It’s difficult not to see parallels between chaos of US Republican party and UK Conservatives | Adam Boulton

Published

2 years ago

January 6, 2023

admin

Nations and political systems differ greatly but it is difficult not to see parallels between what is happening now in the US Republican party and the recent history of the UK Conservative party.

There is a brutal tussle under way over the direction which should be taken by Anglophone conservatism, as embodied a generation past by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan.

Last year, the turmoil in Britain’s ruling party resulted in three prime ministers in a matter of months, as Tory MPs failed to agree on leaders capable of governing the nation reliably.

The Republican party actually “won” the mid-term elections for the lower House of Congress, taking control from the Democrats.

But as the 118th Congress met for the first time this week, the new majority party failed to agree on their first order of business, who should be their leader, for the first time since 1923, 100 years ago.

Although they share the same title, and preside over proceedings in their house, the US Speaker does not have the same role as the Speaker in the House of Commons.

Like his predecessors, Sir Lindsay Hoyle is expected to be neutral and has abandoned his ties to Labour. By convention the UK Speaker is effectively an incumbent, irrespective of general elections when he or she stands without opposition from the main political parties.

The Speaker of the House of Representatives is an entirely partisan figure. In practice they are the leader of the majority party, which makes them the equivalent of prime minister in UK terms.

In the US Constitution the Speaker is second in the line of succession to the Presidency, after the vice president. (Confusingly the Veep is also the presiding officer in the upper house, with the casting vote in the US Senate.)

The likes of Speakers Tip O’Neill, Newt Gingrich, Paul Ryan and Nancy Pelosi have made much of their role as major national political figures.

When there is no Speaker in place, the House of Representatives is what one frustrated congressman this week called “a useless entity”. Its members cannot be sworn in, so they cannot legislate or hold the executive to account. They don’t even have security clearance.

When, as now, the Presidency and the Senate are controlled by the other party, the Speaker of the House is more important than ever as the equivalent to the Leader of the Opposition.

When Kevin McCarthy, an eight-term congressman from California, led his party to victory over the Democrats in the mid-terms by 222 seats to 212, the Republicans might have been expected to stick with his leadership and to install him in the top job.

But no. In 11 painful roll call votes McCarthy failed to get the required overall majority of representatives because 20 members of his own Republican party resolutely refused to back him, including five US Representatives elected for the first time.

Meanwhile the Democrats settled immediately and unanimously on Hakeem Jeffries of New York as their minority leader, replacing Pelosi who has retired. Jeffries is the first African-American to lead a party in the US Congress.

The overwhelming majority of House Republicans – 201 out of 222 – back McCarthy but without most of the 20 holdouts they did not have enough votes to put him over the top on 218.

Nineteen of those blocking McCarthy belong to the right-wing Freedom Caucus. Their motivation is best summed up by the controversial congressman from Florida, Mike Gaetz, who declared “If you want to drain the swamp, you cannot put the biggest alligator in charge”.

“The swamp” is the fetid American version of what British populists like to write-off as the “Westminster bubble”.

Gaetz’s extremist language carries echoes of Jacob Rees-Mogg’s pronouncement that Rishi Sunak’s policies are “socialist”.

McCarthy is not a centrist member of the establishment. He courted and promoted candidates belonging to the Tea Party. He hesitated briefly after the attack on the Capitol on 6 January 2021, but within days voted against impeachment and flew to Mar-a-Lago to seek Donald Trump’s endorsement. McCarthy embraced the “big lie” that Trump won in 2020, and voted to challenge the official electors in key states.

If he becomes speaker, McCarthy says his first priority will be to cancel the hiring of 87,000 tax inspectors. He will also block the crucial bipartisan budget measures already agreed in the Senate.

He has promised to change the rules to make it easier to sack a speaker (a bit like the 1922 Committee and votes of no confidence). This eventually won “MY Martin” the backing of Trump on his own Truth Social platform: “He will do a good job and maybe even a GREAT JOB”.

Politically he is not much different from those refusing to back him but they still don’t trust him. Instead they deliberately plunged US politics into chaos, at one stage proposing an alternative candidate, Jim Jordan, who had himself nominated McCarthy.

Partisan Democrats relished their opponents’ plight and tweeted out images of the popcorn they were munching as the drama unfolded.

A critical columnist in The New York Times found it “grimly amusing to see that the party of insurrection can’t even manage the orderly transfer of power to itself”.

But the progressive newspaper took a more serious tone assessing the consequences of the refusenik’s behaviour: “They simply will not relent and join their colleagues even if it is for the greater good of their party, and perhaps the nation. They consider themselves conservative purists who cannot be placated unless all their demands are met – and maybe not even then. Their agenda is mostly to defund, disrupt and dismantle government, not to participate in it.”

The UK’s Conservatives have not disappeared down this rabbit hole. It is difficult to imagine Tory MPs celebrating the removal of metal detector arches, as symbols of oppression rather than security, as some Republicans did this week. Nor do they celebrate the right to bear arms.

Yet such groups as the European Research Group have been willing to use obstructionism and their position as de facto swing voters to force the bulk of their party in a more right-wing direction in policy and personnel matters.

They too have abandoned party loyalty in favour of ideology, allegedly supported by unelected and energised party activists.

On both sides of the Atlantic they have endorsed purges of those they disagree with in what was a “broad church” type of party. Their energy is focussed on fighting within their own party for control. Provided their party can eke out election wins, they disregard those who don’t vote for it.

Whether they call it the swamp or the bubble their suspicion of government and its agencies comes with demands for a smaller state, welfare cutbacks, scepticism about climate change measures, less regulation of business, and curtailed civil rights.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

The essential difference is that a significant minority of Republican representatives think that the best way to achieve their goals is to disrupt and overturn the system while the overwhelming majority of Conservative MPs still want to work within it.

Many Tory MPs disagree profoundly with the right’s atavism but, for self-preservation, they look over their shoulders anxiously before speaking up for One Nation values.

So far those most effective in forcing the Conservatives in a rightward direction have been outsiders. Significantly, in praising the Brexit negotiator Lord Frost this week, Nigel Farage bellowed “now is the time for all good men to leave the Conservative Party”. Farage’s sidekick Richard Tice relaunched their Reform Party.

Last year, the British public suffered the consequences of the unquiet soul of the right. This year the Republicans are already offering another lesson in real time.

US

Cardi B ‘wasn’t going to vote’ until Harris entered race – as National Guard activated in US state ‘in case of election violence’

Published

9 hours ago

November 2, 2024

admin

Cardi B 'wasn't going to vote' until Harris entered race - as National Guard activated in US state 'in case of election violence'

Cardi B has said she was not planning to vote in the US election this year, but Kamala Harris taking over as the Democratic nominee changed her mind.

The WAP rapper appeared at a Harris campaign rally on Friday, becoming the latest celebrity to endorse the vice president for Tuesday’s election following the likes of Beyonce, Jennifer Lopez, Bruce Springsteen and Eminem.

At the rally in Milwaukee in the swing state of Wisconsin, the singer said she would be voting for the Democratic nominee because she is “not delusional”, while branding Republican contender Donald Trump a “bully”.

Follow latest US election updates

“She’s passionate, compassionate… and most of all she is not delusional,” Cardi B said about the vice president, who took over as the Democratic presidential candidate after US President Joe Biden dropped out.

Cardi B went on to refer to Mr Trump as a “bully” and said about the Republican presidential candidate: “He said he’s gonna protect women whether they like it or not.

“If his definition of protection is not the freedom of choice… then I don’t want it,” she said.

“I’m not giving Donald Trump a second chance.”

Both Mr Trump and Ms Harris have been making the most of their last few days of campaigning, visiting swing states in a bid to get voters on their side in what is set to be a nail-bitingly close race.

The Republican nominee spent his day in Michigan and Wisconsin – calling on voters to “make America great again” by voting him in.

Mr Trump is currently being investigated by Arizona’s top prosecutor over comments he made about Liz Cheney, one of his most vocal Republican critics, when he said on Thursday she would not be a “radical war hawk” if she was in a war herself and had guns “trained on her face”.

“Let’s put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, OK? Let’s see how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained on her face,” Mr Trump said during an event with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

The suburbs of Atlanta could tell us a lot about where the US election is going

In the suburbs of Atlanta, Georgia, there’s a hugely tight race afoot that could tell us a lot about where this election goes.

As I walk through the leafy streets of Cobb County, I see the signs of change everywhere.

This suburb is home to an exodus from Atlanta – one that’s brought more diversity, more affluence and more nuance.

Four years ago, it delivered a rare win for Joe Biden in a southern state that hadn’t backed a Democrat for president in nearly 30 years.

Georgia turned out to be the biggest swing for the party in 2020. Now, Kamala Harris wants to hold on to that momentum, but it won’t be easy.

Some cast suburbia as staid, sleepy and slow.

Keep reading here.

During his rally in Michigan last night, Mr Trump also engaged in an exchange with a heckler who shouted something unintelligible, before he stopped speaking and said: “You want to marry me?”

“She wants to marry me what the hell?”

That was met by a whooping before Mr Trump said: “Let me ask the [former] first lady if that would be ok… it’s OK with me but let me get permission”.

Meanwhile in Washington, the state governor has said he is “activating” members of the National Guard to be on standby in case of violence surrounding the upcoming election.

Governor Jay Inslee said he made the decision after he received information and concerns regarding potential violence.

The order is set to go into effect Monday and last until midnight on Thursday.

Ms Harris is expected to defeat Mr Trump in the state.

Ballot boxes were set on fire there earlier in the week, with hundreds of votes thought to have been damaged.

US

America does exit polls differently to the UK – here’s how and why

Published

13 hours ago

November 2, 2024

admin

America does exit polls differently to the UK - here's how and why

There are two main differences between election coverage in the UK and the United States.

Last July, at 10pm, Sky News’ exit poll graphic predicted a Labour landslide and a massive defeat for the Conservatives.

Confirmation of this forecast was a long time coming since constituency results are only announced by local returning officers once all votes have been counted.

US election latest: Data reveals potentially decisive trends in two swing states

Americans do things differently and for good reason. Polling stations close much earlier in the east than they do in the west. When voting has hours to go in some states, they’ve already started counting elsewhere.

There is a “wait for it” moment when voting closes in west coast states and the broadcasters can reveal the national exit poll headline, but this won’t tell us the winner.

Instead, it will tell us the types of people who have voted for Harris or Trump and the issues that dominated the outcome.

So far, one-nil to the UK, I think. But, here comes the next bit.

Instead of postponing announcements about votes until every last one has been accounted for, each state then begins releasing figures as and when votes are being counted.

And they do so in such a way where we can compare this time with previously. Not for them declarations in sports halls with dodgy microphones but rather running tallies for precincts (think our local council wards) and counties (ranging from tiny to huge).

It’s these data that US broadcasters such as NBC will use to “call” each state’s vote for president. The television networks are big players in the US election drama.

Over 160 million votes will be cast in the election, more than five times the number cast in our general election last July.

And while the outcome of our election was in no doubt once the broadcasters’ exit poll revealed Labour had won a landslide majority, that will be far from the case in the battle for the presidency.

As in the UK, a consortium of US broadcasters, comprising NBC, ABC, CBS and CNN, form the national election pool.

This commissions the consumer research company, Edison Research, to survey voters in over 600 polling places as people exit their polling station.

The survey also includes telephone interviews with people casting a ballot before 5 November. Once completed, the US exit poll will have obtained responses from over 20,000 voters, a similar number that were collected for the general election.

Two surveys of voters, therefore, but now important differences in their purpose become clear.

The UK version is entirely focussed on predicting the distribution of seats among the competing parties and, thereby, the winner and its likely House of Commons majority. Over recent elections it has proved pretty good at achieving this task.

By contrast, the US version is much less concerned about predicting the winner (and there are very good reasons for taking this approach) and more interested in the campaign issues that mattered to voters, how they viewed the candidates and what factors motivated them to make their choices.

The survey identifies key demographic characteristics for each respondent – men or women, age, ethnic heritage, and educational qualifications.

Combined with questions relating to their choice for president this time around, their usual partisan preference, Democrat, Republican or none of the above, the survey data enables a considered and detailed analysis of what kinds of voters made what kinds of choices and their reasons for doing so.

Broadcast organisations, including Sky News, will use the 2024 exit poll to highlight differences between men and women voters in relation to the abortion issue.

The poll will also show how the economy ranked among voters and whether Donald Trump’s stance on low taxation gained or lost him votes among different social groups. Did Kamala Harris’s association with the Biden administration and the challenges of illegal immigration prove to be a positive or a negative in her bid for the White House?

👉 Tap here to follow the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts 👈

All very interesting, but aren’t we all tuning in to see who’s won? While the US exit poll can, in theory, be used for this purpose it is unwise to do so in what is proving to be an extremely close race.

Sky’s tracker of national polls shows the Democrat blue line and the Republican red line moving ever closer together but with Harris currently marginally ahead. But even if she loses the national vote, the polls would still be within the margin of error.

Of course, she could yet win more votes than Trump and still lose the election, as Hillary Clinton discovered when she lost to him in 2016. Winning votes is necessary, but it’s where those votes are and the available number of electoral college votes that matters the most.

Trump beat Clinton because his votes were better distributed than hers. History could be repeated.

Releasing precinct-level voting numbers as counting progresses is essential to US election coverage. The national election pool employs over a thousand researchers to collect votes from each of the 50 states.

Additionally, NBC News will augment these figures with more detailed analysis prior to making its call for each state and the electoral college votes for Harris or Trump. The first to reach 270 college votes wins.

Professor John Lapinsky of Pennsylvania University leads NBC’s decision desk.

Although the broadcasters have pooled resources to bring us the exit poll, each will independently analyse the actual voting figures as they become available.

Lapinsky and his team on behalf of NBC will call the state for either Harris or Trump only when they are satisfied that the leading candidate’s vote is sufficiently large that he or she cannot be overtaken.

This a big moment for each broadcaster, especially when the race is likely to be close and where social media may be playing a significant role in stoking accusations and counter-accusations of a fraudulent election.

With so much at stake, these decisions will take time and patience.

Our July election was done and dusted in time for the breakfast bulletins. It could be days of counting, recounting and legal appeals before we know the winner of the 2024 presidential election.

US

US election: The elderly couple whose marriage has been tested by Trump

Published

1 day ago

November 1, 2024

admin

US election: The elderly couple whose marriage has been tested by Trump

When they made America truly great its backbone was forged in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

The steel for 80% of Manhattan’s skyscrapers, many of the US Navy’s battleships, and even the entire San Francisco Golden Gate Bridge, all came from its blast furnaces in the hills north of Philadelphia.

Its mammoth steel plants stretched for almost five miles.

They lie empty and unused, now a huge open-air museum for guided tours led by former plant workers like Don Young.

US election latest: ‘We’re gonna have to lock them up,’ Trump says after suing CBS for $10bn

The 87-year-old has been married to Barbara for 20 years, but their marriage has been tested in recent months, as have many others in the most divisive presidential election in living memory.

Both Republicans, she is for Donald Trump, he is emphatically not.

Mr Trump, I pointed out, claimed he could make America great again. Did he believe him?

“No, I do not believe him. My wife does,” he said. “I’ve seen the rise of dictators in history.

“As much as I am a studier of the history of industry, I’m also a studier of the history of politics and world politics. And, you know, Mr Trump’s campaign literally, literally mirrors that of Adolf Hitler.”

His wife sees Mr Trump completely differently: “I absolutely do not agree with that. And I’m sorry to hear my husband say this. And I actually believe we have seen what President Trump can do and how our country was when he was in office.”

Trump ‘is the future for America’, Ms Young says

Their town has recovered from the collapse of Bethlehem Steel. But it’s the state of America that worries Ms Young now.

And it is Mr Trump who can save it, she said.

“He is the future for America,” she said. “I don’t want to see people coming over our border. We’ve had women murdered and raped by illegal immigrants. Who wants their children dead as a result of fentanyl, which comes over the border?”

Trump is ‘going to run America into the ground’

Her husband’s view is diametrically opposed.

“I think he’s going to run America into the ground because he does not observe any of the Democratic norms that his predecessors have,” he said.

“He didn’t observe them when he was in office. And so that’s just a window on what will happen in this coming term.”

Pennsylvania will likely determine presidential election result

Their marriage mirrors the state of play in the place they live in.

Pennsylvania is on a knife edge, say the polls, split right down the middle and the outcome here will likely determine the result on election day in this most important of swing states.

They can agree on one thing. They cannot wait for this election to be over.

Mr Young said their marriage can survive a Trump victory. Ms Young thinks so too.

The closest, nastiest, most divisive presidential election in living memory will be over soon. The bitterness and division that has plagued it less so in this deeply polarised country.