The dark cynicism at the heart of democracy…

Churchill’s maxim that “democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried” is being severely tested. The quality of politicians, populism, the rise of social media, fake news, the 24-hour news cycle are all testing its ability to deliver. Those in public life more cynically than ever before, sometimes in desperation, attempt to manipulate the electorate in the face of such headwinds whilst voters, in turn, are more cynical about politicians, their believability and ability to produce results. Polls suggest the public is losing patience.

Democracy facing almost overwhelming headwinds

Let’s take each one in turn. The quality of politicians in most democracies is generally deteriorating. The price paid for public service is seen as too high as 24- hour media scrutiny, online abuse, and a general lack of respect for those in authority take their toll. I was a Conservative Party parliamentary candidates’ list assessor for nine years up to 2019, and the fall in quality of applicants was palpable. The best are eschewing politics for a career elsewhere. Many on the list are simply glorified local councillors. Local knowledge on day one and a fanatical ability to deliver leaflets and canvass are seen as superior to raw talent. That is before one takes into consideration the quality of recent Prime Ministers at the top of the political tree…

In America, before the rise of Kamala Harris, the choice of presidential candidate, aided by the obscene amounts of money needed to participate, was awful and probably not that great now. But why is a narcissist with declining cognitive abilities still leading the Republicans? Desperate.

This fall in the quality of those seeking a role in public life is repeated across countries and is exacerbated by past and current populist candidates such as Trump, Johnson, Farage, Bolsonaro, Berlusconi, Marine Le Pen, Orban, Modi to name but a few. Mostly (perhaps not the latter two) incompetent and caring little for their electorate, they have risen on the back of over-promising mainstream politicians failing to deliver relative to expectations.

Then social media. The abuse is awful and sometimes aired by leaders who should know better. Trump recently implied online that Kamala Harris was the beneficiary of oral sex. Incredible. Conspiracy theories such as QAnon (the world is run by satanic child molesters) abound. They have always existed, but the oxygen of publicity that the internet provides is like pouring petrol on flames. Who wants to steer a path through democratic politics in this maelstrom? This dovetails into fake news with doctored videos, photos, voice recordings, further adding pressure.

Lastly, the 24 hour news cycle. Hounded by social media, mainstream outlets harry politicians constantly in order to keep up. Politicians are expected to respond to events immediately, know everything about every topic in interviews and account for the smallest flaws. Achievements go unrecognised as journalists focus on publicising every misstep in the name of ‘news’. Thoughtful, longer-term political discourse on complex issues has become an unnecessary luxury in a world of fragmented, short-term focused communication channels set on instant voter gratification.

Authoritarians suppress debate, control social media, and brutally remove opponents. Democracy in contrast, is a system of checks and balances overwhelmed by the pressures listed above. Those pressures are undermining its very existence and are becoming a price too heavy to bear.

Harris performs well in TV debate with Trump, but does it matter?

Possibly, but in the face of so many polarised voters, Harris will struggle to move decisively clear of Trump.

Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Harris probably trumped the debate itself…

Harris performed strongly, and Trump was frankly, well, weird. So angry, so fixed on the past, and Biden, he failed to land blows on Harris and, that in itself, was a victory for the Vice-President.

But it went beyond that. Trump railed against immigrants eating animals, rising immigrant led violent crime, and babies aborted after birth and was pulled up by moderators for these lies. He had no policies on healthcare and refused to support a Ukraine victory. He lives in a dark, dark world although I worry that his angry fluency might rally his supporters.

Harris looked relaxed, often laughed at Trump, and talked about a positive future. She was not held to account for changing policy views, and this will be a source of regret for Trump supporters

Harris should have a small bounce in the polls after this debate, but it is all about mostly independent voters in the swing states, and the electoral college is currently too fickle to call.

What is wrong with America? What is wrong with the Republican Party? The Democrats have baggage, and any other Republican candidate might have walked it.

But Trump? He should and deserves to be miles behind. The fact that he is level with Harris says more about the state of American politics than it does Harris.

The world and moderate American voters wait for November 5th with baited breath, although now feeling safer, probably not because of this debate, but because Taylor Swift has just endorsed the Vice-President…

None of the Tory leadership candidates will be the next Prime Minister

Why are they standing? Leadership of the Opposition is a thankless task particularly 10 years’ out… Hope is everything that the Tories’ fortunes may be restored faster, counting on a Labour blow-up, but the main reason is a belief that the country will accept the need for a viable Opposition at some stage in the future, whenever that is. One party governance in a democracy never works. Just check in with Labour (1997-2010) and the Tories (2010-2024).

Priti Patel: a well-deserved elimination from the Tory leadership race…

But the Tories’ current leadership candidates are a motley crew with one or two exceptions, probably not a surprise when the six candidates are drawn from a talent pool of just 121 MPs. In the first round of elections announced this afternoon, Priti Patel has been eliminated and good riddance. A very poor Home Secretary appointed by Johnson who put Party before office and danced with Nigel Farage on the fringes of the Conservative Party conference as he was destroying it. Need we say more…

Of the rest, Kemi Badenoch, the bookies’ favourite, has achieved little in her ministerial career except gaining a reputation as a cultural warrior and ruffling the feathers of her parliamentary colleagues. Robert Jenrick has dodgy property business links to his name and has turned right-wing on immigration after sulking he didn’t get into a Sunak cabinet. That looks like a positive favour granted to him now. James Cleverly is not known for being, well, clever, but is a decent person if very much a stop-gap leader. That leaves Mel Stride, decent, smart, but wrong image and little following. Not a hope in hell. The most interesting character is the never knowingly undersold moderate, Tom Tugendhat. He would be by far the best option except for blotting his copy book by potentially committing himself to leaving the ECHR. When will the Left learn that there should be no compromise with the Right of the Conservative Party if there is any decent path back to power?

The main problem is the Tory membership decides who of the last two candidates should be the leader. It is like giving the vote to pupils to select their headteacher. Inappropriate. The hugely diminished Tory membership is not remotely representative of Tory voters and, if many have not cleared off to Reform, would like to. Think of their judgement. Duncan Smith over Clarke, Johnson over Hunt, Truss over Sunak. Only Cameron over Davis was remotely a bright spot, perhaps not with the benefit of hindsight. Who knows.

Whoever wins the Tory leadership, announced in November (what a tedious slog!), will have little influence on politics generally. But they could have influence over the Tory Party by giving the final choice of leader back to MPs.