The Prime Minister’s score is still dire: he is back in positive ratings, but not by very much. Though a substantial minority of the panel want him on the leadership election ballot and/or would vote for him had they the option, a larger majority of it does not.
The Home Office is a legendary graveyard of political ambition, and Patel is less well placed to escape burial than was Theresa May, who won the 2016 contest.
Our findings and theirs are in the same territory even allowing for six months’ or so difference. There is no decisive view on who any replacement should be.
To waste time now on internal factionalisation would be indefensible to so many party members who worked so hard to secure our majority.
It seldom occurs to this author that the best way to deal with fashionable absurdities is to laugh at them, and trust in the public’s common sense.
The authors reply to William Atkinson – who suggested a week ago on this site that it should not.
Cooper is on top of her brief, yet somehow failed to press home her advantage as she pointed out to Patel that many criminals are getting off scot free.
Labour had a slightly higher mean likelihood voting score among voters as a whole than the Conservatives.
A pattern is beginning to form below the Defence Secretary, with Truss, Zahawi and Trevelyan coming in variously at second, third and fourth.
Our political constitution rightly puts our representatives, not the permanent bureaucracy, in the driving seat.
This partnership is a world first and will change the way we collectively tackle illegal migration.
The Home Secretary’s reticence in publicly backing the Prime Minister reflects concern from those enforcing the law about defending those seen to break it.
Shadow home secretary says she does not “understand why Priti Patel is so failing to get a grip on this”.
Meanwhile, Johnson is out of negative ratings for the first time in three months – and in comparative mid-table safety.