Boris Johnson resigned (1 Viewer)

[Optimus Prime]

It actually looked like he was going to survive all the missteps
================
LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Boris Johnson resigned Thursday, acknowledging that it was “clearly the will” of his party that he should go.

He stepped down immediately as leader of his Conservative Party but plans to remain as prime minister while the leadership contest is held. He said he has appointed a new Cabinet following a multitude of resignations, but many are calling for him to go now.

It is a humiliating defeat for Johnson, who succeeded in leading Britain out of the European Union and was credited with rolling out one of the world’s most successful mass vaccination campaigns to combat COVID-19.

The announcement came after the latest ethics scandal around Johnson’s leadership led some 50 senior lawmakers to quit the government and left him unable to govern.

Speaking outside No. 10 Downing St., Johnson said he was “immensely proud of the achievements of this government,” from Brexit to steering the country through the pandemic, and leading the West in standing up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

But he acknowledged that “in politics, no one is remotely indispensable.”

Johnson had clung to power for two days, defiantly telling lawmakers on Wednesday that he had a “colossal mandate” from voters and intended to get on with the business of government……..

Johnson resigns, remains UK prime minister for now

LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Boris Johnson resigned Thursday, acknowledging that it was “clearly the will” of his party that he should go. He stepped down immediately as leader of his Conservative Party but plans to remain as prime minister while the leadership contest is held.

apnews.com

 

[RobF]

no idea who this is, but his replacement

Liz Truss vows tax cuts after winning vote to be next British prime minister

She vowed to press ahead with promised tax cuts and action to tackle a deepening energy and cost of living crisis.

www.reuters.com

Unsurprisingly, I do know who she is, and hahaha, we're so forked.

She's somewhat hard to describe - "pound shop Thatcher" (dollar store, if you insist) is the obvious one, but doesn't quite capture it - in that in many ways she's a "these are my principles, but if you don't like them, I have others," type. One example, she was against Brexit in 2016, but is ardently for it now, to the extent of possibly starting a trade war with the EU.

She's also taking over as PM while the UK is in a cost-of-living crisis, and how. Because here it's a whole bunch of factors. Inflation, in particular rising cost of energy driven significantly if indirectly by the war in Ukraine, plus Brexit, plus over a decade of austerity which has stifled wage growth, and reduced public investment in things like renewables and energy conservation (like insulating housing stock). And when I say 'rising cost of energy', I mean, for example:



Domestic energy bills here are capped, but the cap gets raised based on wholesale prices. It was £1,277 (representative value for an average household) in October 2021, then increased 54% to £1,971 in April, and is now due to rise another 80% (!) to £3,549 in October.

There is no cap for businesses, hence things like the above with care homes.

It's not clear exactly what Truss's plan to deal with this is - see the thing about principles, she's been kind of all over the place during her campaign - but she's talked repeatedly about cutting taxes, particularly for the wealthiest, because trickle-down economics will surely work and grow the economy out of the problem this time, along with cutting the state even more - and again, bear in mind there have already been repeated cuts over the last decade and a bit of austerity. She's spoken against freezing energy bills partly funded by a windfall tax on the unexpected profits the energy suppliers are making, but she's presumably going to have to do something, because obviously a 178% increase in energy bills over a year is not something low-income households can cover.

Also, she doesn't really have substantial support. She only had the support of 32% of MPs to get to the vote of the Conservative party members, and she only got the vote of 57% of them (from an 83% turnout). And the Conservative party is well behind in polling now.

To sum up:

So I can't say I'm optimistic. This could easily be a pit stop on the road of insanity and corruption, not a turnaround.

Pit stop over, back on the road, with the pedal to the metal.

 

[zztop]

After just 44 days, the shortest tenure in their history, Truss is resigning

Also, I learned of a new term: kakistocracy

Kakistocracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[samiam5211]

Didn't her entire party support the moves she made until the results started showing?

 

[Nolaswede]

Didn't her entire party support the moves she made until the results started showing?

You are taking it out of context

 

[GrandAdmiral]

And ironically, the man she replaced has gained support to replace her. What a world we live in...

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[brandon]

Maybe just let Charles take a crack at it and lets see if absolute monarchy is what we've been missing.

 

[coldseat]

And ironically, the man she replaced has gained support to replace her. What a world we live in...

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

The conservative movement around the world doesn't have any new ideas for a promising future. They just keep rehashing the same failed polices and dressing them in different dresses. The problem is voters keep buying it.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

The UK need to retool their election cycle. It's crazy there is basically zero chance at another election prior to 2025 which leave a party that is in shambles with control of Parliament despite them being 20+ points behind Labor in the polls.

 

[Saintamaniac]

After just 44 days, the shortest tenure in their history, Truss is resigning

Also, I learned of a new term: kakistocracy

Kakistocracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The US just escaped 4 years of kakistocracy and we are headed right back there.

 

[RobF]

I said we were forked with Liz Truss.

Thing is, it wasn't Truss - there will always be people like Truss who want to be in power - it's the forces that put them there. Her policies were the destination they've been heading towards with Brexit, cuts on public spending and services, tax cuts primarily benefiting the wealthiest, etc. And while you'd think those policies blowing up spectacularly might cause a rethink, most of the thinking behind those policies is of the wishful kind, so rethinking becomes just coming up with more imaginary reasons why it should've worked (in this case, it seems to be "the policies were fine, it was just the presentation/speed/global situation").

And ironically, the man she replaced has gained support to replace her. What a world we live in...

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

And to follow on from that, I think this is, as ludicrous as it is, actually likely to happen. Not certain. But likely.

The Conservative party basically makes up their leadership election rules to suit their circumstances. In this case they've gone with nominees needing the backing of 100 MPs to be in the contest, and a quick polling of the membership if they can't unify behind one candidate. They have 357 MPs in Parliament, so you're looking at a maximum of three candidates initially.

Initially (i.e. yesterday), the thinking was that this would end up with Rishi Sunak and Penny Mordaunt, on the basis that in the earlier contest, Sunak had the backing of 137 MPs, and Mordaunt 105 (with Truss having 113), so they would probably end up being the two candidates again. Johnson wasn't expected to be able to get the backing of 100 MPs because, you know, the whole being forced to resign after mass resignations in the first place thing. And the odds reflected that yesterday evening, Sunak was the favourite, with Mordaunt not far behind, and Johnson (and Ben Wallace, the current defense secretary), some way back on 12/1 odds.

But all those Truss-backing MPs haven't vanished, and they haven't learned a thing either. They don't like Sunak and Mordaunt, and they're not inclined to back either of them out of rational unity. They do like Johnson, and, powered by all that wishful thinking, think he could reverse their collapse in the polls on the grounds that he won the last general election (never mind everything that's happened in between).

And then you combine that with the media's love of narrative - "The Return of Boris" is just so much more compelling than "Runner-up in previous leadership election now favourite" - which means you get things like, on the home page of the Guardian right now, Boris Johnson being mentioned 17 times in headlines and sub-headings compared to Rishi Sunak and Penny Mordaunt being mentioned once, you could, if you're not really paying that much attention, start to get the impression that it actually is a serious notion and not an absolutely idiotic one (see also: Trump becoming the Republican nominee and then President).

Which is why the odds now have Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak on even odds, with Mordaunt now trailing at 10/1.

And if it goes to the Conservative party membership, Boris Johnson will win. Unless he doesn't get the backing of 100 MPs, or is somehow put into third place or otherwise doesn't make it to that point, he'll be PM again.

As I've seen being quoted a few times recently, those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it... but those that do learn from it are doomed to watch helplessly while others repeat it.

 

[bird]

I said we were forked with Liz Truss.

Thing is, it wasn't Truss - there will always be people like Truss who want to be in power - it's the forces that put them there. Her policies were the destination they've been heading towards with Brexit, cuts on public spending and services, tax cuts primarily benefiting the wealthiest, etc. And while you'd think those policies blowing up spectacularly might cause a rethink, most of the thinking behind those policies is of the wishful kind, so rethinking becomes just coming up with more imaginary reasons why it should've worked (in this case, it seems to be "the policies were fine, it was just the presentation/speed/global situation").


And to follow on from that, I think this is, as ludicrous as it is, actually likely to happen. Not certain. But likely.

The Conservative party basically makes up their leadership election rules to suit their circumstances. In this case they've gone with nominees needing the backing of 100 MPs to be in the contest, and a quick polling of the membership if they can't unify behind one candidate. They have 357 MPs in Parliament, so you're looking at a maximum of three candidates initially.

Initially (i.e. yesterday), the thinking was that this would end up with Rishi Sunak and Penny Mordaunt, on the basis that in the earlier contest, Sunak had the backing of 137 MPs, and Mordaunt 105 (with Truss having 113), so they would probably end up being the two candidates again. Johnson wasn't expected to be able to get the backing of 100 MPs because, you know, the whole being forced to resign after mass resignations in the first place thing. And the odds reflected that yesterday evening, Sunak was the favourite, with Mordaunt not far behind, and Johnson (and Ben Wallace, the current defense secretary), some way back on 12/1 odds.

But all those Truss-backing MPs haven't vanished, and they haven't learned a thing either. They don't like Sunak and Mordaunt, and they're not inclined to back either of them out of rational unity. They do like Johnson, and, powered by all that wishful thinking, think he could reverse their collapse in the polls on the grounds that he won the last general election (never mind everything that's happened in between).

And then you combine that with the media's love of narrative - "The Return of Boris" is just so much more compelling than "Runner-up in previous leadership election now favourite" - which means you get things like, on the home page of the Guardian right now, Boris Johnson being mentioned 17 times in headlines and sub-headings compared to Rishi Sunak and Penny Mordaunt being mentioned once, you could, if you're not really paying that much attention, start to get the impression that it actually is a serious notion and not an absolutely idiotic one (see also: Trump becoming the Republican nominee and then President).

Which is why the odds now have Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak on even odds, with Mordaunt now trailing at 10/1.

And if it goes to the Conservative party membership, Boris Johnson will win. Unless he doesn't get the backing of 100 MPs, or is somehow put into third place or otherwise doesn't make it to that point, he'll be PM again.

As I've seen being quoted a few times recently, those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it... but those that do learn from it are doomed to watch helplessly while others repeat it.

“The policies were fine…”

That is the reasoning of economists. For them the real world is a special case.

And, yes, repetition of history is not only sad, it underscores the lack of critical thinking.

 

[RobF]

Unless he doesn't get the backing of 100 MPs, or is somehow put into third place or otherwise doesn't make it to that point, he'll be PM again.

Looks like Johnson has 'decided' not to run. Popular opinion seems to be that, while he claims he has over 100 MPs who were willing to back him, he's lying about that and is dropping out because he doesn't. I'm not quite so sure; seems equally likely to me that he does have those (absolutely nuts) MPs willing to back him, but he's also been made aware in no uncertain terms that a lot of the other MPs are not only not willing to back him, but they'll refuse to accept him as leader again and if he did run and win he'd be out as soon as he was in.

That means it'll either be Rishi Sunak or Penny Mordaunt, if Mordaunt can get 100 MPs and decides to go ahead. She could well not, in which case Sunak will just be in. If she does, it's a little more unpredictable - the members already picked Truss over Sunak earlier in the year - but with a rushed leadership contest and a lot of support for Sunak from MPs, he'd probably swing it this time.

That's not actually much better. Sunak was Chancellor of the Exchequer under Johnson, and very much front and center for pretty much all of Johnson's failures. Best hope is it'll be slightly less chaotic. It's still likely to be a rough ride to the next general election (no later than January 2025, probably late 2024; there's a lot of demand for a general election now, but that would rely on the failing Conservative government to recognise that it's failing and voluntarily put itself out of its misery, and, y'know, as if).

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

This would be an interesting inflection point in the UK with the Conservative party floundering. Conceivably disenchanted Tory voters -- and if the polls are even remotely accurate there are millions of them -- could vote Liberal Democrat instead of switching to Labor. The former would have what I view as a positive effect of making the LibDems a more viable party and having the Tory leadership engage in some self-reflection over the long term. The latter is too 'US-centric' in its position that there are only two valid choices on the ballot.

 

[RobF]

That means it'll either be Rishi Sunak or Penny Mordaunt, if Mordaunt can get 100 MPs and decides to go ahead. She could well not, in which case Sunak will just be in.

And Mordaunt just withdrew at the last minute, so Sunak - who, again, was Johnson's Chancellor of the Exchequer and was rejected by the Tory membership in favour or Truss just last month - is now PM.

 

[RobF]

This would be an interesting inflection point in the UK with the Conservative party floundering. Conceivably disenchanted Tory voters -- and if the polls are even remotely accurate there are millions of them -- could vote Liberal Democrat instead of switching to Labor. The former would have what I view as a positive effect of making the LibDems a more viable party and having the Tory leadership engage in some self-reflection over the long term. The latter is too 'US-centric' in its position that there are only two valid choices on the ballot.

So far, the polling indicates that isn't happening. E.g. one example of current polling:



For comparison, at the 2019 General Election, it was Conservative 43.6%, Labour 32.1%, Liberal Democrat 11.6%, SNP 3.9%, Green 2.6%, although note a lot of these polls don't include SNP, presumably because they naturally only stand in Scotland).

So the general trend is very much in the direction of Labour, with a notable increase in Green as well, rather than towards the Lib Dems. Part of this is because Labour, under Kier Starmer, have gone straight for the center (or even the center-right, depending on your point of reference), ditching a number of pledges he made in the Labour leadership contest in 2020, and generally adopting positions that could be considered non-threatening to voters considering switching from voting Conservative (e.g. affirming Brexit, opposing freedom of movement).

That also probably accounts for the boost in Green support, since that move by Labour is leaving voters towards the left somewhat disenfranchised.

Of course, there's probably quite a long time before the next General Election, and campaigning in the run up to that and tactical voting during it can change that picture quite a lot.

One thing I would add is that, observationally, I am seeing an increase in talk about and support for electoral reform towards proportional representation. The Labour Party voted for a commitment towards that at their last conference, but it's not a binding motion, and Starmer has indicated that he'll reject it (saying it's "not a priority"). Still, it'll be interesting to see if that pressure continues to build and can have an impact.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

So far, the polling indicates that isn't happening. E.g. one example of current polling:



For comparison, at the 2019 General Election, it was Conservative 43.6%, Labour 32.1%, Liberal Democrat 11.6%, SNP 3.9%, Green 2.6%, although note a lot of these polls don't include SNP, presumably because they naturally only stand in Scotland).

So the general trend is very much in the direction of Labour, with a notable increase in Green as well, rather than towards the Lib Dems. Part of this is because Labour, under Kier Starmer, have gone straight for the center (or even the center-right, depending on your point of reference), ditching a number of pledges he made in the Labour leadership contest in 2020, and generally adopting positions that could be considered non-threatening to voters considering switching from voting Conservative (e.g. affirming Brexit, opposing freedom of movement).

That also probably accounts for the boost in Green support, since that move by Labour is leaving voters towards the left somewhat disenfranchised.

Of course, there's probably quite a long time before the next General Election, and campaigning in the run up to that and tactical voting during it can change that picture quite a lot.

One thing I would add is that, observationally, I am seeing an increase in talk about and support for electoral reform towards proportional representation. The Labour Party voted for a commitment towards that at their last conference, but it's not a binding motion, and Starmer has indicated that he'll reject it (saying it's "not a priority"). Still, it'll be interesting to see if that pressure continues to build and can have an impact.

Would definitely be interesting to see the results of such reform and whether it leads to a rise in vote share of the minor parties.

 

[zztop]

did he resign a second time...?

Boris Johnson’s out, and the Tories are at war

The former prime minister has resigned as a member of Parliament, throwing his own party into chaos.

www.vox.com

 

[MT15]

He resigned from Parliament, to avoid being forced out. Evidently he went back to the Parliament when he stepped down from PM.

My first thought when I saw this was - I miss Rob.