Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think she will be satisfied once Boz is gone and a blue wall aware replacement is in role. There are wheat fields unrun and walking holidays for cunning plans to last her a lifetime out there. She will remain one of the great what might have been mysteries. But for the referendum a May Osborne fight for the top job after Cameron quit?
I'm fascinated on what his reasoning might be - one thing that can usually be agreed upon is that an outright and unprovoked war of conquest is at least blessedly unambiguous, even if most of the world outside Europe and North AMerican does not care enough about it to do anything.
Exactly. This is one of the most clear-cut Good versus Evil wars of my lifetime at least. It's unprovoked, the justifications given are laughable and frequently contradictory, it has not been given any international backing, and the intent appears to be straight up genocidal.
Anyone who doesn't condemn Russia should be re-christened "Neville" and made to wave a paper saying "peace inb our times"
I'm fascinated on what his reasoning might be - one thing that can usually be agreed upon is that an outright and unprovoked war of conquest is at least blessedly unambiguous, even if most of the world outside Europe and North AMerican does not care enough about it to do anything.
Exactly. This is one of the most clear-cut Good versus Evil wars of my lifetime at least. It's unprovoked, the justifications given are laughable and frequently contradictory, it has not been given any international backing, and the intent appears to be straight up genocidal.
Anyone who doesn't condemn Russia should be re-christened "Neville" and made to wave a paper saying "peace inb our times"
“We were lucky on exiting the Stadium, but many other Madrid fans were robbed or attacked by gangs of what seemed to be locals, while exiting the Stadium or on the Subway, with a total absence of presence and action from French police. It almost seemed it was allowed on purpose.
This is what we saw, French Minister and UEFA officials trying to put the blame on LFC fans is absolutely disgusting. @UEFA should not be allowed to run a final anymore.”
Following on from Simon Jenkins in the Guardian, the New York Times has printed a column trying to blame the US for the "ambiguous" war in Ukraine.
Fuck all of these apologists for Russia.
And to think how much time the likes of NYT banging about Trump / Russia interference in elections.....gone full circle and printing Russia propaganda.
The article in NYT is clearly marked "Opinion" and "Guest Essay". The role of the press is to further debate. Just because they print an article doesn't mean the entire newspaper agrees with every word.
You seem to forget not that long ago when they tried to print an opinion piece from a guest writer that the staff disgreed with...they lost their shit and demanded it being withdrawn immediately.
Sure: but (for example), the NYTimes ran an article yesterday in the same slot about how Russia is much more dangerous to the US than China (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/30/opinion/china-us-russia-strategy.html). And that the US needs to get serious about Russian containment going forward.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Not quite that. There is another reason. If an election winner looks like a liability, they tend to get dumped. See Thatcher, Macmillan, Eden, Lloyd George... so the party fights the election with a new leader.
And of course, there is the fact that many politicians until the 1960s did ride out defeats, sometimes for strange reasons. Baldwin, for example, might have been ousted in 1930 had he not decided to stay on to spite Beaverbrook.
Macmillan resigned from his hospital bed because of ill health and orchestrated Douglas Home as his successor, Eden also resigned as doctors warned his life was at stake if he stayed on as PM. Lloyd George never won a Liberal overall majority.
Only Thatcher of general election majority winning PMs was toppled by her own party, however even she won support from 54% of Tory MPs in 1990 so would have survived under the VONC rules the Conservatives have now
The FLSOJ is on course to lose his seat, he won't call an early election.
Not sure that analysis works. It's not so much being MP as PM that counts. Two options:
(a) he has had a Tory Party vonc and won it - he's OK for a year, but only one year, and will his position be any better when the time for the next TPV comes round? So he might as well call an election now before the tractor with the financial manure-spreader comes round.
(b) he's not had a Tory Party vonc - he might as well call the election before someone puts in the 54th letter, or some other event happens, and have a go in the hope of winning another 4-5 years, ditto ditto manure spreader.
In both cases, having Labour leadership possibly inactivated might seem a big bonus.
And who cares about Uxbridge if he has lost Downing St? The two probabilities are fairly strongly correlated of course.
So perhaps he will call an election on Monday?
He could gamble that if he does call an election then Starmer and Rayner get FPNs in mid-campaign, giving Labour a choice between (a) breaking their promise (b) leaving the party leaderless and (c) promising to resign after the election and handing over to ??? I'm not sure what the hell we'd do then.
They surely wouldn't announce it during a leadership election? They waited til after the locals before even saying there was an investigation.
That'd be awkward for us too. "Vote for our brilliant leadership to steer Britain through uncertain times! PS It might not be us but whoever the membership decide on if we resign."
Yes, and the Tories will massively overplay the risk of 'getting an unwanted Corbynite cuckoo' even though thats not a likely proposition
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Not quite that. There is another reason. If an election winner looks like a liability, they tend to get dumped. See Thatcher, Macmillan, Eden, Lloyd George... so the party fights the election with a new leader.
And of course, there is the fact that many politicians until the 1960s did ride out defeats, sometimes for strange reasons. Baldwin, for example, might have been ousted in 1930 had he not decided to stay on to spite Beaverbrook.
Staying on to spite the Daily Mail ought to have become a noble tradition.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
Perhaps, but you never know until you try. You cannot prove someone has a better chance until it happens.
Blyth Valley is not the best example, as the Lab majority was still pretty big in 2017, but we know many areas had been moving toward the Tories for many elections, and Boris gave them that extra tip over the edge to win a swathe of new seats. But it could be that the skills and leader necessary to hold the seat are not the same as to win the seat. He got the foot in the door, but can he be the one to plant both feet?
Different times call for different approaches after all - Could Boris have done what Cameron did in 2010? Probably not. Could Cameron have done what Boris did in 2019? No.
Would Boris cost seats in the south and not save enough in the north at present? Some may think so, and if so worth seeing if someone else can.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Not quite that. There is another reason. If an election winner looks like a liability, they tend to get dumped. See Thatcher, Macmillan, Eden, Lloyd George... so the party fights the election with a new leader.
And of course, there is the fact that many politicians until the 1960s did ride out defeats, sometimes for strange reasons. Baldwin, for example, might have been ousted in 1930 had he not decided to stay on to spite Beaverbrook.
Macmillan resigned from his hospital bed because of ill health and orchestrated Douglas Home as his successor, Eden also resigned as doctors warned his life was at stake if he stayed on as PM. Lloyd George never won a Liberal overall majority.
Only Thatcher of general election majority winning PMs was toppled by her own party, however even she won 54% of Tory MPs in 1990 so would have survived under the VONC rules the Conservatives have now
Eden, yes, although he would have been ousted anyway.
Macmillan - there continues to be a great deal of argument over whether he thought he was dying, whether he was taking a convenient excuse, or whether he actually was as ill as he thought.
Lloyd George, no, and the Unionists would probably have won without him, but he was still the Coalition's chief selling point in the campaign. For good or ill he was an election winning PM.
“We were lucky on exiting the Stadium, but many other Madrid fans were robbed or attacked by gangs of what seemed to be locals, while exiting the Stadium or on the Subway, with a total absence of presence and action from French police. It almost seemed it was allowed on purpose.
This is what we saw, French Minister and UEFA officials trying to put the blame on LFC fans is absolutely disgusting. @UEFA should not be allowed to run a final anymore.”
Yes, no more finals, lets stop at the quarter final stage and award it to the highest bribe from there. Happy to take my 10% finders fee if UEFA approve this scheme.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Not quite that. There is another reason. If an election winner looks like a liability, they tend to get dumped. See Thatcher, Macmillan, Eden, Lloyd George... so the party fights the election with a new leader.
And of course, there is the fact that many politicians until the 1960s did ride out defeats, sometimes for strange reasons. Baldwin, for example, might have been ousted in 1930 had he not decided to stay on to spite Beaverbrook.
Staying on to spite the Daily Mail ought to have become a noble tradition.
Following on from Simon Jenkins in the Guardian, the New York Times has printed a column trying to blame the US for the "ambiguous" war in Ukraine.
I'm fascinated on what his reasoning might be - one thing that can usually be agreed upon is that an outright and unprovoked war of conquest is at least blessedly unambiguous, even if most of the world outside Europe and North AMerican does not care enough about it to do anything.
The article - as is typical of the type - suggests that Russia had no choice but to attack Ukraine because otherwise Ukraine was going to attack Russia.
Let me share some quotes:
On Nov. 10, 2021, the United States and Ukraine signed a “charter on strategic partnership” that called for Ukraine to join NATO, condemned “ongoing Russian aggression” and affirmed an “unwavering commitment” to the reintegration of Crimea into Ukraine.
That charter “convinced Russia that it must attack or be attacked,” Mr. Guaino wrote. “It is the ineluctable process of 1914 in all its terrifying purity.”
This is a faithful account of the war that President Vladimir Putin has claimed to be fighting. “There were constant supplies of the most modern military equipment,” Mr. Putin said at Russia’s annual Victory Parade on May 9, referring to the foreign arming of Ukraine. “The danger was growing every day.”
Whether he was right to worry about Russia’s security depends on one’s perspective. Western news reports tend to belittle him.
The rocky course of the war in Ukraine thus far has vindicated Mr. Putin’s diagnosis, if not his conduct.
Utter bullshit, of course.
The reality is that Ukraine was never going to attack a nuclear armed Russia. They never had any realistic hope of regaining Crimea, and were making little (if any) progress in the East of the country. The vast, vast majority of the modern military kit that has been sent, has been sent *because* Russia invaded.
Preposterous stuff. It is possible, though I disagree, to think we should not get involved, but as glw notes a lot of the justifications given by Russia are contradictory in any case. Their 'we are vastly more powerful than pitiful Ukraine nazis, but also those nazis were planning on attacking us despite being so inferior' argument is one of the more ridiculous (Yes, I'm paraphrasing), and it is pretty silly to give it credence even in watered down form.
The argument that vindicating his 'diagnosis' is not doing so for his conduct is pretty ridiculous as well. If someone is arguing his pretexts are, in fact, justified ones, then it is arguing his actions are justified as well, otherwise it makes no sense.
Lex Friedman spoke this week about it. Russian born at MIT. Noted that both sides are subject to their own propaganda even though people he knows in either country deny that. But he concludes that all considered, it’s pretty clear who is the aggressor in this war.
It’s really not difficult this one. Putin is the baddy. And it didn’t come from nowhere. He’s used radiological, biological and chemical weapons on foreign soil in the last decade. Launched multiple unprovoked foreign incursions. Assassinated goodness knows how many political opponents. Expropriated enough of the Russian people’s wealth to become the world’s richest person, by most informed estimates.
And yet after all that, as Lex notes, he’s still very popular in Russia (and in certain other countries). Which I have to say, makes “Russia” as much the aggressor as Putin himself, even though I’ve spoken to Russian based Russians since this started who are appalled. They are seemingly the minority.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Not quite that. There is another reason. If an election winner looks like a liability, they tend to get dumped. See Thatcher, Macmillan, Eden, Lloyd George... so the party fights the election with a new leader.
And of course, there is the fact that many politicians until the 1960s did ride out defeats, sometimes for strange reasons. Baldwin, for example, might have been ousted in 1930 had he not decided to stay on to spite Beaverbrook.
Staying on to spite the Daily Mail ought to have become a noble tradition.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
The amazing thing about the stade de farce, it regularly holds big events and everybody knows the neighborhood is rough as hell with very high crime rates. a) surprised this has happened before and b) clearly no plan on how to tackle any issues.
As predicted by some on here, ok me, the “fiasco au stade de France” is impacting wider French politics
You really should have a word with the PBers who were blaming Liverpool fans on Saturday.
I have been consistently on the Liverpool fans side throughout and as a Man U supporter since 1953 it is the first time I have supported Liverpool !!!!!
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
The half thars joining half of Tynemouth as the Whitley Bay seat might be interesting but i think the way Tynemouth has trended away (even with Brexit and red wall movement they are no closer than 2005 to taking it back) its likely not going to be one they can take
Following on from Simon Jenkins in the Guardian, the New York Times has printed a column trying to blame the US for the "ambiguous" war in Ukraine.
I'm fascinated on what his reasoning might be - one thing that can usually be agreed upon is that an outright and unprovoked war of conquest is at least blessedly unambiguous, even if most of the world outside Europe and North AMerican does not care enough about it to do anything.
The article - as is typical of the type - suggests that Russia had no choice but to attack Ukraine because otherwise Ukraine was going to attack Russia.
Let me share some quotes:
On Nov. 10, 2021, the United States and Ukraine signed a “charter on strategic partnership” that called for Ukraine to join NATO, condemned “ongoing Russian aggression” and affirmed an “unwavering commitment” to the reintegration of Crimea into Ukraine.
That charter “convinced Russia that it must attack or be attacked,” Mr. Guaino wrote. “It is the ineluctable process of 1914 in all its terrifying purity.”
This is a faithful account of the war that President Vladimir Putin has claimed to be fighting. “There were constant supplies of the most modern military equipment,” Mr. Putin said at Russia’s annual Victory Parade on May 9, referring to the foreign arming of Ukraine. “The danger was growing every day.”
Whether he was right to worry about Russia’s security depends on one’s perspective. Western news reports tend to belittle him.
The rocky course of the war in Ukraine thus far has vindicated Mr. Putin’s diagnosis, if not his conduct.
Utter bullshit, of course.
The reality is that Ukraine was never going to attack a nuclear armed Russia. They never had any realistic hope of regaining Crimea, and were making little (if any) progress in the East of the country. The vast, vast majority of the modern military kit that has been sent, has been sent *because* Russia invaded.
Preposterous stuff. It is possible, though I disagree, to think we should not get involved, but as glw notes a lot of the justifications given by Russia are contradictory in any case. Their 'we are vastly more powerful than pitiful Ukraine nazis, but also those nazis were planning on attacking us despite being so inferior' argument is one of the more ridiculous (Yes, I'm paraphrasing), and it is pretty silly to give it credence even in watered down form.
The argument that vindicating his 'diagnosis' is not doing so for his conduct is pretty ridiculous as well. If someone is arguing his pretexts are, in fact, justified ones, then it is arguing his actions are justified as well, otherwise it makes no sense.
Lex Friedman spoke this week about it. Russian born at MIT. Noted that both sides are subject to their own propaganda even though people he knows in either country deny that. But he concludes that all considered, it’s pretty clear who is the aggressor in this war.
It’s really not difficult this one. Putin is the baddy. And it didn’t come from nowhere. He’s used radiological, biological and chemical weapons on foreign soil in the last decade. Launched multiple unprovoked foreign incursions. Assassinated goodness knows how many political opponents. Expropriated enough of the Russian people’s wealth to become the world’s richest person, by most informed estimates.
And yet after all that, as Lex notes, he’s still very popular in Russia (and in certain other countries). Which I have to say, makes “Russia” as much the aggressor as Putin himself, even though I’ve spoken to Russian based Russians since this started who are appalled. They are seemingly the minority.
As the NYTimes wrote yesterday...
Under Mr. Putin, Russia demolished the Chechen capital, Grozny, in 2000; invaded Georgia in 2008; annexed Crimea in 2014; and used its air force in 2015 and 2016 against opponents of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. Mr. Putin’s regime has used cyberattacks, brutalized or assassinated domestic opponents and passed laws that impose draconian prison sentences on anyone questioning the state. He launched a brutal invasion of Ukraine and has hinted at possibly using nuclear weapons. He has not just declared his intent to redraw international borders and resurrect the ghost of the former Soviet Union; he has acted on it.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
I'm fascinated on what his reasoning might be - one thing that can usually be agreed upon is that an outright and unprovoked war of conquest is at least blessedly unambiguous, even if most of the world outside Europe and North AMerican does not care enough about it to do anything.
Exactly. This is one of the most clear-cut Good versus Evil wars of my lifetime at least. It's unprovoked, the justifications given are laughable and frequently contradictory, it has not been given any international backing, and the intent appears to be straight up genocidal.
Anyone who doesn't condemn Russia should be re-christened "Neville" and made to wave a paper saying "peace inb our times"
Though Chamberlain had the backing of both Conservative party and country for his Appeasement policy. It is revisionist to pretend that it was unpopular and forced on the country by an effete elite.
And as for American isolationism, that carried on well into the 1940's.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
It's over and you need to understand Boris is toxic
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
Dozens of them
2019 Johnson could win Blyth.
2020s Johnson cannot.
Simples.
And yet it still too me 166 words to say the same thing, alas.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Good News PBers - the Supreme Court has blocked HB20 prior to a full hearing. It was an interesting split of the Justices, too - with both ACB and Kavanaugh in concurrence, and Kagan teaming with Alito, Goresuch and Thomas.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Making good use of former PMs is something the UK does badly- like it or not, they have experience that few others posess. Though having said that, does any nation do that well?
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
I think that in those unusual circumstances the Labour NEC nominate a leader.
As predicted by some on here, ok me, the “fiasco au stade de France” is impacting wider French politics
You really should have a word with the PBers who were blaming Liverpool fans on Saturday.
If this ridiculous barb is aimed at me, you should withdraw it
I do not like the section of Liverpool fans that boos Queen, anthem and beautiful hymns, and I still don’t like them
But as events unfolded even on the night it became increasingly clear that LFC fans in this case were largely (but not wholly) blameless, and I said so at the time. I was one of the PB-ers relentlessly digging out the social media and showing what ACTUALLY happened.
What happened that night was a disgrace, it could easily have ended in many dead people, and 95% of the blame lies within France, from the police to the government to French UEFA to the ratbags that live in St Denis
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Not quite that. There is another reason. If an election winner looks like a liability, they tend to get dumped. See Thatcher, Macmillan, Eden, Lloyd George... so the party fights the election with a new leader.
And of course, there is the fact that many politicians until the 1960s did ride out defeats, sometimes for strange reasons. Baldwin, for example, might have been ousted in 1930 had he not decided to stay on to spite Beaverbrook.
Macmillan resigned from his hospital bed because of ill health and orchestrated Douglas Home as his successor, Eden also resigned as doctors warned his life was at stake if he stayed on as PM. Lloyd George never won a Liberal overall majority.
Only Thatcher of general election majority winning PMs was toppled by her own party, however even she won 54% of Tory MPs in 1990 so would have survived under the VONC rules the Conservatives have now
Eden, yes, although he would have been ousted anyway.
Macmillan - there continues to be a great deal of argument over whether he thought he was dying, whether he was taking a convenient excuse, or whether he actually was as ill as he thought.
Lloyd George, no, and the Unionists would probably have won without him, but he was still the Coalition's chief selling point in the campaign. For good or ill he was an election winning PM.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Watching Newsnight. Some horrendous MP interviews. Chris Bryant sat under the stairs with highlighter yellow paint. And now Kelly Tolhurst with wronng makeup in what looks like the admin office in a sailing club.
Yes, new technology lets you go on the telly without being dragged into that London. But please, switch the camera on first before going on. If I can manage that before investor meetings they can manage it before going on TV.
I'm not sure the Major trend of quitting when you lose was a positive. No one demanded Ed M go after 2015 AIR. He did get a positive swing in E+W. We could have avoided some trouble.
As predicted by some on here, ok me, the “fiasco au stade de France” is impacting wider French politics
You really should have a word with the PBers who were blaming Liverpool fans on Saturday.
I have been consistently on the Liverpool fans side throughout and as a Man U supporter since 1953 it is the first time I have supported Liverpool !!!!!
As a United fan I wanted Liverpool to stuff Citeh. As a Brit I wanted the Brit team to beat the non-Brit team. Was the same with Rangers who I absolutely detest normally.
Anyway, onwards to the Euros. Looking forward to screaming at the telly as Scotland bin it every attack tomorrow night...
The amazing thing about the stade de farce, it regularly holds big events and everybody knows the neighborhood is rough as hell with very high crime rates. a) surprised this has happened before and b) clearly no plan on how to tackle any issues.
A particularly sinister yer horribly plausible theory is floating around French Twitter. It is this:
By about 7pm that night French police realised they had lost control (mainly because of their own terrible policing and crap UEFA organisation - plus the horrible locals attacking everyone). They panicked, as all this was happening in full view of the media, so they then started assaulting Liverpool fans - see the pepper spraying - so they could get a reaction and it could all be blamed on Les Anglais and les hooligans
I don’t want to think this is true. I hope it isn’t. But it fits a lot of the bizarre evidence
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
It's over and you need to understand Boris is toxic
And yet, our Epping correspondent is also right; there is a chunk of the voting population that will be lost to the Conservatives if they ditch Johnson. Nobody else can be sufficiently dishonest with sufficient brio to hold the current coalition together. I agree that Johnson should go, but it won't be a cost-free process.
But that's what happens when you fall for a conman. A while later, you end up in a corner where every possible step you can take means that you lose out.
Watching Newsnight. Some horrendous MP interviews. Chris Bryant sat under the stairs with highlighter yellow paint. And now Kelly Tolhurst with wronng makeup in what looks like the admin office in a sailing club.
Yes, new technology lets you go on the telly without being dragged into that London. But please, switch the camera on first before going on. If I can manage that before investor meetings they can manage it before going on TV.
I am still shocked how piss poor most people webcams are who spend a lot of doing media. £150 you can get an excellent auto focusing one.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Making good use of former PMs is something the UK does badly- like it or not, they have experience that few others posess. Though having said that, does any nation do that well?
May not be viable in many systems, where there are term limits for leaders and possibly bars on what they can do afterwards in formal politics, which may well lead to more shadowy, esoteric influence only. In others I wonder if like us many of them have gotten out of the habit of giving leaders second chances, so those who lose election simply never get the opportunity to rebuild, as new leaders are unlikely to want them in their ranks and they might see it as humiliating. Which is a shame.
I think there was at least one former US President who was later a member of Congress.
As predicted by some on here, ok me, the “fiasco au stade de France” is impacting wider French politics
You really should have a word with the PBers who were blaming Liverpool fans on Saturday.
There obviously needs to be an impartial investigation, because there are likely lots lessons to be learned we can only speculate at this evening.
I have a few ideas though.
To start with, both this disaster and the one at Wembley are owned as Euafa events, but aspects if the management of them and the security is outsourced to other stakeholders, who in turn further outsource? Maybe Ueafa can be more actively involved themselves, with both a set of principles and a team to ensure all parties involved follow the Euafa principles.
For example.
Is it that much harder to forge eTickets than Paper ones? If so, I’m tempted to say one principle is eTicket admission only, no paper tickets. But I would need to be sure that is technically true. If fans say they don’t have smart phones, or even if they do, how much will it cost Euafa to gift each ticket holder a simple device with their clubs branding - a e-ticket device free with each ticket for example to beat the fraud?
Secondly, particularly the case at Wembley, too many fans with no tickets, also possibly fake tickets, far too close to the turnstiles and fencing at the match stadium, there should be a cordon further away for ticket checking to avoid pressure on turnstiles gates and fences. The dmz between ticket checking cordon and the ground is ideal space for any required security presence to sit and operate effectively.
Thirdly, in the case of Paris, Police had pre conceived expectations of fans that can lead to self fulfilling prophecy, my suggestion is use more stewarding and police from the cities or countries of the two teams playing.
As predicted by some on here, ok me, the “fiasco au stade de France” is impacting wider French politics
You really should have a word with the PBers who were blaming Liverpool fans on Saturday.
If this ridiculous barb is aimed at me, you should withdraw it
I do not like the section of Liverpool fans that boos Queen, anthem and beautiful hymns, and I still don’t like them
But as events unfolded even on the night it became increasingly clear that LFC fans in this case were largely (but not wholly) blameless, and I said so at the time. I was one of the PB-ers relentlessly digging out the social media and showing what ACTUALLY happened.
What happened that night was a disgrace, it could easily have ended in many dead people, and 95% of the blame lies within France, from the police to the government to French UEFA to the ratbags that live in St Denis
Quite. Liverpool being blameless on Saturday is their Boris did well on Ukraine moment. Booing HMQ, the Anthem and Abide With Me was their partygate.
You know you are a #newscot when you're jealous that your brother / sis-in-law are off to watch Skerryvore and can't stop playing a track called Soraidh Slan https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0-xudWCB_I
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Making good use of former PMs is something the UK does badly- like it or not, they have experience that few others posess. Though having said that, does any nation do that well?
Good question. There's Stoltenberg, ex-PM and then head of NATO. Can't think of many others. What about comebacks as leader? There are the ones which were just dodging a rule about not being elected twice running (Putin says hi), but I can't think of others.
May would make a good appointment in a role where total uprightness is required. Does the attorney-general have to be a lawyer?
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
Great, thanks. That last clause rules out Blair as an option.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Acting PM during campaign for new leader?
Next PM in betting????
It is vaguely possible but depends on Boris throwing his toys out of the pram and resigning immediately as Prime Minister rather than staying on until a successor is elected. Even then, more likely is Dominic Raab, who is Deputy PM, unless he stands himself. It seems to me this would be a bet on Boris's health.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. And even with sane people on the NEC they cannot select Blair.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Acting PM during campaign for new leader?
Next PM in betting????
It is vaguely possible but depends on Boris throwing his toys out of the pram and resigning immediately as Prime Minister rather than staying on until a successor is elected. Even then, more likely is Dominic Raab, who is Deputy PM, unless he stands himself. It seems to me this would be a bet on Boris's health.
I think it is unlikely but as you say Raab could stand
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
I was suggesting if the Big Dog used an FPN and resignations to call an election. He could well. Cos he's a bastard. History suggests that nominating Blair as a candidate and as leader would be the way to win. As very few election winners simply slope off. See the thread. But. it won't happen. As I was being facetious. More likely it's Nandy. As the only one not thoroughly hated by either Right or Left.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Making good use of former PMs is something the UK does badly- like it or not, they have experience that few others posess. Though having said that, does any nation do that well?
Good question. There's Stoltenberg, ex-PM and then head of NATO. Can't think of many others. What about comebacks as leader? There are the ones which were just dodging a rule about not being elected twice running (Putin says hi), but I can't think of others.
May would make a good appointment in a role where total uprightness is required. Does the attorney-general have to be a lawyer?
We already know they don't have to be a good lawyer, so it might not be that bad for one of the Law Officers to not be a lawyer.
Going to NATO doesn't really count, it's the sort of job designed for an ex-PM because they cannot do anything in their own country.
On that grounds Verhofstadt might count as a reasonably prominent member of the European Parliament at times, and former PM (for a lot longer than I had realised).
Watching Newsnight. Some horrendous MP interviews. Chris Bryant sat under the stairs with highlighter yellow paint. And now Kelly Tolhurst with wronng makeup in what looks like the admin office in a sailing club.
Yes, new technology lets you go on the telly without being dragged into that London. But please, switch the camera on first before going on. If I can manage that before investor meetings they can manage it before going on TV.
I am still shocked how piss poor most people webcams are who spend a lot of doing media. £150 you can get an excellent auto focusing one.
Yep. Gone one of those. Though having had to buy a new Win11 laptop for a client project its beyond bemusing that my LG ultrawide monitor's USB hub isn't properly driven. Which means needing to unplug and replug my otherwise marvellous Surface Pro 8 to get my webcam to work via Teams is bloody stupid.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
It's over and you need to understand Boris is toxic
And yet, our Epping correspondent is also right; there is a chunk of the voting population that will be lost to the Conservatives if they ditch Johnson. Nobody else can be sufficiently dishonest with sufficient brio to hold the current coalition together. I agree that Johnson should go, but it won't be a cost-free process.
But that's what happens when you fall for a conman. A while later, you end up in a corner where every possible step you can take means that you lose out.
With Jeremy Hunt the Tories won't lose Woking but probably will lose Darlington.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Or they could pick someone far left and unelectable again, Streeting might be a net benefit for them most other alternatives are no better than Starmer if not worse.
In any case I think once he and Rayner have filled in their questionnaires they will avoid a fine
The amazing thing about the stade de farce, it regularly holds big events and everybody knows the neighborhood is rough as hell with very high crime rates. a) surprised this has happened before and b) clearly no plan on how to tackle any issues.
A particularly sinister yer horribly plausible theory is floating around French Twitter. It is this:
By about 7pm that night French police realised they had lost control (mainly because of their own terrible policing and crap UEFA organisation - plus the horrible locals attacking everyone). They panicked, as all this was happening in full view of the media, so they then started assaulting Liverpool fans - see the pepper spraying - so they could get a reaction and it could all be blamed on Les Anglais and les hooligans
I don’t want to think this is true. I hope it isn’t. But it fits a lot of the bizarre evidence
Sounds about right. Its both the English (hooligans) and Liverpool (hooligans) so kettle them then assault them and if they react blame it all on them.
I have a hot/cold approach to football. Though as the last match I went to was in a corporate box probably excuses me from being able to opine on fans and crowds.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Forget Blair. The obvious candidate is Ed Milliband. Who after the disaster of 2015 has really shone.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
It's over and you need to understand Boris is toxic
And yet, our Epping correspondent is also right; there is a chunk of the voting population that will be lost to the Conservatives if they ditch Johnson. Nobody else can be sufficiently dishonest with sufficient brio to hold the current coalition together. I agree that Johnson should go, but it won't be a cost-free process.
But that's what happens when you fall for a conman. A while later, you end up in a corner where every possible step you can take means that you lose out.
With Jeremy Hunt the Tories won't lose Woking but probably will lose Darlington.
Darlington is more fruitful for Tories generally than much of those 2019 gains though, striking distance from 2010 to 2017 and no big Brexit vote on show. Its another red wall not really red wall seat that they should remain competitive in regardless of leader
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Forget Blair. The obvious candidate is Ed Milliband. Who after the disaster of 2015 has really shone.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
It's over and you need to understand Boris is toxic
And yet, our Epping correspondent is also right; there is a chunk of the voting population that will be lost to the Conservatives if they ditch Johnson. Nobody else can be sufficiently dishonest with sufficient brio to hold the current coalition together. I agree that Johnson should go, but it won't be a cost-free process.
But that's what happens when you fall for a conman. A while later, you end up in a corner where every possible step you can take means that you lose out.
With Jeremy Hunt the Tories won't lose Woking but probably will lose Darlington.
That's the trade: which seats do the Conservatives care more about? It's notable that many (although not all, see @Tissue_Price) of the most vocally anti Johnson MPs are in the South East and facing LD challengers.
Can't see the NEC going for it as it would massively split the Lab party during a GE contest.
Interestingly, if they were to follow the likely royal/constitutional protocol then the person who was interim leader during a GE should be someone who was definitely not in the race to be the perma leader.
At the last 7 general elections the Tories have had 6 different leaders. Only Cameron fought two elections.
And only IDS was untested at a general. Maybe the quiet man would have won Manchester and Liverpool back? And that, gang, is a cracker
IDS (or the Conservatives led by IDS) did better than expected at the local elections. It is entirely possible that had IDS not been deposed, the party would have performed better than it actually did in the general election.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Or they could pick someone far left and unelectable again, Streeting might be a net benefit for them most other alternatives are no better than Starmer if not worse.
In any case I think once he and Rayner have filled in their questionnaires they will avoid a fine
Wrong. We are talking about the Boris pressing the GE button, as save big dog squad blackmailing tonight, whilst 11 points behind in polls, and Starmer and Rayner both having to step down - NEC call for leadership election, and NEC and Shadow cabinet appoint leader and deputy for rest of General Election campaign and beyond. That will not be an unelectable care taker. In fact whoever said Blair is caretaker made a brilliant call.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Forget Blair. The obvious candidate is Ed Milliband. Who after the disaster of 2015 has really shone.
Off top of my head, I think the NEC forced into this position might choose Harriet Harperson.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Forget Blair. The obvious candidate is Ed Milliband. Who after the disaster of 2015 has really shone.
As predicted by some on here, ok me, the “fiasco au stade de France” is impacting wider French politics
You really should have a word with the PBers who were blaming Liverpool fans on Saturday.
If this ridiculous barb is aimed at me, you should withdraw it
I do not like the section of Liverpool fans that boos Queen, anthem and beautiful hymns, and I still don’t like them
But as events unfolded even on the night it became increasingly clear that LFC fans in this case were largely (but not wholly) blameless, and I said so at the time. I was one of the PB-ers relentlessly digging out the social media and showing what ACTUALLY happened.
What happened that night was a disgrace, it could easily have ended in many dead people, and 95% of the blame lies within France, from the police to the government to French UEFA to the ratbags that live in St Denis
While the tennis gets quite exciting, I guess some people know that Roland Garros wasn't a tennis player?
He was a pilot, and the first one to shoot down an enemy with a gun that fired through the propeller.
I used to watch it on FreeView on ITV4 but they've stopped it now and I have no idea what's going on this year, apart from the fact that Emma has been knocked out.
As predicted by some on here, ok me, the “fiasco au stade de France” is impacting wider French politics
You really should have a word with the PBers who were blaming Liverpool fans on Saturday.
There obviously needs to be an impartial investigation, because there are likely lots lessons to be learned we can only speculate at this evening.
I have a few ideas though.
To start with, both this disaster and the one at Wembley are owned as Euafa events, but aspects if the management of them and the security is outsourced to other stakeholders, who in turn further outsource? Maybe Ueafa can be more actively involved themselves, with both a set of principles and a team to ensure all parties involved follow the Euafa principles.
For example.
Is it that much harder to forge eTickets than Paper ones? If so, I’m tempted to say one principle is eTicket admission only, no paper tickets. But I would need to be sure that is technically true. If fans say they don’t have smart phones, or even if they do, how much will it cost Euafa to gift each ticket holder a simple device with their clubs branding - a e-ticket device free with each ticket for example to beat the fraud?
Secondly, particularly the case at Wembley, too many fans with no tickets, also possibly fake tickets, far too close to the turnstiles and fencing at the match stadium, there should be a cordon further away for ticket checking to avoid pressure on turnstiles gates and fences. The dmz between ticket checking cordon and the ground is ideal space for any required security presence to sit and operate effectively.
Thirdly, in the case of Paris, Police had pre conceived expectations of fans that can lead to self fulfilling prophecy, my suggestion is use more stewarding and police from the cities or countries of the two teams playing.
This is me taking my brief as PB shadow minister for sport seriously. Even if it meant ignoring my girlfriends calls for me to come to bed.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
I do wonder whether May can manage 25 more years of sulking and haunting to beat Heaths record. She seems to be enjoying the schadenfreude than the top job.
I think that Lady May sees public service as a calling. Whilst she is no longer serving "the country I love" as Prime Minister, she likely feels she is providing a service to that country from the backbenches holding the executive to account.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
I think it would be very interesting if she were to return to the Cabinet under a new leader one day (though I think that unlikely). I dare say she will have plenty of critics of her time there, but there have also been far worse figures in the Cabinet, and it would be intriguing to see a former PM return to a lesser, better suited role.
Making good use of former PMs is something the UK does badly- like it or not, they have experience that few others posess. Though having said that, does any nation do that well?
Good question. There's Stoltenberg, ex-PM and then head of NATO. Can't think of many others. What about comebacks as leader? There are the ones which were just dodging a rule about not being elected twice running (Putin says hi), but I can't think of others.
May would make a good appointment in a role where total uprightness is required. Does the attorney-general have to be a lawyer?
They do it in Japan.
Shinzo Abe had two goes as PM, the first was short and not very successful. He resigned after losing the Upper House election, while blaming medical complications after only serving a year. Then he came back later and did 8 years.
They also keep the former PMs in the cabinet a lot, for instance Taro Aso crashed pretty hard as PM then came back to be Minister of Finance. Yoshito Mori was a similarly terrible PM, and subsequently got put in charge of the Olympics
On the Democratic Party side, Naoto Kan got screwed as opposition leader in a setup that looks a bit like the Kier Starmer situation with the penalty notices: A bunch of LDP (then government side) ministers got caught dodging their pension contributions. Kan went after them on that, then it turned out that many years before, he too had dodged his pension contributions. He resigned, went on a pilgrimage around Shikoku to atone, and later came back to take over as PM.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Or they could pick someone far left and unelectable again, Streeting might be a net benefit for them most other alternatives are no better than Starmer if not worse.
In any case I think once he and Rayner have filled in their questionnaires they will avoid a fine
Wrong. We are talking about the Boris pressing the GE button, as save big dog squad blackmailing tonight, whilst 11 points behind in polls, and Starmer and Rayner both having to step down - NEC call for leadership election, and NEC and Shadow cabinet appoint leader and deputy for rest of General Election campaign and beyond. That will not be an unelectable care taker. In fact whoever said Blair is caretaker made a brilliant call.
The absolutely fascinating scenario, if we are playing this game, is the following:
a) Durham police issue the FPNs. b) Johnson presses GE button immediately he hears that news and just before his own defenestration. c) Lab NEC appoint interim leader pending a proper leadership election. d) Interim leader fronts GE campaign and wins a landslide. e) Let's imagine that interim leader is Blair.
At the last 7 general elections the Tories have had 6 different leaders. Only Cameron fought two elections.
And only IDS was untested at a general. Maybe the quiet man would have won Manchester and Liverpool back? And that, gang, is a cracker
It's difficult to say whether IDS would have done better than Howard in 2005. Most likely they would have done better than each other in different parts of the country, which would have cancelled out.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
It's over and you need to understand Boris is toxic
And yet, our Epping correspondent is also right; there is a chunk of the voting population that will be lost to the Conservatives if they ditch Johnson. Nobody else can be sufficiently dishonest with sufficient brio to hold the current coalition together. I agree that Johnson should go, but it won't be a cost-free process.
But that's what happens when you fall for a conman. A while later, you end up in a corner where every possible step you can take means that you lose out.
With Jeremy Hunt the Tories won't lose Woking but probably will lose Darlington.
That's the trade: which seats do the Conservatives care more about? It's notable that many (although not all, see @Tissue_Price) of the most vocally anti Johnson MPs are in the South East and facing LD challengers.
If you are a thinking Tory (yes, I know) then you might be able to imagine a few steps ahead and think it is better to hold our SEast strongholds than lose them and keep a shakey seat in the NE.
Don't buy this if there's a vote he'll win it. Why? Because. Deep down they know he's a dud. They always did. But he'd win them an election. Do they think that now? Maybe. But maybe not. And I don't buy this payroll vote either. There must be a hundred juniors and bag carriers looking at some of the idiots in Cabinet thinking. I could do that better. Only idiots who are self-aware won't be. And I don't buy the no successor either. Almost anyone. Almost. Would be an upgrade. It's a secret ballot. He has no faction, no friends, and no plan.
That's largely my view. But then I thunk back to GE2019, and remember the speech from the winning candidate in Blyth Valley - the chike of emotion when Boris was mentioned. I wonder whether that was typical of the new intake, and how much if that loyalty remains.
Exactly, he knew he owed his victory in large part to Boris. Would Jeremy Hunt or Michael Gove as leader have seen him become the first Tory ever to win Blyth Valley? I doubt it
And if he wants to remain the MP for Blyth Valley he needs to vote to remove him.
What other alternative Tory leader, even now has a better chance of holding Blyth Valley than Boris?
None. But Blyth Valley ain't pulsing with love for Big Dog as I see it. Also. It won't exist soon.
For Blyth Valley also read any other redwall seat Boris became the first Conservative leader ever to win in 2019
It's over and you need to understand Boris is toxic
And yet, our Epping correspondent is also right; there is a chunk of the voting population that will be lost to the Conservatives if they ditch Johnson. Nobody else can be sufficiently dishonest with sufficient brio to hold the current coalition together. I agree that Johnson should go, but it won't be a cost-free process.
But that's what happens when you fall for a conman. A while later, you end up in a corner where every possible step you can take means that you lose out.
With Jeremy Hunt the Tories won't lose Woking but probably will lose Darlington.
That's the trade: which seats do the Conservatives care more about? It's notable that many (although not all, see @Tissue_Price) of the most vocally anti Johnson MPs are in the South East and facing LD challengers.
Yes but they are no longer enough to make 51% of the parliamentary party thanks to all the redwall MPs who won in December 2019. Hunt might have been able to topple Boris if it was the same parliamentary party as summer 2019, just, however now Boris has the extra cushion of redwall MPs who see him as the man who won them their seats
Adding to the mix on the debate about Tony B being interim GE leader during "korma election", he is about to launch what Rentoul is calling 'Teal' thinktank/party. Centre ground etc etc...
For the huge numbers of tory members would would vote Patel given a vote next week based on Rwanda and bring back hanging for sheep stealers etc etc...
For the huge numbers of tory members would would vote Patel given a vote next week based on Rwanda and bring back hanging for sheep stealers etc etc...
They said the same thing about Mrs Thatcher in 1975.
Just realised something. The last election winner to be removed at the ballot box was John Major. Before that it was Ted Heath. That's once in 47 years.
Wilson and Attlee. 4 in nearly 80 years
Yep. And Wilson got two more goes. So I'm not entirely sure he counts the same.
True, yes. So defeated and gone are Attlee, Heath (after a 27 year sulk) and Major (to the Oval)
If we discount Churchill, Salisbury, Baldwin and Gladstone for the same reason as Wilson, then believe it or not the previous election winner sacked by the electorate who never returned to the premiership was Disraeli in 1880.
And before him it was Melbourne in 1841.
Wow. That's some stat. It is vanishingly rare. Being an "election winner" is actually far more of a booster for Big Dog than it at first appears.
Thinking outside the box now. If he did use an FPN on Starmer to call an election... The obvious Labour candidate is one ACL Blair. History is his friend here.
Hang on a sec. There would be an almighty constitutional crisis, thats for sure. HM Loyal Opposition is supposed to be ready to step into government at any time - especially during an election. Both the leader and deputy leader would have gone. I don't recall anything in the Labour Party constitution which covers this scenario in terms of who takes control who would be a viable LOTO and ready to become PM in a few weeks.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
Presumably if SKS and Rayner quit, the NEC has to pick an interim leader (general election campaign or not)?
Yep. Labour Rule Book:
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
So much for that Johnson wheeze then. Within 24 hours Labour could be galvanised by a more exciting and electable leader than they were 24hrs earlier with a lot of public sympathy for their outgoing leadership doing the honourable thing.
Or they could pick someone far left and unelectable again, Streeting might be a net benefit for them most other alternatives are no better than Starmer if not worse.
In any case I think once he and Rayner have filled in their questionnaires they will avoid a fine
Wrong. We are talking about the Boris pressing the GE button, as save big dog squad blackmailing tonight, whilst 11 points behind in polls, and Starmer and Rayner both having to step down - NEC call for leadership election, and NEC and Shadow cabinet appoint leader and deputy for rest of General Election campaign and beyond. That will not be an unelectable care taker. In fact whoever said Blair is caretaker made a brilliant call.
The absolutely fascinating scenario, if we are playing this game, is the following:
a) Durham police issue the FPNs. b) Johnson presses GE button immediately he hears that news and just before his own defenestration. c) Lab NEC appoint interim leader pending a proper leadership election. d) Interim leader fronts GE campaign and wins a landslide. e) Let's imagine that interim leader is Blair.
f) Who does the Queen ask to form a Government?
Blair would not - presumably - be running as a parliamentary candidate, so I presume it would be whichever Labour MP could get a majority of MPs to support him.
For the huge numbers of tory members would would vote Patel given a vote next week based on Rwanda and bring back hanging for sheep stealers etc etc...
The problem is you have to break it into two questions: 1) Does the maddest 1/3 of the parliamentary Conservative Party prefer her to anyone else 2) Do the members prefer her to the whoever the less mad side picked.
For the huge numbers of tory members would would vote Patel given a vote next week based on Rwanda and bring back hanging for sheep stealers etc etc...
So if Boris goes it has to be Wallace or Javid then if the Tories want to see any electoral improvement.
Hunt, Truss, Raab, Gove, Sunak, Zahawi and Patel would all do worse than Boris is
For the huge numbers of tory members would would vote Patel given a vote next week based on Rwanda and bring back hanging for sheep stealers etc etc...
They said the same thing about Mrs Thatcher in 1975.
I think Patel is a clear buy (33-1!), but her judgement is not the greatest. Do you remember the whole holiday that wasn't a holiday.
For the huge numbers of tory members would would vote Patel given a vote next week based on Rwanda and bring back hanging for sheep stealers etc etc...
They said the same thing about Mrs Thatcher in 1975.
She was Leader of the Opposition in 1975 against a failing Labour government, not straight into PM
Comments
There are wheat fields unrun and walking holidays for cunning plans to last her a lifetime out there. She will remain one of the great what might have been mysteries. But for the referendum a May Osborne fight for the top job after Cameron quit?
Before politics he was employed as a seed drill.
“We were lucky on exiting the Stadium, but many other Madrid fans were robbed or attacked by gangs of what seemed to be locals, while exiting the Stadium or on the Subway, with a total absence of presence and action from French police. It almost seemed it was allowed on purpose.
This is what we saw, French Minister and UEFA officials trying to put the blame on LFC fans is absolutely disgusting. @UEFA should not be allowed to run a final anymore.”
https://twitter.com/amandosfalcon/status/1531499420155510785?s=21&t=BCmhI5lY5hdQjnCuinpZog
Only Thatcher of general election majority winning PMs was toppled by her own party, however even she won support from 54% of Tory MPs in 1990 so would have survived under the VONC rules the Conservatives have now
Blyth Valley is not the best example, as the Lab majority was still pretty big in 2017, but we know many areas had been moving toward the Tories for many elections, and Boris gave them that extra tip over the edge to win a swathe of new seats. But it could be that the skills and leader necessary to hold the seat are not the same as to win the seat. He got the foot in the door, but can he be the one to plant both feet?
Different times call for different approaches after all - Could Boris have done what Cameron did in 2010? Probably not. Could Cameron have done what Boris did in 2019? No.
Would Boris cost seats in the south and not save enough in the north at present? Some may think so, and if so worth seeing if someone else can.
Also. It won't exist soon.
Macmillan - there continues to be a great deal of argument over whether he thought he was dying, whether he was taking a convenient excuse, or whether he actually was as ill as he thought.
Lloyd George, no, and the Unionists would probably have won without him, but he was still the Coalition's chief selling point in the campaign. For good or ill he was an election winning PM.
(Although Rothermere was allied to him.)
It’s really not difficult this one. Putin is the baddy. And it didn’t come from nowhere. He’s used radiological, biological and chemical weapons on foreign soil in the last decade. Launched multiple unprovoked foreign incursions. Assassinated goodness knows how many political opponents. Expropriated enough of the Russian people’s wealth to become the world’s richest person, by most informed estimates.
And yet after all that, as Lex notes, he’s still very popular in Russia (and in certain other countries). Which I have to say, makes “Russia” as much the aggressor as Putin himself, even though I’ve spoken to Russian based Russians since this started who are appalled. They are seemingly the minority.
I have a lot more respect for her in this role than I did her previous role.
Under Mr. Putin, Russia demolished the Chechen capital, Grozny, in 2000; invaded Georgia in 2008; annexed Crimea in 2014; and used its air force in 2015 and 2016 against opponents of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. Mr. Putin’s regime has used cyberattacks, brutalized or assassinated domestic opponents and passed laws that impose draconian prison sentences on anyone questioning the state. He launched a brutal invasion of Ukraine and has hinted at possibly using nuclear weapons. He has not just declared his intent to redraw international borders and resurrect the ghost of the former Soviet Union; he has acted on it.
This is really really really close to lots of people dying, as in Hillsborough
Shameful
https://twitter.com/imran_igg/status/1531649485570560001?s=21&t=BCmhI5lY5hdQjnCuinpZog
2019 Johnson could win Blyth.
2020s Johnson cannot.
Simples.
How then do we get to Blair? OK, there is no constitutional bar on a non-MP being a minister. But how and why do Labour select him as even an interim LOTO and candidate to lead a government?
OK, lets assume that Starmer and Rayner resign in the immediate aftermath of an election which Labour win. So the question is who does the Palace call to ask to form a government. Again, how do we get to Blair?
And as for American isolationism, that carried on well into the 1940's.
Next PM in betting????
I do not like the section of Liverpool fans that boos Queen, anthem and beautiful hymns, and I still don’t like them
But as events unfolded even on the night it became increasingly clear that LFC fans in this case were largely (but not wholly) blameless, and I said so at the time. I was one of the PB-ers relentlessly digging out the social media and showing what ACTUALLY happened.
What happened that night was a disgrace, it could easily have ended in many dead people, and 95% of the blame lies within France, from the police to the government to French UEFA to the ratbags that live in St Denis
Yes, new technology lets you go on the telly without being dragged into that London. But please, switch the camera on first before going on. If I can manage that before investor meetings they can manage it before going on TV.
No one demanded Ed M go after 2015 AIR. He did get a positive swing in E+W. We could have avoided some trouble.
Anyway, onwards to the Euros. Looking forward to screaming at the telly as Scotland bin it every attack tomorrow night...
A particularly sinister yer horribly plausible theory is floating around French Twitter. It is this:
By about 7pm that night French police realised they had lost control (mainly because of their own terrible policing and crap UEFA organisation - plus the horrible locals attacking everyone). They panicked, as all this was happening in full view of the media, so they then started assaulting Liverpool fans - see the pepper spraying - so they could get a reaction and it could all be blamed on Les Anglais and les hooligans
I don’t want to think this is true. I hope it isn’t. But it fits a lot of the bizarre evidence
But that's what happens when you fall for a conman. A while later, you end up in a corner where every possible step you can take means that you lose out.
I think there was at least one former US President who was later a member of Congress.
I have a few ideas though.
To start with, both this disaster and the one at Wembley are owned as Euafa events, but aspects if the management of them and the security is outsourced to other stakeholders, who in turn further outsource? Maybe Ueafa can be more actively involved themselves, with both a set of principles and a team to ensure all parties involved follow the Euafa principles.
For example.
Is it that much harder to forge eTickets than Paper ones? If so, I’m tempted to say one principle is eTicket admission only, no paper tickets. But I would need to be sure that is technically true. If fans say they don’t have smart phones, or even if they do, how much will it cost Euafa to gift each ticket holder a simple device with their clubs branding - a e-ticket device free with each ticket for example to beat the fraud?
Secondly, particularly the case at Wembley, too many fans with no tickets, also possibly fake tickets, far too close to the turnstiles and fencing at the match stadium, there should be a cordon further away for ticket checking to avoid pressure on turnstiles gates and fences. The dmz between ticket checking cordon and the ground is ideal space for any required security presence to sit and operate effectively.
Thirdly, in the case of Paris, Police had pre conceived expectations of fans that can lead to self fulfilling prophecy, my suggestion is use more stewarding and police from the cities or countries of the two teams playing.
"When the Party is in opposition and the leader and deputy leader, for whatever reason, both become permanently unavailable, the NEC shall order a ballot as provided under E above. In consultation with the Shadow Cabinet they may choose to appoint a member of the Shadow Cabinet to serve as Party leader until the outcome of that ballot.
May would make a good appointment in a role where total uprightness is required. Does the attorney-general have to be a lawyer?
He knows how many letters he has. Enough letters feels pretty clear.
History suggests that nominating Blair as a candidate and as leader would be the way to win.
As very few election winners simply slope off. See the thread.
But. it won't happen. As I was being facetious.
More likely it's Nandy. As the only one not thoroughly hated by either Right or Left.
Going to NATO doesn't really count, it's the sort of job designed for an ex-PM because they cannot do anything in their own country.
On that grounds Verhofstadt might count as a reasonably prominent member of the European Parliament at times, and former PM (for a lot longer than I had realised).
And that, gang, is a cracker
In any case I think once he and Rayner have filled in their questionnaires they will avoid a fine
I have a hot/cold approach to football. Though as the last match I went to was in a corporate box probably excuses me from being able to opine on fans and crowds.
They've had 7 seven leaders over that time right?
Its another red wall not really red wall seat that they should remain competitive in regardless of leader
Interestingly, if they were to follow the likely royal/constitutional protocol then the person who was interim leader during a GE should be someone who was definitely not in the race to be the perma leader.
So, Ed M would fit.
He was a pilot, and the first one to shoot down an enemy with a gun that fired through the propeller.
I think I better go to bed now 😉
Shinzo Abe had two goes as PM, the first was short and not very successful. He resigned after losing the Upper House election, while blaming medical complications after only serving a year. Then he came back later and did 8 years.
They also keep the former PMs in the cabinet a lot, for instance Taro Aso crashed pretty hard as PM then came back to be Minister of Finance. Yoshito Mori was a similarly terrible PM, and subsequently got put in charge of the Olympics
On the Democratic Party side, Naoto Kan got screwed as opposition leader in a setup that looks a bit like the Kier Starmer situation with the penalty notices: A bunch of LDP (then government side) ministers got caught dodging their pension contributions. Kan went after them on that, then it turned out that many years before, he too had dodged his pension contributions. He resigned, went on a pilgrimage around Shikoku to atone, and later came back to take over as PM.
a) Durham police issue the FPNs.
b) Johnson presses GE button immediately he hears that news and just before his own defenestration.
c) Lab NEC appoint interim leader pending a proper leadership election.
d) Interim leader fronts GE campaign and wins a landslide.
e) Let's imagine that interim leader is Blair.
f) Who does the Queen ask to form a Government?
1) Does the maddest 1/3 of the parliamentary Conservative Party prefer her to anyone else
2) Do the members prefer her to the whoever the less mad side picked.
Hunt, Truss, Raab, Gove, Sunak, Zahawi and Patel would all do worse than Boris is
Guesses: 35/37
2️⃣6️⃣ 2️⃣1️⃣ 2️⃣2️⃣ 2️⃣5️⃣
2️⃣0️⃣ 0️⃣7️⃣ 1️⃣9️⃣ 2️⃣4️⃣
0️⃣6️⃣ 1️⃣6️⃣ 1️⃣1️⃣ 2️⃣3️⃣
0️⃣8️⃣ 0️⃣9️⃣ 0️⃣4️⃣ 3️⃣2️⃣
0️⃣5️⃣ 0️⃣3️⃣ 1️⃣8️⃣ 1️⃣7️⃣
1️⃣3️⃣ 2️⃣7️⃣ 2️⃣8️⃣ 1️⃣0️⃣
1️⃣4️⃣ 3️⃣4️⃣ 3️⃣3️⃣ 2️⃣9️⃣
3️⃣5️⃣ 3️⃣0️⃣ 3️⃣1️⃣ 1️⃣5️⃣
https://duotrigordle.com/