[spidermonkey09]

Frankly,  I'd far rather have Rishi Sunak as a PM until the next election.  If he's pushed out, they'll almost certainly bring back Boris Johnson.  There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he'd be worse. You'd get a much less competent cabinet and the return of policy like privatising channel 4.

I find your insistence that Johnson is uniquely awful fascinating. Every time there is a political scandal you reference back to him and conclude that it would be worse with him in charge (see above re Zahawi's blatant tax evasion: "Johnson is worse." I think this view represents a not insignficant minority of British politics observers but I'm not sure its based on anything other than image and the appearance of respectability. This Sunak government is the same level of incompetent as the ones that have gone before. There has been no improvement in the polls or the management of the country. Where does it come from? What do you like about Sunak you didn't about Johnson? It can't just be the sharper suit, neater hair and slightly better disguised factionalism?! There is still no plan, still nothing they want to achieve, still no big flagship policy they're working towards. Nothing works still; there is just a posher man at the helm which seems to return many political observers to their safe space!

Thats not meant to sound accusatory at all, even though I disagree!

[Oldmanmatt]

Frankly,  I'd far rather have Rishi Sunak as a PM until the next election.  If he's pushed out, they'll almost certainly bring back Boris Johnson.  There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he'd be worse. You'd get a much less competent cabinet and the return of policy like privatising channel 4.

I find your insistence that Johnson is uniquely awful fascinating. Every time there is a political scandal you reference back to him and conclude that it would be worse with him in charge (see above re Zahawi's blatant tax evasion: "Johnson is worse." I think this view represents a not insignficant minority of British politics observers but I'm not sure its based on anything other than image and the appearance of respectability. This Sunak government is the same level of incompetent as the ones that have gone before. There has been no improvement in the polls or the management of the country. Where does it come from? What do you like about Sunak you didn't about Johnson? It can't just be the sharper suit, neater hair and slightly better disguised factionalism?! There is still no plan, still nothing they want to achieve, still no big flagship policy they're working towards. Nothing works still; there is just a posher man at the helm which seems to return many political observers to their safe space!

Thats not meant to sound accusatory at all, even though I disagree!

The lesser of two Weevils…


Not a typo.

[spidermonkey09]

Yes, I think lots of people do see him as a 'lesser evil/weevil' - but the question is, why? What makes him better than Johnson in this construction, other than the aesthetics?

[galpinos]

I think it is the fact Rishi is seen as rich enough to not make decisions solely for personal gain.

Johnson's decisions always seemed to be traced back to a donor, someone paying for a holiday, his wallpaper, securing a loan, he could be "bought" quite easily as he desires a lavish lifestyle he can ill afford and has zero morals so will do the donor's bidding.

Rishi is different, he may have horrible politics but they bare his politics, his decisions, not those forced upon him by donors with a juicy bribe.

In reality, Rishi is still weak, beholden to the bonkers fringes of the conservative party and still has the corrupt/incompetent MPs in cabinet so plus ca change.

As I've posted before, the corruption is too much even for my mum, who has never put a cross next to Labour before but would (currently) vote for Kier. Not even on polices, just he seems like the only "honest" option.

[Oldmanmatt]

I think it is the fact Rishi is seen as rich enough to not make decisions solely for personal gain.

Johnson's decisions always seemed to be traced back to a donor, someone paying for a holiday, his wallpaper, securing a loan, he could be "bought" quite easily as he desires a lavish lifestyle he can ill afford and has zero morals so will do the donor's bidding.

Rishi is different, he may have horrible politics but they bare his politics, his decisions, not those forced upon him by donors with a juicy bribe.

In reality, Rishi is still weak, beholden to the bonkers fringes of the conservative party and still has the corrupt/incompetent MPs in cabinet so plus ca change.

As I've posted before, the corruption is too much even for my mum, who has never put a cross next to Labour before but would (currently) vote for Kier. Not even on polices, just he seems like the only "honest" option.

This.

Sorry, driving.

I view Boris as utterly despicable (for exactly the reasons above), as opposed to Sumac’s bland, anodyne, despicability, born of insulation and the ignorance that engenders.
Boris would be objectively evil, knowingly so; if he stood to profit from such evil. Sumac, I feel, might stray into that territory, through a lack of understanding of the world outside his bubble; however, he would be less likely to double down and advance a damaging agenda, more likely to reverse and adapt.

[spidermonkey09]

Thanks galpinos, thats interesting. I hadn't considered that Sunak's extreme wealth might be a plus point in the eyes of voters. In a way though, that same wealth sort of removes one of the 'excuses' Johnson had; people would roll their eyes at his antics, his need for money to support an unknown number of children and ex wives but that was kind of part of his jack the lad image for some. Sunak also risks slipping very easily into 'out of touch' headlines.

I presume thats an amusing autocorrect of Sunak to Sumac OMM!

[wasbeen]

Whilst Johnson provokes a strong gag reflex in me on a personal level. I wonder if he was largely impotent in terms of policy as he spent so much time setting himself on fire.

Biden seems to have achieved more than might have been expected for a doddering old fool, perhaps by disarming through decency. I am not sure this will be the case for Sunak. His 'decency' seems to be a thin veneer, and I get the feeling, the more we get to know him, the less we want to.

[galpinos]

Thanks galpinos, thats interesting. I hadn't considered that Sunak's extreme wealth might be a plus point in the eyes of voters. In a way though, that same wealth sort of removes one of the 'excuses' Johnson had; people would roll their eyes at his antics, his need for money to support an unknown number of children and ex wives but that was kind of part of his jack the lad image for some.

Re Johnson I think that was definitely true at the start but that veneer wore very thin very quickly and the stench of corruption turned people off in the end.

Sunak also risks slipping very easily into 'out of touch' headlines.

Totally agree, I think he's already there due to his total inability to manage his political image. He seems absurdly bad at it. He's as rich as Creosote, one would have assumed he would have prepared answers to simple questions like, "Do you use a private GP" and "Why did you fly to Leeds" in order to "own" his wealth, instead of looking blank and avoiding the question and driving the "out of touch" narrative.

(Apologies for the Discworld reference)

[Oldmanmatt]

.

I presume thats an amusing autocorrect of Sunak to Sumac OMM!

Not even a little bit.

[Rocksteady]

Frankly, I'd far rather have Rishi Sunak as a PM until the next election.  If he's pushed out, they'll almost certainly bring back Boris Johnson.  There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he'd be worse. You'd get a much less competent cabinet and the return of policy like privatising channel 4.

I find your insistence that Johnson is uniquely awful fascinating. Every time there is a political scandal you reference back to him and conclude that it would be worse with him in charge (see above re Zahawi's blatant tax evasion: "Johnson is worse." I think this view represents a not insignficant minority of British politics observers but I'm not sure its based on anything other than image and the appearance of respectability. This Sunak government is the same level of incompetent as the ones that have gone before. There has been no improvement in the polls or the management of the country. Where does it come from? What do you like about Sunak you didn't about Johnson? It can't just be the sharper suit, neater hair and slightly better disguised factionalism?! There is still no plan, still nothing they want to achieve, still no big flagship policy they're working towards. Nothing works still; there is just a posher man at the helm which seems to return many political observers to their safe space!

Thats not meant to sound accusatory at all, even though I disagree!

Interesting question.

For me Johnson is the more despicable - just a pure cynical populist, he doesn't seem to care what he does or what he says, doesn't care if it's true or false, doesn't care if it's good or bad for the country if it leads to more power and position for him. He is a man of words and no substance; his whole career is of a specious liar.

The policies bit is secondary - that comes from the party more than the prime minister I think? Johnson just lacks all integrity as a person and I think was quite dangerous for our democracy (suborning Parliament, lying to the Queen etc).

Sunak obviously comes from a background of enormous privilege and has married into even greater wealth. As such he is at a complete remove from the problems of ordinary people. In this he is not dissimilar from many of our previous 'best' Prime Ministers (Churchill grew up in Blenheim Palace!) It's whether or not he cares to understand, to try to do a good job that makes a difference for me.
He is a Fulbright Scholar which at least suggests a level of academic ability and has worked in a number of actual jobs where he would have had to work vs write polemic like Johnson.
His politics are of the current Conservative era which encompass the crazy fringe of the right and seem to me to be misguided and also seem to have damaged the country enormously. He also seems to be a poor politician. However, he doesn't give off that vibe of utter contempt for the role of politician, for the populace, for the pillars of democracy that is evident from Johnson. He seems to at least try to have integrity? It's more that he is bemused about what ordinary people might care about. Or that is my impression of him.

My feeling echoes TobyD's that started this little divergent thread - I'd rather have him at the helm than any of the other loons at the top of the blue team.
But the sooner we get a new party in government the better!

[Paul B]

For me Johnson is the more despicable - just a pure cynical populist, he doesn't seem to care what he does or what he says, doesn't care if it's true or false, doesn't care if it's good or bad for the country if it leads to more power and position for him. He is a man of words and no substance; his whole career is of a specious liar.

I think the recent seatbelt saga is a good indication of the differences. Could you imagine Johnson holding up his hands and saying he got it wrong (for what is a fairly minor issue given the backdrop of the country currently) or would you see endless non-denials and other attempts to obfuscate? Some of Johnson's more brazen attempts at this were quite staggering yet he seemed to survive them, repeatedly. Why is the blonde buffoon in Ukraine getting photographed at the negotiating table with Zelensky? It's self-interested posturing for his future career.
 

[spidermonkey09]

However, he doesn't give off that vibe of utter contempt for the role of politician, for the populace, for the pillars of democracy that is evident from Johnson. He seems to at least try to have integrity? It's more that he is bemused about what ordinary people might care about. Or that is my impression of him.

Interesting response, thanks! Ithink this cuts to the nub of it and I don't entirely disagree. Sunak's potential for cynical positioning and realpolitik is limited by the fact that as several have pointed out, he is a dreadful politician. Whereas Johnson was a brilliant politician and bad at everything else. Sunak's mishandling of his wife's nondom status, his use of private healthcare, the private jet are all such own goals its a bit embarrassing. As you say, its like he hadn't even clocked people might object to those decisions. To me he exemplifies the 'born to rule' strain of the Tories which I personally find far more offensive than some of Johnson's antics, demeaning as they were/are (i agree his posturing in Kyiv is a disgrace). Johnson isn't even really a Conservative politician; he has no affinity with any ideology at all beyond himself. I can understand people liking Sunak if they like the Tories, good luck to them even if I don't agree politically. What I struggle to wrap my head around is people who don't like the Tories, liking Sunak more than Johnson even though Sunak exemplifies Tory policy and ideology far more strongly than Johnson ever did, with all the social harm that entails (if thats what you believe politically). That to me suggests people prefer, to some extent at least, someone who 'looks the part' and fits a professionalised, managerial aesthetic- even if they are still incompetent. there is nothing visibly competent about the government currently compared to Johnson's I don't think. Both were better than truss but that is a very low bar!

I see Sunak's 'integrity' as a pretty thin veneer; I reckon his tax return might make for some pretty interesting reading as well.

[TobyD]

 Interesting responses. I think that Sunak, however much the above replies think otherwise, is a basically decent, honest person. He is weak as a leader and beholden to be grimmer sides of the Conservative party. But he hasn't crashed the economy, and might do something moderately sane about N Ireland.
Johnson, on the other hand is a liar, treats women like shit, is a racist either intentionally or incidentally. He'd do anything in policy terms that he thought might play well for himself, and is therefore more dangerous.
I'm not wild about Rishi Sunak either, but he's better than either Truss or Johnson.

[Wil]

Anyone who willingly served in cabinet under Johnson is, by default, neither decent nor honest.

[ali k]

I think that Sunak…is a basically decent, honest person.

Not sure how you can say this with a straight face Toby. He was chancellor of the UK, responsible for collecting taxes for the UK, at a time when his wife was claiming non-dom status to reduce her UK tax liability. And he somehow thought that was fine.

Not to mention taking that job after Javid resigned in protest at the strings being attached to No11. And then as Will says, staying on til the bitter end and repeating lie after lie to defend Johnson.

[mrjonathanr]

In his way he’s a trailblazer. No PM has ever had received two criminal convictions in office. Even Johnson only managed one.

[andy popp]

Even Johnson only managed one.

Not for want of trying.

[spidermonkey09]

Not sure how you can say this with a straight face Toby. He was chancellor of the UK, responsible for collecting taxes for the UK, at a time when his wife was claiming non-dom status to reduce her UK tax liability. And he somehow thought that was fine.

Not to mention taking that job after Javid resigned in protest at the strings being attached to No11. And then as Will says, staying on til the bitter end and repeating lie after lie to defend Johnson.

This. Sunak owes his entire political career to Johnson. How has he managed to emerge smelling of roses?!

[remus]

This. Sunak owes his entire political career to Johnson. How has he managed to emerge smelling of roses?!

It's like going to the loo after someone's left a real stinker in there, you can get away with a lot and still smell good in comparison. For me there's also a healthy dose of "at least he's not Truss", and a feeling that having another leadership challenge (or a general election) would be a shitshow, even if I would much prefer someone else in government.

[spidermonkey09]

Doesn't this analogy only work if we accept Sunak was in the cubicle with BJ?!

Also interested in why you think an election would be a shit show ; destabilising? But that's another q!

[TobyD]

I think that Sunak…is a basically decent, honest person.

Not sure how you can say this with a straight face Toby. He was chancellor of the UK, responsible for collecting taxes for the UK, at a time when his wife was claiming non-dom status to reduce her UK tax liability. And he somehow thought that was fine.

Not to mention taking that job after Javid resigned in protest at the strings being attached to No11. And then as Will says, staying on til the bitter end and repeating lie after lie to defend Johnson.

This sounds a bit like getting at someone because you don't like them to me, I'm really not saying that I think hes wonderful,  because I really don't.  But, I'm sure Johnson lied to all his MPs who went out to defend him,  and it was only when Lord Macdonald contradicted him that they were presented with irrefutable evidence that he was lying. 
Re the tax thing, whatever one's view on whether she should have used it,  when it was revealed she started paying UK taxes on her earnings,  which strictly,  she isn't obliged to by law.
There was an earlier comment that Sunak was from an extremely privileged background,  that's really not true,  his father was a GP, and his mother a pharmacist,  and they lived somewhere pretty normal in Southampton.  I'd say that was comfortable upper middle class more than anything. 
For balance,  I'd say Sunaks biggest mistake was the failure to keep a better hold on the finances during Covid and prevent the widespread abuse of the furlough system.  He is politically naive and his judgment suffers as a result.  He's a committed eurosceptic as well,  unlike Truss and Johnson who just got in on it for personal gain,  and I think that's the biggest foreign policy error the UK has made for an extremely long time. 
At the moment,  I think that any administration would struggle to get any significant policy change enacted due to the pressure on the national finances,  strikes, war, need to try to sort out Brexit etc etc, though.
In summary I'm really not a fan of Rishi Sunak,  but I'd much rather he just stay there until the next election.  More instability will inevitably affect our currency,  business confidence etc. He's seriously mediocre,  but I think that's as good as you'll get right now. 

[ali k]

This is all well and good in terms of overall political analysis Toby. But you said Sunak was “decent and honest”. That’s the bit I can’t ever agree with. No decent person would consider that tax situation to be justifiable, however legal it may be. At least not in my book. It was done to reduce her overall tax liability because UK tax rates are higher. That’s despite her husband being chancellor of the country she’s avoiding paying tax in, and both of them living here full time.

Consider the counter-factual; if UK tax rates were lower, and giving up her non-dom status meant she would pay less in overall tax, do you honestly believe she wouldn’t have done that immediately?

And as for the stuff about him lying to defend Johnson only because he’d been deceived - pull the other one.

[spidermonkey09]

But, I'm sure Johnson lied to all his MPs who went out to defend him,  and it was only when Lord Macdonald contradicted him that they were presented with irrefutable evidence that he was lying. 

Eh?!  The idea they didn't all know he was lying is absolutely risible. You and I knew it; the idea the cabinet didn't is absurd.

Anyway, no need to keep going over old ground as we aren't going to agree, but theres not a lot here convincing me that the preference for Sunak isn't largely based on aesthetics rather than substance. Which is a bit sad but nothing we didn't know already.

[Oldmanmatt]

But, I'm sure Johnson lied to all his MPs who went out to defend him,  and it was only when Lord Macdonald contradicted him that they were presented with irrefutable evidence that he was lying. 

Eh?!  The idea they didn't all know he was lying is absolutely risible. You and I knew it; the idea the cabinet didn't is absurd.

Anyway, no need to keep going over old ground as we aren't going to agree, but theres not a lot here convincing me that the preference for Sunak isn't largely based on aesthetics rather than substance. Which is a bit sad but nothing we didn't know already.

Unfortunately, like it or not, aesthetics matter.
A deplorable number of people base all sorts of major, life changing, decisions on such things; rather than put any effort in to trying to understand complex issues.
It’s not even simply the vulnerable elderly, that gladly hand their life savings over to the charming young man for that unmissable investment opportunity.
Blair sold snow to Inuits, on little more than his smile.
Brown was competent, clever and…
Looked wrong.
Potential Labour leaders cannot eat sandwiches until they’ve been safely installed in office.
Biden could end global conflict, house the homeless, feed the words hungry, but if he stumbles on the way to the podium to announce the end of Cancer, he’s done for.

Whole nations form their opinions of entire, multifaceted, complex cultured, neighbouring nations, on the way that nation’s leader stands in a group photo for the G780 climate conference/cheese and wine party.

I do not believe this to be “right”, merely that it is.

[User deactivated.]

This is all well and good in terms of overall political analysis Toby. But you said Sunak was “decent and honest”. That’s the bit I can’t ever agree with. No decent person would consider that tax situation to be justifiable, however legal it may be. At least not in my book. It was done to reduce her overall tax liability because UK tax rates are higher. That’s despite her husband being chancellor of the country she’s avoiding paying tax in, and both of them living here full time.

Consider the counter-factual; if UK tax rates were lower, and giving up her non-dom status meant she would pay less in overall tax, do you honestly believe she wouldn’t have done that immediately?

And as for the stuff about him lying to defend Johnson only because he’d been deceived - pull the other one.

Picking out the single point that essentially no decent and honest person would utilize legal tricks to reduce their tax contributions, well if that's true then I don't know many decent and honest people!

I've never replied to an email so quickly as the one that offered me a switch to a salary sacrifice pension, saving me over 100 quid a month from my tax contribution. All my mates in trades are fiddling their books, putting allsorts down to expenses. The builder currently working on my house asked if I could pay him partly cash. These are all decent people. I get that Sunak is in a different position to us plebs and should be held to a different standard, but you said 'no decent person...'

Interesting topic though. I tend to ignore politics as much as possible (he says in a politics thread...) but I subconsciously dislike Sunak slightly less than Johnson. This discussion has made me consider why I've had this impression and it probably has been due to aesthetics, which is odd as I'm not usually one for authority or convention!