Lewis Goodall

So I spent three hours talking about the reordering of the international political order, redrawing of the Middle East map, and listening to a man, honestly, who was actually Trump's ambassador to Israel in his first term, playing a clip, earnestly discussing whether or not Gaza should be called Gaza-Lago or Mar-a-Gaza.

So I spent three hours talking about the reordering of the international political order, redrawing of the Middle East map, and listening to a man, honestly, who was actually Trump's ambassador to Israel in his first term, playing a clip, earnestly discussing whether or not Gaza should be called Gaza-Lago or Mar-a-Gaza.

So I would say, yeah, just another normal day, really. I mean, not so different to 2024. You know, I mean, basically now I suppose the difference now is now that we we all have to inhabit, don't we? The burning hedge maze that is Donald Trump's brain and try and each day see if we can navigate our way out of it and always fail.

So I would say, yeah, just another normal day, really. I mean, not so different to 2024. You know, I mean, basically now I suppose the difference now is now that we we all have to inhabit, don't we? The burning hedge maze that is Donald Trump's brain and try and each day see if we can navigate our way out of it and always fail.

Yeah, I sometimes wonder, and I suppose I could, again, ask our boxer shorty friend, John Sopel, about this. I sort of wonder, like, what did political journalists kind of, what did they do in, like, I don't know, 1999? You know, they sort of like, they're just like, are we going to join the Euro? No, we're not. Next. Like, you know, it's all very, very odd. I mean, yeah.

Yeah, I sometimes wonder, and I suppose I could, again, ask our boxer shorty friend, John Sopel, about this. I sort of wonder, like, what did political journalists kind of, what did they do in, like, I don't know, 1999? You know, they sort of like, they're just like, are we going to join the Euro? No, we're not. Next. Like, you know, it's all very, very odd. I mean, yeah.

And obviously that is a challenge, right? And particularly with Trump. It's like putting back on a kind of particularly, I don't know why I keep sort of, reaching for the kind of below the waist kind of metaphors. But like, you know, it's like putting on... Well, you correctly assess the tone of our show.

And obviously that is a challenge, right? And particularly with Trump. It's like putting back on a kind of particularly, I don't know why I keep sort of, reaching for the kind of below the waist kind of metaphors. But like, you know, it's like putting on... Well, you correctly assess the tone of our show.

It's just an instinct. You know, it's like wearing a particularly sort of comfortable pair of trunks that you haven't worn for a long time. It's like you've got to try each and every day to try and differentiate... like what matters and what doesn't matter and try and raise the kind of hysterical bar, right? Because the problem is, this is his great genius, right?

It's just an instinct. You know, it's like wearing a particularly sort of comfortable pair of trunks that you haven't worn for a long time. It's like you've got to try each and every day to try and differentiate... like what matters and what doesn't matter and try and raise the kind of hysterical bar, right? Because the problem is, this is his great genius, right?

His great genius is that he makes all of his enemies seem hysterical, even when there is loads to be hysterical about. Every day is a challenge.

His great genius is that he makes all of his enemies seem hysterical, even when there is loads to be hysterical about. Every day is a challenge.

Well, you know what? As the response to various sort of madcap things that Trump has come up with sort of day by day goes, it's probably the strongest and most strident kind of point of disagreement that he's had. I mean, obviously, he didn't say, you know, Trump is wrong.

Well, you know what? As the response to various sort of madcap things that Trump has come up with sort of day by day goes, it's probably the strongest and most strident kind of point of disagreement that he's had. I mean, obviously, he didn't say, you know, Trump is wrong.

They will do everything that they possibly can right now to avoid saying the words Trump is wrong or what the hell was he talking about or whatever it happens to be. So, you know, it is a qualitatively kind of different stance. But I mean, I think, you know, you look at Starmer right now and his biggest problem is, I mean, you can feel how utterly buffeted, you know, he finds himself being.

They will do everything that they possibly can right now to avoid saying the words Trump is wrong or what the hell was he talking about or whatever it happens to be. So, you know, it is a qualitatively kind of different stance. But I mean, I think, you know, you look at Starmer right now and his biggest problem is, I mean, you can feel how utterly buffeted, you know, he finds himself being.

Being in government, you know, you finally get the bully pulpit, right? You finally get the ability to command. You finally get the ability to be able to set the terms of political trade, right? You basically say what's happening every day and everybody else responds it, particularly in the media, right? That's one of the great kind of convening powers of being in government.

Being in government, you know, you finally get the bully pulpit, right? You finally get the ability to command. You finally get the ability to be able to set the terms of political trade, right? You basically say what's happening every day and everybody else responds it, particularly in the media, right? That's one of the great kind of convening powers of being in government.

He doesn't have that right now because every single day, Westminster and British journalism wakes up and doesn't actually think at the moment, like what is Downing Street saying about something? It's what is the White House saying about something? And then like paragraph B is this is what Downing Street is saying or often like not saying in response to what Trump has said.

He doesn't have that right now because every single day, Westminster and British journalism wakes up and doesn't actually think at the moment, like what is Downing Street saying about something? It's what is the White House saying about something? And then like paragraph B is this is what Downing Street is saying or often like not saying in response to what Trump has said.

He's a figure who, at the best of times, Dharma, struggles to command the narrative. And right now he is basically being completely and utterly removed from it by force, by the kind of Leviathan that is Trump.

He's a figure who, at the best of times, Dharma, struggles to command the narrative. And right now he is basically being completely and utterly removed from it by force, by the kind of Leviathan that is Trump.

Well, I don't think it's a secret that that. there's been a lot of people within the Labour Party who are very uncertain about what Starmer's politics are, right? He is quite Sphinx-like about it. He is somewhat, I mean, the Labour Party, right, loves to, its principal activity, right, is to over-intellectualize. right?

Well, I don't think it's a secret that that. there's been a lot of people within the Labour Party who are very uncertain about what Starmer's politics are, right? He is quite Sphinx-like about it. He is somewhat, I mean, the Labour Party, right, loves to, its principal activity, right, is to over-intellectualize. right?

Like it constantly, and this is one of the reasons probably it loses by comparison to the Conservative Party a lot, you know, it constantly engages in self-reflection. Like if they are good at one thing, right, it is beating themselves up and thinking about all of the different things that kind of are making up their politics at one given time.

Like it constantly, and this is one of the reasons probably it loses by comparison to the Conservative Party a lot, you know, it constantly engages in self-reflection. Like if they are good at one thing, right, it is beating themselves up and thinking about all of the different things that kind of are making up their politics at one given time.

The Tory party just tends to sort of go on and crack on with things and do it, you know, like the Labour Party could win 649 seats of 650, and it would be really worried about not winning the 650th, right? That's what somehow it would really sort of start thinking, oh God, but we might lose next time. We might lose next time, you know, right? So that's the difference.

The Tory party just tends to sort of go on and crack on with things and do it, you know, like the Labour Party could win 649 seats of 650, and it would be really worried about not winning the 650th, right? That's what somehow it would really sort of start thinking, oh God, but we might lose next time. We might lose next time, you know, right? So that's the difference.

Starmer is quite different in the sense he doesn't like to over-intellectualize anything. As far as I can tell, he doesn't really like thinking about much at all. I mean, this is a guy who was asked not long ago who his favorite authors were or what his favorite films were. And he looked entirely blankly. He said, I don't really read stuff. I don't really read novels.

Starmer is quite different in the sense he doesn't like to over-intellectualize anything. As far as I can tell, he doesn't really like thinking about much at all. I mean, this is a guy who was asked not long ago who his favorite authors were or what his favorite films were. And he looked entirely blankly. He said, I don't really read stuff. I don't really read novels.

I don't think he has a very broad kind of intellectual life beyond what is right in front of him. That's not to say he's not intelligent. He clearly is. But he doesn't have a very broad sort of intellectual life. And so I think, and I've asked him about this, You sort of ask politicians, who are your political heroes? Or who are you more like? Are you more like Harold Wilson?

I don't think he has a very broad kind of intellectual life beyond what is right in front of him. That's not to say he's not intelligent. He clearly is. But he doesn't have a very broad sort of intellectual life. And so I think, and I've asked him about this, You sort of ask politicians, who are your political heroes? Or who are you more like? Are you more like Harold Wilson?

Are you more like Tony Blair? And normally, Labour leaders in particular really enjoy talking about that stuff. They might sidestep the question, but on some level, they kind of enjoy it. Starmer recoils from it. He hates it. He actually eschews and is distrustful of political ideas, full stop.

Are you more like Tony Blair? And normally, Labour leaders in particular really enjoy talking about that stuff. They might sidestep the question, but on some level, they kind of enjoy it. Starmer recoils from it. He hates it. He actually eschews and is distrustful of political ideas, full stop.

And so that can be helpful sometimes because it means he's quite, let's put it this way, intellectually nimble. He can kind of move quite easily from kind of one area to the next. But what it does mean is that your troops are kind of like uncertain about what we're actually fighting for here. What are the things we really, really care about?

And so that can be helpful sometimes because it means he's quite, let's put it this way, intellectually nimble. He can kind of move quite easily from kind of one area to the next. But what it does mean is that your troops are kind of like uncertain about what we're actually fighting for here. What are the things we really, really care about?

and crucially, in an era which is actually being defined by big ideas. And those ideas right now are coming all from the right. You know, they're fighting a war of intellectual aggression day after day after day, painting very clearly exactly what is going on, why they think is going on, and what should be done about it. Starmer has very little to say.

and crucially, in an era which is actually being defined by big ideas. And those ideas right now are coming all from the right. You know, they're fighting a war of intellectual aggression day after day after day, painting very clearly exactly what is going on, why they think is going on, and what should be done about it. Starmer has very little to say.

I'm not entirely certain, really, what it is that Labour or Starmer conceive even the question of politics right now to be, let alone the answer.

I'm not entirely certain, really, what it is that Labour or Starmer conceive even the question of politics right now to be, let alone the answer.

I think you're right that the problem is with that is twofold. One is Labour leaders are expected to actually provide a lot more intellectual justification for what they do than others, than conservatives, partly because the media environment is so hostile to them, partly because, as I say, the Labour Party actually is a much more kind of like over intellectualizes things generally.

I think you're right that the problem is with that is twofold. One is Labour leaders are expected to actually provide a lot more intellectual justification for what they do than others, than conservatives, partly because the media environment is so hostile to them, partly because, as I say, the Labour Party actually is a much more kind of like over intellectualizes things generally.

But I think it's important for another reason, which is that the Labour Party, I mean, Harold Wilson once famously said that the Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing, right? The whole point of the Labour Party is that it isn't supposed to just be a party of the status quo. It's supposed to be a party which offers a moral and political critique to capitalism, right?

But I think it's important for another reason, which is that the Labour Party, I mean, Harold Wilson once famously said that the Labour Party is a moral crusade or it is nothing, right? The whole point of the Labour Party is that it isn't supposed to just be a party of the status quo. It's supposed to be a party which offers a moral and political critique to capitalism, right?

And the thing about Starmer is, and what he's offered, is that everything he talks about It's great. I mean, of course we want growth, right? Of course we want the trains to run better. Of course we want the economy to be better. Of course we want more investment. All of this stuff, any party would want that. The Conservative Party would want that. Rishi Sunak would have wanted that.

And the thing about Starmer is, and what he's offered, is that everything he talks about It's great. I mean, of course we want growth, right? Of course we want the trains to run better. Of course we want the economy to be better. Of course we want more investment. All of this stuff, any party would want that. The Conservative Party would want that. Rishi Sunak would have wanted that.

And if your politics is simply... a politics of delivery, if your politics is just, okay, we might want the same things, but we can deliver it in a way the other party can't because we're more competent. Well, there are two problems with that. One, what happens if you fail? You're left with literally nothing in terms of your politics.

And if your politics is simply... a politics of delivery, if your politics is just, okay, we might want the same things, but we can deliver it in a way the other party can't because we're more competent. Well, there are two problems with that. One, what happens if you fail? You're left with literally nothing in terms of your politics.

You have no kind of adhesive which binds together your political coalition because it was one based on efficacy and delivery. And the other problem with it is that in an era, as I say, defined by

You have no kind of adhesive which binds together your political coalition because it was one based on efficacy and delivery. And the other problem with it is that in an era, as I say, defined by

very big ideas, which we got at the moment, these sort of intellectual ideas from the right, which are being fought out every single day, you're basically taking a water pistol to a knife fight because you're not really engaging with them on the actual substance of the politics itself.

very big ideas, which we got at the moment, these sort of intellectual ideas from the right, which are being fought out every single day, you're basically taking a water pistol to a knife fight because you're not really engaging with them on the actual substance of the politics itself.

And for me, the parable of this, which I'm surprised Downing Street is less concerned about, the parable is Joe Biden. Joe Biden, who actually did deliver quite a lot was overwhelmed by the intellectual force of the attacks from the right because he was unable or unwilling to communicate exactly what he was doing.

And for me, the parable of this, which I'm surprised Downing Street is less concerned about, the parable is Joe Biden. Joe Biden, who actually did deliver quite a lot was overwhelmed by the intellectual force of the attacks from the right because he was unable or unwilling to communicate exactly what he was doing.

So you can make, and I think in the era of the smartphone that we're in and the era where, and I don't like saying this, but vibes are basically dominant in politics. I think you could deliver all of the things that Starmer says he wants to deliver in

So you can make, and I think in the era of the smartphone that we're in and the era where, and I don't like saying this, but vibes are basically dominant in politics. I think you could deliver all of the things that Starmer says he wants to deliver in

and still lose because people actually are more likely to recognize what they see digitally on their phones than the stuff in their actual lives around them. That's the kind of weird sort of meta reality, political reality we're living in. Let's assume for a moment that reform is actually going to be the main threat to labor or where the main oppositional energy is.

and still lose because people actually are more likely to recognize what they see digitally on their phones than the stuff in their actual lives around them. That's the kind of weird sort of meta reality, political reality we're living in. Let's assume for a moment that reform is actually going to be the main threat to labor or where the main oppositional energy is.

It's certainly true that they're defining the terms of trade, for sure. I'm not clear what labor thinks whether they're willing to articulate what the clear difference is in terms of how they see society as opposed to reform. Now, I think I know what they think privately, but what sort of society is it they want to defend? Is it the liberal society? Is it the multicultural society?

It's certainly true that they're defining the terms of trade, for sure. I'm not clear what labor thinks whether they're willing to articulate what the clear difference is in terms of how they see society as opposed to reform. Now, I think I know what they think privately, but what sort of society is it they want to defend? Is it the liberal society? Is it the multicultural society?

Is it a society which traditionally, traditionally for a Labour Party would have been based on equality and fairness? Now, that would be a very clear dividing line in terms of equality between Farage and so on. but it's not something they talk about. You know, what at the moment Labour I think is lacking is what you really need in politics, which is the normative part of politics.

Is it a society which traditionally, traditionally for a Labour Party would have been based on equality and fairness? Now, that would be a very clear dividing line in terms of equality between Farage and so on. but it's not something they talk about. You know, what at the moment Labour I think is lacking is what you really need in politics, which is the normative part of politics.

What ought to be, what ought to be, not just growth. So growth is a good example. Yeah, you want growth. What sort of growth do you want? Where, who do you want to favour most? Is it everybody? Is it the poorest? That is, these are the sort of central questions of Labourism, which like go down the ages. And right now, It seems to me that labor is defined by a kind of a politics of nice things.

What ought to be, what ought to be, not just growth. So growth is a good example. Yeah, you want growth. What sort of growth do you want? Where, who do you want to favour most? Is it everybody? Is it the poorest? That is, these are the sort of central questions of Labourism, which like go down the ages. And right now, It seems to me that labor is defined by a kind of a politics of nice things.

Basically, they just want everything to be somewhat better. Everyone wants that. Everyone wants that. But in a society and a politics which is increasingly about dividing lines and it's about having arguments about who your people are and who your people are not and which issues you care about and which you don't.

Basically, they just want everything to be somewhat better. Everyone wants that. Everyone wants that. But in a society and a politics which is increasingly about dividing lines and it's about having arguments about who your people are and who your people are not and which issues you care about and which you don't.

It just feels to me like Labour at the moment just fail to articulate that clear sense. And I think that is without, I think that is a prerequisite to political success.

It just feels to me like Labour at the moment just fail to articulate that clear sense. And I think that is without, I think that is a prerequisite to political success.

Look, there is not a great history of populist forces when they take office. I mean, usually, actually engaging with the realities of governing and the trade-offs that are inherent in governing doesn't usually go well. They're very good at critique and they're very good at throwing in grenades from the outside. They struggle. I mean, Trump was the best example of that. He has oppositional energy.

Look, there is not a great history of populist forces when they take office. I mean, usually, actually engaging with the realities of governing and the trade-offs that are inherent in governing doesn't usually go well. They're very good at critique and they're very good at throwing in grenades from the outside. They struggle. I mean, Trump was the best example of that. He has oppositional energy.

That's the thing on which he thrives. But in terms of what's next for them, look, Farage, I mean, the one thing that Starmer has got on his side, the real, real Trump card, as it were, is time. He's got time, right? He has got, theoretically, if Starmer wants to push this parliament to its maximal extent, he will have seen the Trump presidency come and go.

That's the thing on which he thrives. But in terms of what's next for them, look, Farage, I mean, the one thing that Starmer has got on his side, the real, real Trump card, as it were, is time. He's got time, right? He has got, theoretically, if Starmer wants to push this parliament to its maximal extent, he will have seen the Trump presidency come and go.

We'll have a new president by July 2029, right? Lest there's been some, well, if we don't, then America's not a democracy anymore. So we can't put that entirely one to one side.

We'll have a new president by July 2029, right? Lest there's been some, well, if we don't, then America's not a democracy anymore. So we can't put that entirely one to one side.

All being well.

All being well.

If the constitutional niceties are observed, then all being well, we should have a different person.

If the constitutional niceties are observed, then all being well, we should have a different person.

I kind of feel like we may end up in the sort of Futurama situation where we actually have President Nixon's head in a jar, you know, just the president by that point, or Trump's. But yeah, all being well. And so that means, and Farage's weakness is that His is a politics and political project which relies basically on a sense of constant momentum, right?

I kind of feel like we may end up in the sort of Futurama situation where we actually have President Nixon's head in a jar, you know, just the president by that point, or Trump's. But yeah, all being well. And so that means, and Farage's weakness is that His is a politics and political project which relies basically on a sense of constant momentum, right?

It relies on a sense that he's always growing. It's always getting bigger. And that relies on the media buying that narrative. And the media love that narrative, right? Particularly right-wing press, they love that narrative. But sooner or later, they get bored. That's a long time to keep that narrative going, four years, right?

It relies on a sense that he's always growing. It's always getting bigger. And that relies on the media buying that narrative. And the media love that narrative, right? Particularly right-wing press, they love that narrative. But sooner or later, they get bored. That's a long time to keep that narrative going, four years, right?

And there are going to be lots of things that tempt him to get interested in it on the way. And there's lots of potential for him to make mistakes. All they need is a few bad performances or a by-election which goes wrong. And suddenly that narrative changes. And because what they don't have is an actual base right now. They don't have a governing base.

And there are going to be lots of things that tempt him to get interested in it on the way. And there's lots of potential for him to make mistakes. All they need is a few bad performances or a by-election which goes wrong. And suddenly that narrative changes. And because what they don't have is an actual base right now. They don't have a governing base.

Like in the old days, ironically enough, they had the European Parliament, right? 2026 will be the key moment for them. because they will have to do well, and I think really well, both in Wales and in Scotland in the devolved elections of that year, in order to give them a springboard for the rest of the Parliament.

Like in the old days, ironically enough, they had the European Parliament, right? 2026 will be the key moment for them. because they will have to do well, and I think really well, both in Wales and in Scotland in the devolved elections of that year, in order to give them a springboard for the rest of the Parliament.

So they're looking very strong right now, and I wouldn't underestimate them for a moment, but it's not all plain sailing between now and 2029.

So they're looking very strong right now, and I wouldn't underestimate them for a moment, but it's not all plain sailing between now and 2029.

I know things can seem really depressing and relentless, and I get it. Believe me, I get the relentless element of it. But I'm afraid we don't get to just kind of remove ourselves or sidestep from the historical and political moment we're living in. I know we all think, oh God, I wish we were back in 1998, 1999. But that's gone. That political world is gone. And the only way, the only way...

I know things can seem really depressing and relentless, and I get it. Believe me, I get the relentless element of it. But I'm afraid we don't get to just kind of remove ourselves or sidestep from the historical and political moment we're living in. I know we all think, oh God, I wish we were back in 1998, 1999. But that's gone. That political world is gone. And the only way, the only way...

that we bend the arc of history back to something that we might prefer is if we engage with it properly and we engage with the reality of the moment that we're living in. So I think what there is to be hopeful about is that there are millions and millions and millions of millions of people out there who actively reject so much of many of the things that are going on.

that we bend the arc of history back to something that we might prefer is if we engage with it properly and we engage with the reality of the moment that we're living in. So I think what there is to be hopeful about is that there are millions and millions and millions of millions of people out there who actively reject so much of many of the things that are going on.

Hey, what do you want from me? What do you want from me? Hey, well, maybe there's going to be loads of beachside properties in Gaza. I mean, who knows, you know? It's a great time if you're a Middle East beachside property developer. Yeah, great.

Hey, what do you want from me? What do you want from me? Hey, well, maybe there's going to be loads of beachside properties in Gaza. I mean, who knows, you know? It's a great time if you're a Middle East beachside property developer. Yeah, great.

Hey, I'll tell you what. Hey, I'll tell you what. I know it's yesterday. It's still light at five o'clock. You can't beat that, can you? You can't beat that.

Hey, I'll tell you what. Hey, I'll tell you what. I know it's yesterday. It's still light at five o'clock. You can't beat that, can you? You can't beat that.

Trump will never be able to change the galactic astrophysics of our movement around the sun, even if he thinks he can. Good luck with that, Don. I can.

Trump will never be able to change the galactic astrophysics of our movement around the sun, even if he thinks he can. Good luck with that, Don. I can.

You just watch.

You just watch.

LAUGHTER

LAUGHTER

Why, it's my pleasure. It's nice to be on a proper show for once.

Why, it's my pleasure. It's nice to be on a proper show for once.

You've got it right. John Sopel, you do not know how much John Sopel would love to do everything from home. Honestly, if he could do everything in his boxer shorts, he would. And frankly, sometimes he does.

You've got it right. John Sopel, you do not know how much John Sopel would love to do everything from home. Honestly, if he could do everything in his boxer shorts, he would. And frankly, sometimes he does.

Yeah, well, John, one walking HR situation, I think, no, it's only a joke. It's only a joke, don't worry.

Yeah, well, John, one walking HR situation, I think, no, it's only a joke. It's only a joke, don't worry.

Disclaimers need not apply.

Disclaimers need not apply.

Well, today I started the day by doing, because I was filling in for James O'Brien on LBC.

Well, today I started the day by doing, because I was filling in for James O'Brien on LBC.