Just out of curiosity, are you suggesting that I (for example) find Boris Johnson (for example) arrogant because I can’t keep up with the agility and precision of his thinking? This could be a rich seam of trolling for you.



Does your intellectual-SAS metaphor apply to all Oxbridge graduates or just the Bullingdon-types? If the former, I have some friends who I think will rather enjoy it on a couple of levels. Or maybe more than a couple, as they’re no doubt thinking in more dimensions than me.

No and also wouldn't have predicted in 2010 what would have happened in Scotland from 2015 onwards. In both cases there was a game changer in terms of a referendum.

But also when you look at politics over time, you see how unpredictable it is and how foolish many of the prevailing political predictions are:

1992 - "If Labour can't win now they can NEVER win"

Major wins against the odds after the Tories had already been in power 13 years, coming off the debacle of the Poll Tax, a recession and with many of the 1980s homebuyers stuck in negative equity. The general take was that Labour couldn't win in those conditions, their only hope was an alliance with the Lib Dems to try and get a coalition in 1997 and establish proportional representation.

Result: Within 3 years it became clear that Labour were on course for an enormous landslide.

2003 - "The Conservative party is dead"

Everyone talks about how bad this Labour defeat in 2019 was - 202 seats, lowest since before the war, worse than 1983. The Conservatives went sub-200 seats for three consecutive elections, 1997, 2001 and 2005!

Blair at this time - before the lies of Iraq had really sunk in - was unusually successful as a PM, at least in political terms. Even Thatcher went through periods of deep unpopularity between her election wins. Blair had sky high satisfaction ratings, Labour had huge leads in the polls for basically 10 straight years from when he took over as leader. The business community was pro-Blair, the tabloids were pro-Blair, the Tories really had nowhere to go. This was the time when we had Ian Duncan Smith saying "the quiet man is turning up the volume" and all that crap. He got deposed as leader and out of desperation the party went to Michael Howard - who epitomised the 'nasty Tory' image the 'modernisers' said they had to shed, but at least seemed like he could be credible across the despatch box against Blair. But at this point it looked like the Tories' demise was terminal.

Result: 2004 was when it started to turn against Blair. Trouble over tuition fees and the exposure of the reality of Iraq took away his golden sheen with the public, and he was weakened in his party by the growing rise of Brown and the factionalism and briefing against him from Brownite Ministers. The Conservatives went through their 'rebrand' under Cameron but when Brown took over it seemed like he'd rejuvenated Labour for a while like Major did for the Tories and there were some rumours of discontent with Cameron, until the financial crisis hit and finished Brown.


2010 - "Cleggmania - end of the two-party monopoly"

After the first ever leaders' debate, the Lib Dems shot to the top of the polls for the first time since the brief SDP-Liberal Alliance lead in the early 80s. But this was about 2 weeks out from an election! Although the Clegg bounce had dipped a bit before polling day, there was talk of the Lib Dems pushing 100 seats and rewriting the two-party system

Result: The Lib Dems actually lost seats compared to 2005, they propped up the Tories in an unhappy coalition and got butchered in 2010 and have never really recovered.

2017 - "Theresa May's coronation":

When the Conservatives swept the board in the local elections (during the 2017 General Election campaign) people were forecasting a 200 seat majority for Theresa May.

Result: The Conservatives lost their majority and had to get the DUP to prop them up, which later checkmated her over the Ireland issue in Brexit. If she'd got her big majority, she'd have been completely in her element - running government in a dominant, authoritarian fashion through her Spads Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill. Up to 2017 people were making comparisons with the 'Iron Lady' and I think those would have carried on if she'd had her expected majority. The result meant you needed someone with skills as a compromiser, which she was unsuited to - but then Thatcher would have also been unsuited to that role as well.
Although the general narrative is that May had a disastrous manifesto and fought a terrible campaign, she boosted the Tories' share of the vote by nearly 6 percentage points compared to Cameron, and got a similar share to what Johnson did in 2019. What really did for May was an unexpected surge for Corbyn's Labour.

later in 2017 - "Jeremy Corbyn will be the next Prime Minister":

With May weakened, JC enjoyed a golden period, being hailed at Glastonbury, huge crowds turning out to see him and chanting Oh Jeremy Corbyn. His internal dissenters in Labour went quiet for a while, stunned by the 2017 result. Labour were ahead in the polls and it looked like Brexit would scupper the Conservatives and open the door to JC in 2022.

Result: Two things really screwed Corbyn. His inability to deal with antisemitism, and his prevarication on Brexit. The first exposed a lot of nasty things within the Labour party, and made him toxic to a lot of the liberal-minded centre left, who decided they couldn't vote Labour again while he was leader. The second separated him from his big youth base, who switched towards campaigning for a second referendum instead of turning up to his Oh Jeremy Corbyn rallies. In the end, Corbyn led Labour to the kind of defeat in 2019, that most people predicted would happen in 2020, when Corbyn first took over the leadership in 2015!

I think the confidence that some Oxbridge graduates have is seen by some as arrogance - Boris is anything but arrogant - arrogant to me are people like Ash Sakar/Grace Blakely/Tony Blair/Alistair Campbell who think they know better than the rest of us. It is a problem with the educated left - they have non-jobs and they try and ram down your throat their superiority. Boris is nothing like that. There is something about these young Oxbridge types that riles you - only you know what that is?

The SAS metaphor applies to Oxbridge graduates i.e. they are the elite of the elite - these two universities are seen by many as amongst the finest educational institutions in the world - they attract the very best. We might mock but the truth is they turn out a high percentage of well educated, well rounded and very talented individuals with a confidence that goes with it.

The world is an ever changing place - anyone who thinks the Tories will be in for 10 is not looking at past history. Boris has to deliver if he doesn't he wont last - as you have shown in the above.

It is an interesting thought that Corbyn has shifted the Overton window.

Perhaps we’ll end up with a fourth way of leftist economic policy and social conservatism. There’s a Godwin’s Law trigger!

I’m unsure which way Johnson will jump as we partially emerge from the political morass of Brexit. To be fair, I imagine he is too. Will it be a Cummings-inspired agenda (challenging because it is radical), will he lean towards the tooth and claw Thatcherite deregulatory capitalism and conservatism of the ERG, Raab and Patel (would require a lot of media lube), or will he try to be more of a traditional Tory Patrician ‘Brexity Heseltine’ PM (despite his cull of what would then be his natural parliamentary base)?

Corbyn has definitely shifted the dial - the idea that it is everyman for himself is dead - I wouldn't be surprised to see a rise in income tax and a lowering of VAT before the end of this Tory government. This way the poor really benefit, they will be out of the tax system and the goods they buy will be cheaper - win win wealth redistribution

You do know that Blair and Campbell went to Oxford and Cambridge, respectively? Blakely went to Oxford, as well.

What saddens me about ‘young’ Oxbridge types like Johnson and Cameron, who are both about a decade older than me, is that they’ve somehow convinced people like you that they are better than you.

Every so often we agree.

Nope, they never said it, how is LORD Prescott, Mrs and Mrs Kinnock, cuckoo Scargill, Paddy Pantsdown?

you hail them, and they where no different.

When it comes to politics, you bring a water balloon to a gun fight.

Completely against the thinking of the Thatcher-Howe-Lawson reforms of the 1980s. They believed that 'pay as you spend' was more fair than 'pay as you earn'. Those who work hard should keep more of their income; those who consume more should be the ones who pay more.

Have you quoted the wrong post? Because, otherwise, i think you have brought a jar of ashphalt to a fondue party.

Who never said what?

For the hailing, do you mean me individually, or entities like me of whom you see me as being representative? Y’know i’m a bot sent back in time by an [iin silico[/i construct of Greta Thunberg’s consciousness, yeah?

wow, you have taken 84t541t lunacy to a new level.