Can Boris be stopped?

What is clear from the opinion polls is that the majority of voters do not want a Boris Johnson-led government. The Tories have flatlined at 42%. The message from the opinion polls is that you should make sure your vote counts if you want to stop Boris.

If you want to protect the NHS, then you will need to stop Boris. If you want significant progress on tackling greenhouse gas emissions and protecting the environment, then Boris must be denied a majority. If you wish for action on child poverty and an end to the misery of austerity, then as a voter you will need to make sure your vote counts to deny Boris Johnson a majority in parliament.

The polls show Labour is closing down the Tory lead, but with just a few more days to polling, it might not be sufficient. Votes are needed where they can impact on the parliamentary arithmetic. This is why voters in the key marginals matter.

The Observer today published a poll checker so that voters can see how best they might vote if they want to stop Boris.

Of course, it could be that one reason Labour may not close the gap is that people are already voting tactically. That might explain the greater resistance to movement of Labour's poll rating.

There is everything to play for in the coming days. Where the votes stack up will matter more than only the national numbers.

Comments

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

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election. All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well. No doubt for some the decision will be difficult. Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing. The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together. Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party. That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s. His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan. It presented a formidable team. Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions. He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together. Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team. Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites. All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature. Nature is inherently creative. Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis. We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic. "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,' and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us. Sticking together is more often the better approach. This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest. We don't

The Thin End

Search This Blog