The country would be well-served by a Rory Stewart premiership. He has the gravitas and seriousness of May but with more intellectual heft

He wasn't right. 2015 election showed how to win a campaign, focus on the economy, focus on jobs, and have competent leader who isn't afraid to go on television. Oh and don't borrow policies that were rejected two years ago

Got to go, she has been a complete failure in every regard since taking over last July. I will be glad to see the back of her. Bet some of you Leavers are regretting the turn of events since June 23rd

Yes. He's an effective campaigner. Y'all are just bitter

Thank you for correctly identifying Fillon as a Centre-Right Gaullist, as oppose to some of the absurdist writings on The Guardian and Vox. The main issue for Le Pen will be space both political and media. If Montebourg wins the PS primary over Valls, then Macron will be able to take a large swathe of the centre left vote and split the centre with Fillon. If Montebourg is able to win over enough of those Old Labour economic voters that Le Pen has made a play for, then we could see a Macron vs Fillon showdown. I admit that this is a bit of a long shot but surprises are a dime a dozen in politics these days.

In terms of competing for media space, Le Pen is disadvantaged because there won't be an FN primary whereas PS have theirs this January. Le Pen has been the leader of her party for longer which is a benefit but this is her first as a legitimate contender for the Presidency and thus she will require a reintroduction of sorts to the French electorate.

The PS primary will decide the Presidency, if Valls wins then Fillon is likely the next French President. If Valls loses then Macron will win it imho

Don't equate a rejection of the status quo with a broader movement against the liberal economic and political order. Let us consider France and Germany. Were FN and AFD to triumph in elections next year, then you would have a point. However, the fact remains that the favourite for the French Presidency is an avowed Europhile and Thatcherite who has been part of the political establishment for 3 decades. In Germany, even if Merkel were defeated be it by Sigmar Gabriel or Martin Schulz if he is able to take over the party, the result would still be a political liberal in power rather than the populist nationalism that has swept through Britain and the United States.

However, what really confuses me is the tone of this article. While IDS has correctly identified a shift that every political scientist has been writing about for 6 months, the tone appears somewhat supportive of this "tectonic shift". Perhaps I am misreading this but these results do not benefit a post-Brexit Britain. A crumbling EU will be more troublesome to negotiate a lasting and successful deal with. Protectionist winds in the North Atlantic will disrupt Theresa May's supposed commitment to making Britain the biggest advocate of free trade. Renzi was one of the few leaders in the EU who didn't want to "punish" Britain and now Italy's best hope at passing meaningful and effective economic reforms has gone. While some people may rejoice in Europe's languishing economic performance, the fact remains that as long as the UK outperforms the continent more people will wish to migrate to Britain. If you believe that to be a bad thing then you should embrace reformers like Renzi, support free trade advocates and hope that the tide of populist nationalism is short lived. I suspect that it will be.

Could you not find anything by Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren or literally anyone from the left wing of the Democratic party?
Are you going to post an article entitled "A response from the Right to Trump’s win" and fill it with tweets by far-right bigots?
Clean up your act ConHome

Excellent article that focuses on the very real issues of delivering Brexit without getting bogged down in petty squabbling. My one addition to the piece would be that the current government needs to get serious about foreign policy. Arguably, that is the most important part of government following the vote to leave. At present I don't believe any of the cabinet ministers have the faintest idea about foreign policy or a notion of grand strategy.

An excellent piece and an interesting read. However I would hesitate to attach too much significance to the JASTA bill. It mostly exists for election purposes and does not represent any concrete shift in government attachment to Saudi Arabia. Even though it would appear as though President Obama prefers Iran to Saudi Arabia, his administration dubbed the bill the dumbest thing the Senate has done since 1983. Congressional leaders expressed regret at having overridden the President's veto of the legislation. While the wider public may have no love for the Saudis (they have none for Iran either) so long as the Kingdom helps US strategic interests no concrete change will occur. Of course the title of this article is "The Creeping Isolation of Saudi Arabia" so this is very much a long term outlook.

I see the Russian trolls are out today.
Most of the Republicans in the 17 person field could have beaten Clinton. Unfortunately the one who got nominated can't because his mouth gets in the way. From the GOP leadership perspective, they need to stick with Trump so that when he gets crushed they can blame the candidate and not face a backlash from the grassroots. HRC is beatable this year and will be even more so in 4 years. There are a lot of people who might run in 2020 who could beat her. Senator Ben Sasse (Nebraska), Senator Rubio, Senator Tom Cotton, Governor Kasich and even Governor Scott Walker, although he is quite stupid. Actually scratch that last one, Walker can't win, he has the mind and mouth of Bush Jr only without the big money backers