voting intentions right now, and that Brexit is driving that flux, but the 'fundamentals' you've chosen to focus on are neither the whole story nor necessarily predictive of the outcome you forecast.

Firstly, the fundamentals you identify (Johnson's incumbency/ambition; the ephemeral nature of the Brexit Party; the Lib/Lab Remainer split) are not the only structural factors defining the political landscape. Some others worth considering:

- The economy/austerity: the 2017 election showed quite clearly that the country was much less receptive to Tory economic policies than most people assumed. Anger over austerity, Universal Credit, and cuts to education and health care is palpable and the Tories have zero credibility on the issue. 2017 also showed that no matter how large Brexit might loom as an issue, a general election can and will address other issues, and voters will decide whom to support for a wide variety of reasons.

- Incumbency: winning 4 elections in a row is a tall order in the best of times. Doing so while failing to resolve the most pressing issue of the day (that the incumbent party initiated) invites skepticism as to that party's ability to succeed.

Secondly, assuming Johnson/Brexit/Corbyn are the major factors in determining the next election, I don't think your account of them is altogether perceptive.

For starters, Johnson being ambitious and being willing to cling to power by the last atoms of his fingernails is nothing new, nor does it distinguish him from any other leader of the Tories.

Meanwhile, I don't think your read on the Brexit Party is accurate. So long as Brexit remains unresolved, which is to say the UK has not left the EU with no-deal or a Malthouse Compromise style revamped WA, the Brexit Party's raison d'etre will be undiminished. Even if Johnson swears he will go for a no-deal Brexit, before or after October 31st, Farage and the diehard Leavers will (prudently) deduce that he is more likely to actually follow through on it if they keep the pressure on. That means running in a GE, splitting the Leaver-sympathetic vote just as badly, if not worse, than the Lib/Lab split of the Remainer vote.

Finally, there are a lot of problems with Corbyn's Brexit policy, but all evidence suggests that he'll inch close enough to a Remain position in the next few months to give just enough cover to diehard Remainers (as well as diehard anti-Tories who aren't already pro-Labour) to keep his voter base together. The Lib Dem surge from the local/EU elections is unlikely to be replicated in a GE for largely the same reasons UKIP got 27% in the 2014 EU election and 8% in the 2015 GE.

Something worth keeping in mind: Johnson's modus operandi has always been to make a big show but do as little as possible. That works for becoming mayor, or getting elected as an MP, and it may even be enough to get elected as leader of the Tories. But it will be utterly useless at changing the  the Irish trilemma, the EU's insistence on the WA, and the lack of a parliamentary majority. Those 'fundamentals' will remain unaltered no matter how much Johnson blusters.

Put another way: nothing has changed.

[cp]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen. Although I still think it could, with pretty much everything else I predicted remaining the same.

I see, so completely delusional wishful thinking then

Be nice, you two!

[cp]

Indeed. Unless one is inclined (or paid to) disbelieve everything the EU says and imagine the UK/Johnson can get what they want automatically, it's quite clear there's going to be no change in the Withdrawal Agreement.

Well, if you're inclined to believe what the EU says, then maybe you'd believe what I'd said considering it's the EU's diplomats themselves who've apparently been privately saying that, while the EU remains resistant to reopening the WA, they could still add to it in addition to potentially rewriting the political declaration on a future relationship & wrapping the whole thing up in a new umbrella deal.

This isn't a pro-Boris delusion (I mean, f**k Boris); it's just what's been reported as fact.

Reported as fact, but not reported very accurately. EU diplomats have said they'd add to the WA, rewrite the PD, and sign off on a comprehensive new deal for months. Every time they do the British press, especially but not exclusively the pro-Brexit press, reports it as if they've finally located the chink in the EU's armour and that they're about to capitulate to the UK's demands. Inevitably, they fail to report the statement that always follows: that any adjustments to the current deal is dependent on accepting the major components of the current deal, i.e. the backstop/citizens rights/£39 billion payment.

[cp]

snip

I think said GE will be triggered when Boris tries for no deal in October, after 'exhausting' or at least pretending to exhaust all other options. The remainer Tories bolt, an extension is granted for a GE period, and its a multitude of remainer policies vs Boris. In this regard, Farage would have already succeeded, the Conservatives have made a bed of No Deal and they would have to sleep in it if they win the election. They have also taken the plunge and carved of their arm that backed remain, for what would ideally This hypothetical GE would also be called purely over Brexit, with the cliff literally right there, all other party policies that do not tie back to Brexit would have to take a back seat. But I will say that I perhaps may have underestimated Corbyn's ability to change...or maybe you are overestimating it. I dunno, Labour infighting is harder to follow then Conservative infighting here in the states.

Now if you think the GE will occur under different circumstances, then different fundamentals may surface. But the situation reflected in the polls right now is untenable and in so much flux that something has to emerge from all this rampant destructive energy.

I also will say that your point on Boris himself is a little off. You see the man as waffling, I see him as consistently trying to follow his voters popular will. This of course leads to 'cracking down and backing down' as seen in the present White House administration. You end up caught between appeasing one side of the base and then angering another, and end up doing nothing but piss off those who would never support you. But when the base is so unified around a single policy, No Deal...

I don't think I ever said Johnson was waffling. I see him as clueless, or at least hapless, and no longer the supposedly charismatic 'man of the people' figure his supporters believe him to me. He might have been that in 2012, but his association with Brexit has toxified his persona. He risks doing the same thing by pursuing anything other than a no-deal exit on October 31st.

On that point, I think your hypothetical election scenario is quite plausible, at least in the events that would lead up to it. However, I don't think it would play out as you depict. If Johnson went full bore for a no-deal exit he would be stopped by Parliament one way or another. That confrontation would pry loose a significant chunk of the Tory's moderate support - enough that even a pact with the Brexit Party would not be enough to prevent heavy losses for the Tories across the South, West, and in Scotland.

Also, I think the chances of Johnson getting credit for trying but failing to go for no-deal before October 31st are quite slim. Leavers will be apoplectic that their precious Brexit was delayed *again*, and Johnson's reputation as a self-seeker will be way too difficult to ignore when they try to figure out who to blame. Meanwhile, Farage will have no incentive to let up on him in such a situation. He (Farage) could quite easily convince himself he will ride a wave of Leaver anger into Parliament in such a situation; he managed something similar in the EU elections, after all, so why not go for the big prize?

Everything about Brexit up to now has revealed how implosive and cannablistic its advocates become as soon as they have a chance to actually implement it. I'm struggling to see how this round will be any different - save that it could mean Corbyn becomes PM and finally puts the whole thing to bed.

[cp]

Indeed. Unless one is inclined (or paid to) disbelieve everything the EU says and imagine the UK/Johnson can get what they want automatically, it's quite clear there's going to be no change in the Withdrawal Agreement.

Well, if you're inclined to believe what the EU says, then maybe you'd believe what I'd said considering it's the EU's diplomats themselves who've apparently been privately saying that, while the EU remains resistant to reopening the WA, they could still add to it in addition to potentially rewriting the political declaration on a future relationship & wrapping the whole thing up in a new umbrella deal.

This isn't a pro-Boris delusion (I mean, f**k Boris); it's just what's been reported as fact.

Reported as fact, but not reported very accurately. EU diplomats have said they'd add to the WA, rewrite the PD, and sign off on a comprehensive new deal for months. Every time they do the British press, especially but not exclusively the pro-Brexit press, reports it as if they've finally located the chink in the EU's armour and that they're about to capitulate to the UK's demands. Inevitably, they fail to report the statement that always follows: that any adjustments to the current deal is dependent on accepting the major components of the current deal, i.e. the backstop/citizens rights/£39 billion payment.

Well, is that not implicit in saying that the WA (as it currently stands; i.e. the backstop/citizens' rights/divorce bill) won't be re-opened per se, but that it can be added onto (presumably) with smaller concessions to the UK?

Yes, you would think that, and you'd be correct! Yet, every time that sort of story is published the reaction always frames it as 'EU WILL RENEGOTIATE BACKSTOP AFTER ALL' rather than as an acknowledgement by the EU that they will say whatever the UK wants to get the current deal, backstop and all, across the line.

The crux of the matter is that the people who want changes to the WA agreement are asking for something the EU will never concede. They're in denial about this and so they latch on to anything any EU official says that they can twist into a rhetorical opening for their preferred course of action.

[cp]

snip

I think said GE will be triggered when Boris tries for no deal in October, after 'exhausting' or at least pretending to exhaust all other options. The remainer Tories bolt, an extension is granted for a GE period, and its a multitude of remainer policies vs Boris. In this regard, Farage would have already succeeded, the Conservatives have made a bed of No Deal and they would have to sleep in it if they win the election. They have also taken the plunge and carved of their arm that backed remain, for what would ideally This hypothetical GE would also be called purely over Brexit, with the cliff literally right there, all other party policies that do not tie back to Brexit would have to take a back seat. But I will say that I perhaps may have underestimated Corbyn's ability to change...or maybe you are overestimating it. I dunno, Labour infighting is harder to follow then Conservative infighting here in the states.

Now if you think the GE will occur under different circumstances, then different fundamentals may surface. But the situation reflected in the polls right now is untenable and in so much flux that something has to emerge from all this rampant destructive energy.

I also will say that your point on Boris himself is a little off. You see the man as waffling, I see him as consistently trying to follow his voters popular will. This of course leads to 'cracking down and backing down' as seen in the present White House administration. You end up caught between appeasing one side of the base and then angering another, and end up doing nothing but piss off those who would never support you. But when the base is so unified around a single policy, No Deal...

I don't think I ever said Johnson was waffling. I see him as clueless, or at least hapless, and no longer the supposedly charismatic 'man of the people' figure his supporters believe him to me. He might have been that in 2012, but his association with Brexit has toxified his persona. He risks doing the same thing by pursuing anything other than a no-deal exit on October 31st.

On that point, I think your hypothetical election scenario is quite plausible, at least in the events that would lead up to it. However, I don't think it would play out as you depict. If Johnson went full bore for a no-deal exit he would be stopped by Parliament one way or another. That confrontation would pry loose a significant chunk of the Tory's moderate support - enough that even a pact with the Brexit Party would not be enough to prevent heavy losses for the Tories across the South, West, and in Scotland.

Also, I think the chances of Johnson getting credit for trying but failing to go for no-deal before October 31st are quite slim. Leavers will be apoplectic that their precious Brexit was delayed *again*, and Johnson's reputation as a self-seeker will be way too difficult to ignore when they try to figure out who to blame. Meanwhile, Farage will have no incentive to let up on him in such a situation. He (Farage) could quite easily convince himself he will ride a wave of Leaver anger into Parliament in such a situation; he managed something similar in the EU elections, after all, so why not go for the big prize?

Everything about Brexit up to now has revealed how implosive and cannablistic its advocates become as soon as they have a chance to actually implement it. I'm struggling to see how this round will be any different - save that it could mean Corbyn becomes PM and finally puts the whole thing to bed.

*Shrugs. We will see what happens in 5 weeks or more. As long as we all recognize that the polls/projections right now are useless, and the shear scope of the destructive energy means that any small thing can produce massive effects on both party policy and overall results. Under FPTP this destruction cannot be maintained forever, eventually there has to be some re-consolidation towards 2 of 4, but who knows when that will happen or who will be the 2.

On that we are in perfect agreement.

[cp]

My prediction: Boris-led Tories shoot to the top of the polls. Election almost immediately. New withdraw agreement passes. Boris remains popular. No idea where this stuff about the Canadian Progressive Conservatives is coming from, it's not going to happen.

And that strikes me very much as what YOU want to happen.

I would rather No Deal Brexit happen.

What is the logic behind preferring No Deal to a Withdrawal Agreement that was both popular in Parliament and in the country at large?

1) it isn't popular in parliament or in the country.

2) If you're going to exit the EU, exit the EU. Withdrawal is Brexit in name only.

3) Get the issue over with. If you do fake Brexit, no matter what happens, Remainers and Brexiteers can claim that the economy failed/didn't fail because their option won out. If you do a real Brexit, there is no question. If the economy tanks, it unambiguously means Brexit was wrong and Tories should be punished. If nothing happens (and it probably will) then it unambiguously means that the Remainers are hysterical children who should never be trusted with power.

Number 1's importance isn't even comparable to the other two. The Overton Window has shifted so much these past three years (Thanks to Farage and Tory incompetence) that recently a poll found close to 40% of the country supported No Deal. That's not just a overwhelming majority of Leave voters, it's a majority so large that if a politician claims to represent Brexit these days it's required to support No Deal in some form.

Also, a no-deal Brexit wouldn't come close to getting the issue 'over with'. As soon as the UK approached the EU for talks on a new arrangement (FTA, Canada +++, whatever), the EU will make a precondition of talks that the UK accept the WA in full - backstop, payments, citizens rights. A no-deal scenario would be far more politically untenable and (overconfident assertions to the contrary notwithstanding) economically painful for the UK than the EU, so it is virtually certain the UK will end up having to accept the EU's offer, if only to staunch the self-inflicted bleeding of no-deal.