Seventeen candidates wanted to become the new leadership of Germany’s Social Democrats. In twenty-three regional conferences across all 16 German states, they introduced themselves to party members and the public in an attempt to stand out as the perfect fit for the former working-class party, that is fighting survival at this stage.

After the, what German media dubbed a controversial casting tour, concluded, over 425,000 SPD members were eligible to vote. On Saturday, it came down to the last two remaining teams. Vice-Chancellor and Minister of Finance Scholz and his co-candidate Klara Geywitz were expected to win, according to the polls. To everyone’s surprise, it was the other remaining duo that succeeded.

Congratulations to Walter Borjans, former Finance Minister of North Rhine-Westphalian and Saskia Esken, Member of Parliament. For those who now feel ignorant for not having heard their names rest assured that neither had most Germans. With just under 53 percent both prevailed. Now Germany’s former proud major party is led by two individuals, who hardly ever appeared in federal politics before and who have been labeled inexperienced and low-profile – in the more moderate assessments of Germany’s media.

The latter did not stop voters to put their faith in Borjans and Esken. And it illustrates their states of mind: the profile is secondary, experience tertiary. Relevant, so it appears, is only the stance on the grand coalition. As an exit, so the legend goes, would reanimate the patient SPD.

The notion that the grand coalition needed to be revisited was a major part of Borjans’ and Esken’s program. Scholz and Geywitz were in favor of continuing to work with the CDU/CSU. The voters disagreed. And despite several high-profile MPs siding openly with Scholz and Geywitz, both received just under 45 percent.

After the latest crushing state election defeats, where the former major party even failed to score double digits at times change was desperately needed. The youth wing within the party, the “JUSOS” and their chair Kevin Kühnert have long been opponents of the grand coalition and seek a hard turn to the left. Naturally, the group endorsed Borjans and Eskens.

Borjans’ and Esken’s manifesto reveals where the journey is supposed to go. Inter alia, the team seeks to turn away from the balanced federal budget, one of Merkel’s signature policies, increase the minimum wage to €12 per hour, force the implantation of stricter climate policies and renegotiate the coalition agreement. The issue? Particularly the latter is pretty much seen as impossible with the CDU, as already stated by chair Kramp-Karrenbauer. Nonetheless, the pressure on Borjans and Eskens in on and the base wants to see results, if necessary, a long-awaited goodbye to the grand coalition.

The result marks a paradigm shift, that was more than necessary. For the SPD to become successful again, it needs to reinvent itself first. Ten years as Merkel’s junior partner and a CDU that, under Merkel, has moved further and further to the middle, have left little room for the SPD to score with an own identity.

A sharp turn to the left and away from the CDU’s moderate stances should thus work in theory. However, it is hard to believe that the two new chairs possess the pedigree to facilitate the party’s resurrection. Furthermore, the division within the party has widened. Young uber progressives attempt to replace the pragmatist, who, for obvious reasons, have no interest in a new general election. The divide and the lack of faith in future leadership are also illustrated by the voter turnout for the candidates. Only 54.9% of the 425,000 members submitted a vote, despite their party being desperate for a change of course.

Most importantly, if Borjans and Eskens were true to opt-out of the grand coalition and force a new general election, can both be trusted in running a campaign of this magnitude? And where would it leave the party that currently polls between 13 and 15 percent?

It has been almost two decades of decrease popularity and inadequate party chairs. This time, it was supposed to be different. A magnum opus of party democracy. A vote for the people, by the people. The result remains the same. And so will the SPD’s descent.

L'articolo New Leadership for Germany’s SPD proviene da InsideOver.

Will Great Britain be more decisive on Brexit than its parliament was? Presumably, we will receive an answer over the next few weeks, when the result of the next General Election will be announced; on December, 13. After months of deadlock, Boris Johnson finally got, from the so-called “Zombie Parliament”, what he wanted: MPs to agree to his Christmas elections claim.

Johnson’s political gamble

On his biography on Winston Churchill, Johnson writes that: “To some extent all politicians are gamblers with events. They try to anticipate what will happen, to put themselves ‘on the right side of history’.”

“As Mr Churchill Put his shirt on a horse called anti-Nazism… and his bet came off in spectacular fashion, ‘Mr Johnson has put his shirt on a horse called Euroscepticism”, last February, the Financial Times said.

That bet has now gone further. Johnson’s call for a general election means that he is wagering that voters will trust in him and secure his position as the man to get Brexit done right after the polling. Johnson hopes that voters won’t blame him for the fact that Brexit has not been delivered yet. He’s confident that he has shifted that blame onto someone else: the deadlocked parliament, the opposition parties and the Tory MPs that betrayed him. He is betting nobody will blame him for making a pledge that was unlikely to be delivered.

He will not “die in a ditch”, as he is sure people are so impatient to “get Brexit done” that they will deliver him a majority that will enable him to pass his withdrawal agreement soon, allowing the UK to leave the EU by the end of January 2020. No more extensions needed.

Theresa May, in June 2017, gambled on a snap election hoping that it would deliver the majority that the pools were predicting (she was 20 points ahead of Labour) and which she believed she needed to get Brexit done. She failed, hopelessly.

Focusing narrowly on Brexit and basing her premiership upon her supposed strong and stable leadership, May’s campaign was “swiftly derailed by a disastrous manifesto launch,” The Times said. The Conservative majority was dramatically lost (45.6% Tories, 41.9% Labour) and she ended up in need of the support of the Democratic Unionist Party to remain in office.

A contest about many things, Brexit first

This is the most crucial vote for Britain facing the most important general elections in 40 years, since the war. Polling experts say the result is likely to be hard to gauge due to the fact that a part of the voters have switched parties in the last two elections.

Volatile voters don’t support the same party, election after election, as it used to happen in the past. That’s one of the reasons why the December 12 contest is the most unpredictable in a generation.

“Each political party will have its own manifesto – Professor Steven McCabe, Senior Fellow, Centre for Brexit Studies at Birmingham City University, explains – but the fact is that, the big question that will dominate over the others is Brexit”. What this election is going to become is a kind of referendum on Brexit because “this issue will overshadow all the rest,” he said.

Divisions between Leave and Remain voters will replace traditional Tory vs Labour ones.

Both sides are very nervous, both of the main parties are extremely worried about what may unfold; this is a huge risk for the Tories and for Labour and, at the same time, a great opportunity, in particular, for the smaller parties with huge expectations.

Such an open scenario shows that it is likely to become a four-way fight, giving inedited chances to Liberal Democrats as much as to the Brexit Party.

This election will move away from the single national campaign, focused on the domestic agenda, becoming a highly targeted one, especially in certain areas and for certain voters groups. It will not just be about stopping Brexit or getting it quickly done. In Northern Ireland the election will be about the union; in Scotland the SNP will be trying to seek every opportunity not just to stop Brexit but to look beyond it, preparing the ground to make their case for what they hope will be another push towards their independence.

It will be hard for all campaigners to make their traditional polling model work the way it did before, because things are fluid and unpredictable, now: a gamble for everyone.

Tories bid

The 2017 elections were a disaster for the Tories led by Theresa May. Anthony Sheldon, a well-known historian and biographer of political figures, wrote a book published by The Times revealing the inside story of May’s campaign:

The Tories have been the most divided party for a century

“Johnson has no intention of repelling voters as she did. He is more charismatic and will learn from May’s mistakes being better on the stump than she was. Even if he is considered untrustworthy, unserious and populist, he is the holder of a Brexit deal that he will use to win Labour seats on the Leave-voting areas,” He added that “He will also try to contrast and offset the certain losses created by voters in the Remain strongholds in Scotland and London. He will transform the centre-right Conservative Party into a rightwing nationalist one shaped by a single issue: “get Brexit done”.

Polling evidence suggests that support for Brexit may not be strong enough among many target voters to overcome their dislike to the Tories and the latest exodus of centrist Conservative MPs is an eloquent answer to this political hazard.

Tactical vote is likely to play a very important role in the next general elections as it did in the recent ones even if there is no guide at all of what could happen also considering that, both the main parties’ leader are natural campaigners,  but they are divisive characters.

Farage’s decision

Right at the beginning of the British political campaign, President Donald Trump picked up the phone and gave unrequested advice. During a radio interview with Nigel Farage, he suggested his friend, Boris Johnson, to join forces with the leader of the Brexit Party.

“I know that you and him will end up doing something that could be terrific if you and he get together as, you know, an unstoppable force,” Mr Trump said.

He also criticized the PM’s Brexit deal overshadowing BoJo’s efforts to use it as a first, strong point in his manifesto.

During the radio interview, Trump claimed Johnson’s deal could limit or even prevent the UK from trading with the US, undermining every effort of selling the deal agreed with the EU as a key point to BoJo’s campaign to win Leavers’ vote.

Another important detail is represented by the loss of fortune affecting Farage’s party since the latest European elections. Last May the Brexit Party reached its highest peak, but after having enjoyed ratings of 20% in the early summer polls, it has gradually lost grounds to the Tories, falling to the current 10%, so far. Nevertheless, the Brexit Party could weaken the PM’s ambitions of winning by taking a large slice of Leave votes in many constituencies, this will inflict real damage on him.

Farage will be remembered for being responsible for giving the 2016 Referendum a chance to exist, whereas he will be always be considered responsible for the bitter division the referendum ultimately created in the country.
His latest decision is not to stand as a candidate, but just to support his party’s 600 candidates. “I don’t want to be in politics for the rest of my life,” he told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show.

He also called Boris Johnson to ask him to drop his deal and create a “Leave Alliance”. “I always thought that to win an election, get a big majority so we can get a proper Brexit, a coming-together would be the objective.” Hopeless, he concluded: “I still hope and pray it happens but it doesn’t look like it will.” 

Farage is considered to be a champion of a cause but, as politics is desperately trying to compromise in order to find a solution to the Brexit saga, will he be able to do it?

Labour’s cahiers de doléances

A political campaign focused on Brexit represents Jeremy Corbyn’s worst outcome. Labour’s manifesto is being drawn up and a key adviser warned Corbyn to stay neutral on this issue in order to avoid wrecking his campaign.

During his leadership, his negative personal ratings have broken all polling record. This explains the party’s reluctancy about going into another election and the deep nervousness of many Labour MPs to back it. Some of them think that Corbyn is unfit for Downing Street, others faithful expect his performance to come alive during the political campaign.

The Momentum army will give a huge support, but will also push him towards the hard-Left Socialism.

Corbyn describes himself as an alternative to austerity, inequality and claims a hard fight against the elites. As an immediate consequence, “The super-rich should prepare to leave the UK ‘within minutes’ if Labour wins the election,” The Guardian said, adding that “the wealthy see potential taxes imposed by Jeremy Corbyn as a bigger threat than Brexit”.

Corbyn’s Britain and Johnson’s Britain are hugely different countries, few MPs expect poll to solve the economic and the political problems created by the 2016 referendum outcome and to the uncertainty that came as a consequence to that result.

Lib Dems’ great chance

Liberal Democrats leaflet proclaims that Jo Swinson will be Britain’s next Prime Minister. She has claimed, at the general election, her party could take a lot of seats capitalizing the frustration of the Remain voters over “Labour’s willingness to enable Brexit”.

The leader of the Lib Dems backed the election after conceding that there was not enough support in parliament to secure a second referendum (on Brexit). That’s how a general election turned into her best way forward.
The Lib Dems’ official election policy is to stop Brexit and revoke Art 50, if they will win. Otherwise, they have a plan B.

The party has dashed predictions of a widespread Remain alliance and assured they will go on campaigning for a second referendum.

Jo Swinson’s biggest challenge is likely to come in the event of a hung Parliament. If the Lib Dems don’t win a majority, which is unlikely (even if they run allied with the SNP), with a significant number of seats, they could be involved in putting together a government. Another referendum is their price for agreeing to support one of the other parties.

The final outcome

And what about Brexit? If Boris Johnson wins his gamble, a Conservative majority will let the UK being able to leave the EU, even earlier than predicted. Likely, at the beginning of January 2020. This would be possible if BoJo will be able to get his deal through the parliament right after the general election, just before Christmas.

If Boris Johnson doesn’t win a comfortable majority, he will not have many allies. The Lib Dems and the SNP want to revoke Article 50, or at least hold a second Brexit referendum that’s why they will never back his deal, whereas the DUP will never back it if it is not changed.

If Jeremy Corbyn wins a majority in the Commons and enters Downing Street, he has to renegotiate Boris Johnson’s deal with the EU and call a second referendum and, then, if voters will back Leave again, negotiate a new deal. If Labour fails to win a majority, it is also possible for Corbyn to ask the support of both Lib Dems, the SNP and even Plaid Cymru in order to form the so-called “rainbow coalition” which will be able to work and solve the Brexit issue and, after that, go back to another election.

Will Boris Johnson’s Christmas Brexit gamble pay off?

L'articolo Is the UK General Election the Last Chance for Brexit? proviene da InsideOver.

The British democracy is facing its biggest national crisis for decades. In 2016, the European Referendum has bitterly split the country into two parts. As a result, the United Kingdom is still paralyzed and unable to free itself from this never-ending saga.

Brexit has no heroes

Jeremy Corbyn’s weak leadership performance and serial fallings could be the key factors responsible for this prolonged impasse.

Subsequently after the Brexit Referendum, in 2016, he refused to step down as leader of the Labour Party even after an overwhelming vote of no-confidence and a wave of resignations from his front bench. During the 2017 elections, he unexpectedly came from a long way behind Theresa May and nearly beat her but, now, this does not seem to be enough to make the electorate accept the idea of making him their Prime Minister. Is this not the first example of weak leadership?

Corbyn’s weakness explained with numbers

The Labour leader has the lowest poll numbers of any leader of the opposition since records began. His ambivalence in the Brexit stalemate situation and his inability in showing a charismatic leadership has given his adversary the chance of looking brighter then he is.

He is less popular than Boris Johnson amongst both men and women, in every socio-economic category, whether richer or poorer, in London and Scotland and remarkably, in every age group, younger and older. It’s no surprise that 62% among the over 65s tend to prefer Johnson to Corbyn, but it could be surprising that even among the youngest voters, aged 18 to 24 – those once seen as the Labour leader’s base – Corbyn is less popular than the PM, albeit by three points.

This is also the result of BoJo’s strong communication strategy turning him into a pumped-up boxer, “a populist simplifier” – according to the definition given by Professor Gianfranco Pasquino (John’s Hopkin’s University, Bologna) – able of keeping the adversary always under pressure. A perfect example of the good outcome of this strategy is the Johnson’s call for general elections by challenging Corbyn to “man up”.

The indecision showed by the leader of the Labour party turned him into the first opposition leader in history to block and fear a general election, even if the one consistent lifeline of the Labour leadership over recent months has been that it wants a general election. Tories call for elections because they believe that, as things stand, they will win. However, their counterpart is reluctant to have an election for the same reason and they are probably both right.

According to a poll conducted by Britain Elects Poll Tracker on Oct the 22nd, on the latest voting intentions, Tories (35%) are ten points ahead of Labour Party supporters (25%).

The polling firm Deltapoll suggests Johnson is better able to rally the Tory base then Theresa May was. He is trusted by leave voters in a way that May wasn’t. This could be one of the obstacles stopping Corbyn’s run towards victory.

Corbyn’s secret plan

Jeremy Corbyn’s ambivalence and opacity on Brexit has given an electoral advantage to Boris Johnson (always claiming to “get Brexit done”, “do or die”) and to the Liberal Democrats led by Jo Swinson (who keeps on asking to revoke Article 50). It is hard for Corbyn, who started with an anti-EU position, to lead a party divided into leavers and remainers. And this job is harder for a man with weak leadership.

Corbyn had been “taken prisoner” by his Party to stop him giving ground to his adversaries, a source said. According to another source, Corbyn’s plan seems to be clear: let Johnson get his Brexit done and then call for a general election next year. This means: moving away from the Brexit issue and taking an advantage on the Liberal Democrats who are wrecked after losing their flagship. As a result, Corbyn’s call for elections, next Spring, would let him become PM.

“LINO”

Interestingly, according to a recent poll, Labour Party supporters are also getting weaker on their traditional issues, whereas Tories overtake them.

The GPR (Ground Penetrating Radar) survey published in the New Statesman shows that Labour Party supporters are five points behind the Tories on education and four behind on infrastructure. Labour has also lost its traditional advantage over the rivals when it comes to its perceived ability to deliver public services and fallen to 2% on the NHS. The Tories also polled better on defense and crime – in line with expectations – while Labour is still maintaining a strong lead is tackling poverty (ahead 10%).

The Daily Mail reported the words of one Labour MP calling his leader “LINO” – Leader In Name Only.

Johnson, on the other side, is always running borderline, stressing rules and sometimes putting the democratic system at risk. He has been capable of upsetting the Queen, his disruptive plans have been stopped by the Supreme Court but at the end, he is showing unconventional leadership abilities, whereas he is also able of becoming softer. BoJo is able of denying what he previously promised, when necessary. 

The Irish Unionists (DUP) know this aspect of his behaviour very well, as they have been sacrificed to a deal that denies all of Johnson’s recent promises.

The importance of the dialectic

“The parliamentary supremacy of the British democracy has shown its strength. Everything works,” Gianfranco Pasquino said.

“Boris Johnson’s avowed strategy is to make him approach one of attempting to carry out the “will of the people” that is being thwarted by an “elite” among MPs who he claims have never been in favour of Brexit,” Steven McCabe, Associate Professor at Birmingham City University said. Johnson also claims that an election is urgently needed to bring end to what is regarded as a “zombie” parliament that is unwilling to make any definitive decision.

However, as Steven McCabe claimed, this criticism is unfair as “Parliament is doing its job in trying to reach a compromise that reflects divisions across the country”. McCabe explained: “There’s great division in all parts of society as well as among the two main parties because supporters voted to ‘leave’ and ‘remain’ which creates a challenge in achieving a solution that is going to be consistently supported by a majority of the electorate”. McCabe acknowledged that the only way out of the impasse will be people voting wither through another referendum he considers “highly unlikely” on an election though, according to him, this could result in continued confusion if the result is another ‘hung’ Parliament.

As for the political costs of this Brexit saga, McCabe suggests that “This situation undermines the trust of people in politics because they simplistically believe that Parliament is not doing what it is supposed to do in fulfilling the wishes of those who voted to leave over three years ago”.

“The political damage caused by the lack of the dialectic dialogue is huge. The voice of the opposition is the strength of every democracy,” Pasquino added.

Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the opposition Party since 2015, was first elected at Islington North on 1983; he won the primaries of his Party twice but has been unable of showing the political ability needed to face that big challenge called Brexit, yet. This could be one of the reasons why the UK is still stuck to this stalemate and this could cost Mr Corbyn dearly.

L'articolo Corbyn’s Responsibilty on the Never-Ending Brexit Saga proviene da InsideOver.

Today, Canada elects a new parliament. What was supposed to be a formality for Canada’s uber progressive poster boy Justin Trudeau, might turn out to be Canada’s first one-term tenure of a Prime Minister since the 1930s, as his party is currently trailing in the polls. His fall from grace is based on having failed to satisfy impeccable standards he seemingly set for everyone but himself.

With momentum and optimism, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took office four years ago after his decisive election victory. A long reign had been predicted. Today, Trudeau might not maintain his mandate. His party is currently slightly behind the opposition conservatives and their top candidate Andrew Scheer at 31 to 32 per cent.

The election victory of Trudeau in 2015 was supposed to be a turning point; he was set to lead the country socio-politically into the modern age. His vision: Canada needed to become more feminist, more ecological and surely even more multicultural. Over were the oppressive, conservative days of predecessor Stephen Harper, who simply was lacking the necessary “wokeness” to appeal to Canada’s millennials. Trudeau’s campaign promises of legalising marijuana, establishing Cabinet parity, as well as his pledge to increase relations with the indigenous peoples of Canada, on the other hand, seemed like a paradigm shift towards a better world and a higher moral ground.

One could even argue that Trudeau won the US election in 2016. With Donald Trump in 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Trudeau’s political style and his worldview made Canada the morally supreme entity on the continent.

Four years later, things have changed, and the election campaign has been unexpectedly tricky at best. The reasons for it are self-inflicted. First, Trudeau violated the country’s ethics laws when he urged his attorney general not to prosecute an engineering company in a conflict of interest case. Two ministers resigned in protest. Trudeau did not apologise until an ethics committee reprimanded him two months ago.

A few weeks ago, almost 20-year-old photos appeared on which Trudeau wears the infamous “brownface”, which is rightfully considered as racist. Worse yet, when asked how many of these pictures he had taken, he was not able to say. It was not just a scratch but rather a deep cut in Canada’s white knight’s armour and an utter PR disaster.

Nonetheless, his policies may be considered successful by some, certainly in progressive circles. Canada’s unemployment rate decreased from seven to five and a half per cent during his tenure, helping the economy to create over one million new jobs. The CETA trade agreement with the EU is also in force for the time being, which should be highly beneficial for the country in the long run. Child support has been raised, taxes for the middle class have been lowered. Moreover, he fulfilled his promise of legalising marijuana and regulated euthanasia by law. One of his signatures promises, the reform of the electoral system, Trudeau did not facilitate, however.

Trudeau has been trying to highlight his accomplishments during the election circle. Naturally, Trudeau emphasises the millennial’s favourite topic: the climate. However, Canada is not just Toronto, Montreal and Edmonton. The people who live out in the beautiful countryside of Canada have had other concerns. The Conservatives, fairly cognizant of it, have not wasted a second always to attack Trudeau’s carbon tax. Scheer has already promised its abolition, as he deems it “job-destroying”.

The Mr perfect aura is gone, and even if he stayed in office, it might be hard for him moving forward, to preach his idealistic visions while attempting to turn Canadians into moralists. Trudeau had never been as popular in Canada as he has been portrayed, however, the fact that the incumbent Prime Minister now struggles to defeat an equally semi-unpopular conservative candidate decisively sums up Trudeau’s downfall perfectly.

If Trudeau wins, his desire for redemption will likely end up in more detrimental policies and an even more pronounced rift in society. It is what his base seeks to see. The rest of the country, however, does not. Whatever the outcome of this election will be, Trudeau has already lost.

L'articolo Practice What you Preach – Why Justin Trudeau has Already Lost proviene da InsideOver.