The Daily Mail also seems to have turned against Johnson recently, ditto the Telegraph, although whether that reflects the views of the country or not is moot. I suspect that Johnson still has some support, partly because he almost died and partly because, yes, it's clearly one of the most difficult situations the country has faced, and most people would appreciate that any leader would struggle.
One question I'd ask, though, is -- is there anything unique that Johnson is actually bringing to his office? It doesn't do to suggest that he's "following the Science", both because "the Science" is not one single opinion on policy anyway and because, if so, that would make Johnson redundant. If nobody else would do any different, then why is it so important that we stick with Johnson? I suppose that goes the other way, ie why replace him if it makes no difference, but what I mean is that for someone to have positive *support*, surely that means they are bringing something unique, and beneficial, to the role. If so, what?