Boris Johnson leads the Conservatives in the 2017 election

[Deleted]

Suppose Boris Johnson leads the Conservatives in the 2017 GE.

Would he have done worse than May? Would the Conservatives have done better?

[mondialito]

Feb 15, 2018 12:06:07 GMT @conservativeestimate said:

Suppose Boris Johnson leads the Conservatives in the 2017 GE.

Would he have done worse than May? Would the Conservatives have done better?

I think the Tories may have done even worse in London even if they did better elsewhere, picking up Labour seats they narrowly missed in real life. Boris is a bigger symbol of the false, incompatible promises of the Leave campaign than Theresa May and while I doubt he would use the words 'Citizens of Nowhere' I do think any lack of seriousness in his approach to Brexit would be further punished by Remainers.

Hung Parliament, deal with the DUP possible but not certain.

[The Bishop]

It really could have gone either way tbh.

But the chances of him dropping some totally incendiary clanger during the campaign (worse than anything May ever managed) would always be there.

Of course even then his captive press would have done their best to cover for him, but on a fundamental level his popularity peaked circa the 2012 Olympics and has been on a steady downward trajectory since (even if he does undoubtedly retain some political skills)

[pragmaticidealist]

Feb 15, 2018 12:50:20 GMT The Bishop said:

It really could have gone either way tbh.

But the chances of him dropping some totally incendiary clanger during the campaign (worse than anything May ever managed) would always be there.

Of course even then his captive press would have done their best to cover for him, but on a fundamental level his popularity peaked circa the 2012 Olympics and has been on a steady downward trajectory since (even if he does undoubtedly retain some political skills)

I'm not sure that would hurt him to the extent it hurt May. BJ has long been viewed as a buffoon, even by many of those who admire him. Before the 2017 campaign May was widely seen as a 'safe pair of hands', so her gaffes greatly altered the public perception of her. BJ making gaffes during an election campaign wouldn't have the same shock value, and indeed many would be shocked if he went through an entire campaign without a gaffe or nine. 

[carlton43]

Let us assume a reasonably duff campaign with a very poor manifesto and really only one feature speaker throughout. A 2017 re-run by with Boris instead of May. A bit of churn on a number of levels but I think enough positive to leave us with an actual majority but no better than we already had.

But on the assumption Boris in place a bit before the election was called, a more overt and pushy Brexit agenda, none of the damaging stuff on pensions and home care, no 'strong and stable' slogans, a tauter more focused manifesto, sensible house building proposals and a new carefully phrased pledge on restricting immigration. Then I think we would have won with a majority of between 50-130. The very fragile state of the electorate would have decided the result and it would have been very much on just how effective a Boris campaign would have panned out?

I am not a Boris fan then or now. He does have a way with him and can speak most effectively. If he was well briefed, kept to brief, worked hard at it and responded to moods and the flow of the campaign, it could have been a major success.

He can be a fool and a muppet at times so nothing would have been a given. But would I have taken him in place May well before the election (probably No) at the call of the election (certainly No) well into the campaign and after the manifesto (desperate Yes) in the final weeks of the campaign (undoubted Yes) any time after election (guarded Yes).

Answer to implied question as put.....Yes. He would probably have won it for us.

[finsobruce]

Feb 15, 2018 13:22:26 GMT carlton43 said:

 A 2017 re-run by with Boris instead of May.

If he was well briefed, kept to brief, worked hard at it and responded to moods and the flow of the campaign, it could have been a major success.

and this is the most problematic part of the thesis....

undoubtedly a better stump performer than May of course, but that wouldn't be difficult.

[Deleted]

As a Leaver I think he’d have appealed more to the North and South Wales who are now increasingly realising Labour lied to them. Further to that, I think his apparent plan to write the 300 million for the NHS into law once he became PM would also have had wide appeal. So overall, I think he’d have won us a majority.

[Sibboleth]

Feb 15, 2018 14:22:45 GMT @davidr said:

As a Leaver I think he’d have appealed more to the North and South Wales who are now increasingly realising Labour lied to them.

lolwhut

[slon]

I think the Tories would have walked the election with Boris.
We are currently in the world of gonzo politics where outrageous personalities and stupid slogans win votes, think Boris, but also think Trump, Farage, Corbyn.

[johnloony]

Boris as PM means no 2017 election in the first place.

[beastofbedfordshire]

Comfortable Tory majority of 30-50

[Deleted]

Feb 15, 2018 16:20:04 GMT johnloony said:

Boris as PM means no 2017 election in the first place.

Why?

[Deleted]

I think he would’ve hurt the Conservatives in London. The following would’ve flipped imo.

CON to LAB
Chipping Barnet
Finchley & Golders Green
Harrow East
Hendon
Putney

CON to LD
Richmond Park

IDS holds Chingford by 500 votes after a recount, much to the chagrin of his detractors.



But he would’ve done better in the Brexit areas

LAB to CON
Ashfield
Barrow & Furness
Bishop Auckland
Dudley North
Newcastle-under-Lyme
Penistone & Stocksbridge
Wakefield
Wrexham

So not much change in seat numbers.

I don’t think the Conservatives would’ve taken seats like Grimsby and Stoke North with Boris at the helm, but who knows?

As for Scotland I think the Conservatives would’ve done a little worse without Boris, missing out on Stirling but winning the other seats they took.

[J.G.Harston]

Feb 15, 2018 13:27:36 GMT finsobruce said:

Feb 15, 2018 13:22:26 GMT carlton43 said:

 A 2017 re-run by with Boris instead of May.

If he was well briefed, kept to brief, worked hard at it and responded to moods and the flow of the campaign, it could have been a major success.

and this is the most problematic part of the thesis....

undoubtedly a better stump performer than May of course, but that wouldn't be difficult.

Boris works best pre-recorded, from a scripted, and edited. As soon as he does something on the hoof he sticks it into his own mouth. It's really noticable when he gives a statement to Parliament and then attempts to respond to questions.

Admittedly, live oratory is skill. I refuse to do live interviews as it would be full of umms and errs and pauses while I check my notes and repeats of the same thing while correcting the grammar and emphasis.

[sirbenjamin]

I'm curious as to why people think Boris would've hurt us in London. This is a man who won London for us - twice - against a tide of leftward trending.

The 'angry Remainer' effect was hugely significant in 2017 anyway. I'm not sure there were many of them left to squeeze in Putney, Richmond Park etc.

Overall I think we'd have done a bit better across the country (up 10-20 seats overall, maybe down a couple in Scotland) and certainly no worse than we actually did in London.

[Deleted]

Feb 15, 2018 15:04:49 GMT Sibboleth said:

Feb 15, 2018 14:22:45 GMT @davidr said:

As a Leaver I think he’d have appealed more to the North and South Wales who are now increasingly realising Labour lied to them.

lolwhut

This behaviour again?🙄 Labour said we’d leave the SM and CU and that free movement would end. Now, if you condescending socialists get into office, God forbid, we will stay in either the CU or a form of a CU but we probably won’t be doing our own trade deals. On the Single Market we were told by Labour we were going to leave it, now we might stay in either it or a reformed Single Market. Whatever that is. The end of free movement is no longer the end of free movement but will now be “easy movement” whatever that is. I get it’s confusing but that’s because your party changes it’s position once a day on Brexit. Whatever your policy ever ends up becoming, it isn’t what you policy was on election day and presumably you always knew it wasn’t.

[finsobruce]

Feb 15, 2018 21:59:17 GMT @davidr said:

Feb 15, 2018 15:04:49 GMT Sibboleth said:

lolwhut

This behaviour again?🙄 Labour said we’d leave the SM and CU and that free movement would end. Now, if you condescending socialists get into office, God forbid, we will stay in either the CU or a form of a CU but we probably won’t be doing our own trade deals. On the Single Market we were told by Labour we were going to leave it, now we might stay in either it or a reformed Single Market. Whatever that is. The end of free movement is no longer the end of free movement but will now be “easy movement” whatever that is. I get it’s confusing but that’s because your party changes it’s position once a day on Brexit. Whatever your policy ever ends up becoming, it isn’t what you policy was on election day and presumably you always knew it wasn’t.

And this is different from the Conservative party how?

[Deleted]

Feb 15, 2018 22:07:21 GMT finsobruce said:

Feb 15, 2018 21:59:17 GMT @davidr said:

This behaviour again?🙄 Labour said we’d leave the SM and CU and that free movement would end. Now, if you condescending socialists get into office, God forbid, we will stay in either the CU or a form of a CU but we probably won’t be doing our own trade deals. On the Single Market we were told by Labour we were going to leave it, now we might stay in either it or a reformed Single Market. Whatever that is. The end of free movement is no longer the end of free movement but will now be “easy movement” whatever that is. I get it’s confusing but that’s because your party changes it’s position once a day on Brexit. Whatever your policy ever ends up becoming, it isn’t what you policy was on election day and presumably you always knew it wasn’t.

And this is different from the Conservative party how? 

Theresa May has made her position on Brexit clear. We are leaving the Single Market and Customs Union and Freedom Of Movement will end. Obviously there are negotiations to be had over how we leave, transition periods etc. The fundamentals are there however.

Here’s a helpful guide courtesy of Guido Fawkes. 
order-order.com/2018/02/15/50-times-theresa-may-set-brexit-red-lines-laws-money-borders-trade/

[finsobruce]

Feb 15, 2018 22:15:39 GMT @davidr said:

Feb 15, 2018 22:07:21 GMT finsobruce said:

And this is different from the Conservative party how? 

Theresa May has made her position on Brexit clear. We are leaving the Single Market and Customs Union and Freedom Of Movement will end. Obviously there are negotiations to be had over how we leave, transition periods etc. The fundamentals are there however.

Here’s a helpful guide courtesy of Guido Fawkes. 
order-order.com/2018/02/15/50-times-theresa-may-set-brexit-red-lines-laws-money-borders-trade/

Hmm weird. I recall every which way and possibility being mooted by the government at some point. And why if she is doing such a good job at this are you trying to get rid of her?

Nothing from Guido Fawkes is ever helpful.

[Deleted]

Feb 15, 2018 22:18:31 GMT finsobruce said:

Feb 15, 2018 22:15:39 GMT @davidr said:

Theresa May has made her position on Brexit clear. We are leaving the Single Market and Customs Union and Freedom Of Movement will end. Obviously there are negotiations to be had over how we leave, transition periods etc. The fundamentals are there however.

Here’s a helpful guide courtesy of Guido Fawkes. 
order-order.com/2018/02/15/50-times-theresa-may-set-brexit-red-lines-laws-money-borders-trade/

Hmm weird. I recall every which way and possibility being mooted by the government at some point. And why if she is doing such a good job at this are you trying to get rid of her?

Nothing from Guido Fawkes is ever helpful.

The fundamentals have always been there. She has always said we are leaving both the CU and SM since Florence. What you are referring to is, I think, Government ministers etc. leaking stuff, which turns out not to be true, because they are either on permanent manoeuvres, Boris and Amber, or are trying to subvert Brexit stealthily, Hammond and elements of the Civil Service. 

I want rid of Theresa because she’s not a leader, a leader would fire any minister or civil servant who behaves the way hers have.