Skip to main content

Will Farage's election deal with Johnson backfire?

Farage's deal with Boris, standing down to give the Tories a clear run in those seats they won in 2016, looks like a winning edge for Johnson, but it may backfire. 

Looking across the polls there does appear to have been a shift in support for Labour. Whether it is significant and consistent remains to be seen. If campaigns do anything, then it is not surprising Labour has picked up.

 The Tories have had a bad week. Johnson, far from meeting ‘real’ people and being seen out and about, has been cocooned with infants in schools or walking around aimlessly in hospital corridors – which didn’t do too well for him when confronted with patients and doctors angry about what the Tories have done to the NHS. 

Corbyn, on the other hand, has had a good start. As in 2017, the more the Tory press portray him as a bogeyman, the more voters see the contrast with the man out on the stumps. He seems to have an edge with empathy, which for all his populism Boris Johnson appears to lack.

Little wonder then that Boris and Farage have become bedfellows, with the Brexit Party standing down in Tory held seats.  What they know from the polls if it continues to tighten through the campaign, as it did in 2016, is that Boris won't get a majority.  A hung parliament would not guarantee Johnson the keys to number 10, and certainly not with Brexit.  

The big question is what the Brexit Party will do in those seats Labour gained last time.  Would a Brexit candidate harm Labour, or is it already factored in? 

The Tories haven't panicked, but nerves will be frayed if they cannot make decent headway from Labour.  If the gap closes, alarm bells will ring.  The move by Farage may end up galvanising support for Labour.  Those voters who have been reluctant to support Corbyn may now do so if the alternative is a Tory government beholden to Farage/Trump.  

Perhaps it will take the Farage/Johnson tactics to bring home the reality of a Boris Johnson majority.  It will be the most right-wing Tory government in decades, and the NHS will undoubtedly be at risk.  

Voters may now realise that the stakes are high.  Jo Swinson's ludicrous position of not allowing Corbyn to be Prime Minister would be foolish if it means the worst possible scenario of a hard Brexit followed by trade deals that trash the environment and the NHS.  

Fiddling around with tactical voting is not going to work.  The choice is there to be made.  Put Corbyn in number 10.   

Historically, the Tories don't do well in campaigns where they panic.   This election is for the Tories to lose, but they may just do that. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Mr Duncan-Smith offers a disingenuous and divisive comparison

Some time ago, actually it was a long time ago when I was in my early teens, someone close to me bought a table. It was an early flat pack variety. It came with a top and four legs. He followed the instructions to the letter screwing the legs into the top. But when he had completed it the table wobbled. One leg he explained was shorter than the other three; so he sawed a bit from each of the other legs. The table wobbled. One leg, he explained, was longer than the other three. So, he sawed a bit off. The table wobbled. He went on cutting the legs, but the table continued to wobble. Cut, cut, cut! By this time he had convinced himself there was no alternative to it.  He ended up with a very low table indeed, supported by four very stumpy legs and a bit of cardboard placed under one of them to stop it wobbling on the uneven floor.  Mr Duncan-Smith argues that we need a 1% cap on benefits to be 'fair to average earners'. Average  earners have seen their incomes rise by less tha

His way or none? Why I can't vote for Jeremy

There is an assumption that all would be well with the Labour Party if people hadn't expressed their genuine concern with what they consider the inadequacies of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership. If only, it is said, the Parliamentary Labour Party and his Shadow Cabinet had supported him, instead of undermining him, all would have been fine. If they had been quiet and towed the line, then the party would not have been in the mess it is in. So, should they have stayed silent, or speak of their concerns? There comes a point when the cost of staying silent outweighs the cost of speaking out. This is a judgment. Many call it a coup by the PLP. They paint a picture of a right-wing PLP out of touch with the membership.  This is the narrative of the Corbyn camp. But Jeremy Corbyn, over the decades he has been in politics, showed the way.  It was Jeremy Corbyn who opposed almost all Labour leaders and rarely held back from speaking out, or voting time and again against the party line. As