How many more are going to declare? Such a ridiculous number of candidates
It’s likely A high number of signatures like 20 to get into the first round, so declaring and being in are two different things.
It’s only Rishi, Truss, Tom and Penny we can be sure are on the first ballot right now I think. Once we are talking about 25 to 40 signatory to be in one of the ballots, then just those 4?
Nor am I having a go at predicting tonight’s Opinum. Except to remind When we get it, remember with swing back built in it’s never given Labour more than 38 or Tories less than 33.
Okay I will have a go, 38 to 32/33 is my best guess.
How many more are going to declare? Such a ridiculous number of candidates
We’ve got Liz and Penny to come for sure (unless Penny withdraws. No way will Liz not run). Nadine was threatening to run too. Javid will unless he has done a deal. So we could be looking at 10 candidates.
"The leadership contest will be as much about character as policy, but a senior party source warned that whoever wins will face more sleaze scandals. “There are two dozen unexploded bombs, cases of scandal that are ready to explode that the new leader will inherit"
Worth adding this to the talk about attacking weapons depots. Ukraine also using its new range systems to go after Russian command and control. That’s definitely US doctrine, and if they can seriously degrade both Russian supply and command in the Kherson area, watch out.
No. If you are going to do ruthlessness, you need a certain class about it. Zahawi's moves were much too brazen. It's also unclear whether anything will come out about him from his business days.
If Zahawi had not become Chancellor and got a gold medal for duplicity he would have had a better chance .
I thought the idea was that someone had to be CoE or there'd be a run on the pound when the markets opened. Perhaps he was just doing his duty.
The true story of what happened between Boris and Zahawi is going to be fascinating when it comes out (and it will).
The rumours the day before BoJo resigned were that Zahawi had essentially told him he’d quit cabinet unless Boris made him Chancellor (Boris was apparently thinking of reshuffling Truss into that role too). Then Zahawi told him to go anyway.
Of course a lot of that could be false rumour and speculation. But I do think Zahawi comes out of it badly regardless.
Some might see that as ruthlessness that is both self-serving and in a good cause. Not sure this will damage his chances as lancing the Boris boil is increasingly going to be seen as essential to Tory electoral prospects.
But just how ruthless was Zahawi? As we don't know what was said, understood and/or pledged between them?
Speculative possibility: BJ asks Z to be CoE, they discuss economics but NOT politics; BJ assumes Z's his man, whereas Z has made zero pledge on THAT score. Agreed to become CoE at time of obvious crisis NOT to shore up BJ. He (and others) say - or rather sputter - but, but, that was understood! However, with zero explicit commitment.
Just speculation, but is there any evidence refuting it?
EDIT - had NOT seen news re: Z's tax issue before posting above, though unsure how it might have affected his appt as CoE by BJ.
If it wasn't for Chris Pincher, this story would have finished off Boris Johnson.
Boris Johnson lobbied for a job for a young woman who claims he abused his power to have a sexual relationship with her.
The then London mayor and MP for Henley advocated for her to get a job in City Hall weeks after meeting her and bringing her back to his parliamentary office.
The appointment was blocked because Johnson’s colleague, the newly appointed Cabinet Office minister Kit Malthouse, said they appeared to have an inappropriately close relationship.
How many more are going to declare? Such a ridiculous number of candidates
It’s likely A high number of signatures like 20 to get into the first round, so declaring and being in are two different things.
It’s only Rishi, Truss, Tom and Penny we can be sure are on the first ballot right now I think. Once we are talking about 25 to 40 signatory to be in one of the ballots, then just those 4?
Braverman will make 25 I fear.
An interesting question, rather as when we discuss Scottish, is how far this election is driven by ideology and how far by personal liking. If we think of Badenoch, Braverman and Truss as all appealing to the right, then they're already on 24, but while I can see them rallying behind Truss, I'm not sure the others are that transfer-friendly. So if Sunak is comfortably sure of reaching th elast two, we may see some tactical games with his supporters trying to get Braverman (who probably wouldn't win a members' vote) ahead of Truss (who probably would).
How many more are going to declare? Such a ridiculous number of candidates
It’s likely A high number of signatures like 20 to get into the first round, so declaring and being in are two different things.
It’s only Rishi, Truss, Tom and Penny we can be sure are on the first ballot right now I think. Once we are talking about 25 to 40 signatory to be in one of the ballots, then just those 4?
Braverman will make 25 I fear.
And then what? A massive groundswell of support to emerge? Or more likely kicked out in the second round.
I have been reading through Philipp Dettmer's "Immune", and on page 121 he reminded me of this: "In human words: You find potential partners with MHC molecules that are different from yours more attractive! OK, wait, what? How would you even know this? Well, you can literally smell the difference!"
If your children have a wider variety of major histocompatibility complex molecules, they will be better able to resist a wider variety of diseases, giving them an evolutionary advantage.
(As far as I know, none of the match-making internet sites currently offer a smell test, but I could wrong.)
How many more are going to declare? Such a ridiculous number of candidates
It’s likely A high number of signatures like 20 to get into the first round, so declaring and being in are two different things.
It’s only Rishi, Truss, Tom and Penny we can be sure are on the first ballot right now I think. Once we are talking about 25 to 40 signatory to be in one of the ballots, then just those 4?
Braverman will make 25 I fear.
An interesting question, rather as when we discuss Scottish, is how far this election is driven by ideology and how far by personal liking. If we think of Badenoch, Braverman and Truss as all appealing to the right, then they're already on 24, but while I can see them rallying behind Truss, I'm not sure the others are that transfer-friendly. So if Sunak is comfortably sure of reaching th elast two, we may see some tactical games with his supporters trying to get Braverman (who probably wouldn't win a members' vote) ahead of Truss (who probably would).
Was just thinking same thing, though far less cogently.
Who gets axed from round to round, and who benefits from transfer patterns AND strategic vote-hording AND -lending? With the end game being almost all.
My guess is that, while there is almost certainly going to be an attack vs Kherson, where the Ukrainians will really launch their strike is against the Melitopol / Mariupol area. If they make major advances there, it leaves the Russian forces in Kherson in a potential pincer trap.
Worth adding this to the talk about attacking weapons depots. Ukraine also using its new range systems to go after Russian command and control. That’s definitely US doctrine, and if they can seriously degrade both Russian supply and command in the Kherson area, watch out.
These Sunday Papers already looking brutal for a few candidates 😟 how long has some of this stuff been sat on by papers, or now leaked by someone else sitting on it?
Given how many stories there have been about the Golden Retriever I’m guessing that they couldn’t spare the column inches.
I picked a poor week to go on a diet. The amount of popcorn I could consume…
How many more are going to declare? Such a ridiculous number of candidates
It’s likely A high number of signatures like 20 to get into the first round, so declaring and being in are two different things.
It’s only Rishi, Truss, Tom and Penny we can be sure are on the first ballot right now I think. Once we are talking about 25 to 40 signatory to be in one of the ballots, then just those 4?
Braverman will make 25 I fear.
An interesting question, rather as when we discuss Scottish, is how far this election is driven by ideology and how far by personal liking. If we think of Badenoch, Braverman and Truss as all appealing to the right, then they're already on 24, but while I can see them rallying behind Truss, I'm not sure the others are that transfer-friendly. So if Sunak is comfortably sure of reaching th elast two, we may see some tactical games with his supporters trying to get Braverman (who probably wouldn't win a members' vote) ahead of Truss (who probably would).
It’s true to expect a bit of difference of opinion between the last 2 candidates where possible? Left-right in terms of fiscal conservatism, social conservatism etc?
"What do you make of the argument that if, say, someone could never, ever be attracted to a person of a significantly different skin colour, we might affirm their personal choice and yet still suggest that they harboured a societal prejudice? And that a similar prejudice is on display for someone (whatever their sexual orientation) that would not ever consider having sex with a trans person?
Is (a) the idea this is prejudiced wrong? (b) correct, but not applicable to the case of trans people because of the physical difference in genitalia? (c) something else going on?"
My answer is that to confuse a sexual preference with societal prejudice is to make a fundamental category mistake.
A sexual preference is innate & strongly correlated with a person's body. If you're gay you want to have sex with people of the same sex. If you're straight you want sex with the opposite sex. It is the sex of the partner which is key. Body and sex are intimately connected.
So a gay man is not prejudiced against women because he does not want to have sex with them. There is no prejudice or bigotry. The basic sexual attraction simply does not exist. Ditto with a lesbian not wanting to have sex with a man. It is not societal preferences which determine this but your own sexuality.
Now TRAs have got themselves into a pickle because while they may well feel themselves to be a different sex, their actual body has not changed. (The overwhelming majority of transpeople do not have surgery so retain the body they were born with.) Whatever they may feel however genuinely, the factual reality is that a lesbian is not going to be sexually attracted to a male body. Similarly a gay man is not going to be attracted a trans man retaining their female body. That is not prejudice or bigotry. It is a consequence of their sexuality.
TRAs are not willing to accept this because it undermines their claim that, say, a TW is just like any other woman. She isn't & in a very fundamental way. Sex is the rock on which the belief TRAs have crashes and founders. Rather than accept this, they describe a normal sexual preference as bigotry & preference belittle & demean lesbians by claiming that men are lesbians. It is aggressive, upsetting & infused with a rape mentality - a coercive approach which assumes that they are entitled to sex with women & any woman refusing this has no business doing so.
If a white person is only attracted to other white people, is that prejudice?
I agree that what genitals you are attracted to is not a prejudice, but does that generalise to other features?
Sex is one of those things that proves we're all capitalists, and proves the ruthlessness of capitalism at the same time.
In sex, there's no redistribution. There's no "look at those poor people over there, they aren't getting any, we should take some partners off the people who are getting loads and give them to the poor deprived people." We lionise the billionares of the sex world. The most beautiful. The most active. The most - dare I say it - privileged.
I'm not saying I disagree with any of that, by the way. Just making the point that even the staunchest communist, who would be willing to redistribute income, food, housing, practically everything else to make people equal - would find the idea of sexual "equality" absurd.
Without commenting on the substance of what you're saying, redistribution and capitalism go together quite nicely. Capitalism does not imply a lack of redistribution, and, I firmly believe, cannot possibly survive without redistribution.
Which is why our attitudes to sex are all the more remarkable. The sexual marketplace is hyper-capitalism, rapacious capitalism, ayn-rand-style-tyranny-of-the-market-capitalism.
The idea of redistribution in the sexual marketplace is repugnant to us. The notion of coercion, abhorrent. We are happy to have 40% of our incomes taken off us, but 40% of our sexual partners given to those unluckier in love than we are would be ridiculous.
The sexual marketplace accepts absolutely zero compulsion, whether that's being forced to sleep with an ugly person, or a person whose bits you aren't attracted to.
As I say, it says something fascinating about human nature.
At the end of the day there are about equal numbers of good looking, average looking and ugly looking men and women. If more followed traditional religious principles and stuck to one partner who matched them in looks and personality for life there would be less of an issue.
Only a small minority of us are very good looking or will be very rich so better to settle for what you have
I know there are two different answers; who would be easiest to beat, or if you can't beat them who would be best as PM?
I think Libdems would fear Truss or Mourdant most for swing back of female voters in blue wall?
Surely Mordaunt would scare anyone more than Truss?
I agree yes, but at same time try to think it not as myself but as a Tory member. In a way it’s easy for me as both my mum and dad have a vote. My mum voted leave and wants Truss. My dad voted remain but wants Rishi to restore Conservative fiscal policies. I’ve never voted Conservative but am rooting for the woke Penny Mourdant.
Secondly it’s women the Tories lost under the laddish Johnson, more than men, surely this is built into the good Libdem results?
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
I have been reading through Philipp Dettmer's "Immune", and on page 121 he reminded me of this: "In human words: You find potential partners with MHC molecules that are different from yours more attractive! OK, wait, what? How would you even know this? Well, you can literally smell the difference!"
If your children have a wider variety of major histocompatibility complex molecules, they will be better able to resist a wider variety of diseases, giving them an evolutionary advantage.
(As far as I know, none of the match-making internet sites currently offer a smell test, but I could wrong.)
You may have stumbled upon a golden opportunity, seeing as how you are in sweet (-smelling) spot tech-wise out there in Redmond!
The fact that the Chancellor is under investigation by the HMRC (and previously the SFO); and that this was known by Boris, is a new low for the United Kingdom.
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
Sri Lanka is the canary in the coal mine isn't it?
Yes. The emerging markets are being crushed by a double pincer of (1) rising commodity prices and (2) a collapse of the currencies vs the dollar, against which most commodities are priced, and hence a double whammy on the cost front for these countries.
Sunak was also in despair about Johnson’s governance more generally. One close ally said: “The thing that gets his goat most, and what he said most, is that the government was not delivering on the things it said it would. Take the Covid backlogs: we gave the NHS lots of money and took the political pain for the tax rise — but there was no grip. Why weren’t we having a weekly meeting about the backlogs? Why wasn’t there a data dashboard making this a priority? Where are the 40 hospitals and the thousands of new nurses? That’s the thing that’s truly unforgivable.”
Another minister contrasted this record with the Downing Street parties: “Boris couldn’t run a piss-up in a brewery, but he did run a piss-up in Downing Street.”
Sunak was also clear that he would not go out and defend Downing Street disinformation on Pincher — a view widely shared by cabinet ministers. A cabinet source said: “The Tory party has finally come to the realisation that it’s in an abusive relationship with the prime minister.”
Another minister said: “The problem with Boris is his personal pronouns, which are me, me and me.”
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
I know there are two different answers; who would be easiest to beat, or if you can't beat them who would be best as PM?
I'm more LibDem than Labour, but I dunno. Clearly none of the candidates are going to align with my political views; has anybody scored them on the non-partisan virtues of competence, honesty, diligence, practicality and compassion ? I feel like No 10 could use some of those -- and it would be useful to have an idea of how likely it is that whoever wins will effectively make policy changes that work (by their ideological standards, even if not by mine).
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
The fact that the Chancellor is under investigation by the HMRC (and previously the SFO); and that this was known by Boris, is a new low for the United Kingdom.
Look on the bright side (being careful how I phrase this) - he’s very knowledgable of the things he needs to legislate against.
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
Someone asked @rcs1000 what they didn't like about Sunak. Can't answer for him but here's mine.
- Slimy / untrustworthy - Totally wrong policies for what is happening - we are facing a bunch of the population not being able to heat their homes and he talks about cutting costs. How about raising wealth taxes / eliminating loopholes for the wealthy (eg the tax rate on PE investments) to get money from those who benefited off the years of cheap money? - Hypocrisy - he talks about balancing the books and the need to make sacrifices except when it comes to his wife's non-dom's status - Obviously couldn't give a fuck about the poor - Worked for TCI - which, for me, would raise possible red flags
Sunak was also in despair about Johnson’s governance more generally. One close ally said: “The thing that gets his goat most, and what he said most, is that the government was not delivering on the things it said it would. Take the Covid backlogs: we gave the NHS lots of money and took the political pain for the tax rise — but there was no grip. Why weren’t we having a weekly meeting about the backlogs? Why wasn’t there a data dashboard making this a priority? Where are the 40 hospitals and the thousands of new nurses? That’s the thing that’s truly unforgivable.”
Another minister contrasted this record with the Downing Street parties: “Boris couldn’t run a piss-up in a brewery, but he did run a piss-up in Downing Street.”
Sunak was also clear that he would not go out and defend Downing Street disinformation on Pincher — a view widely shared by cabinet ministers. A cabinet source said: “The Tory party has finally come to the realisation that it’s in an abusive relationship with the prime minister.”
Another minister said: “The problem with Boris is his personal pronouns, which are me, me and me.”
I know there are two different answers; who would be easiest to beat, or if you can't beat them who would be best as PM?
As it’s likely to be a Leaver I’d go for Sunak as he might be more pragmatic re the EU and won’t want a trade war . I also think he’d be less divisive at home . In terms of more beatable for Labour the rest of the Leavers on show !
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
I have a spatchcock poussin in the oven. It says it serves two; I plan to challenge that assertion.
"Liked" this display of conspicuous consumption (!) even as I sit down to lukewarm bowl of gruel that Oliver Twist would have thrown against the workhouse wall.
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
Twitter Andrew Neil@afneil·4m Great quote from tomorrow’s Sunday Times - Boris Johnson is the 3rd Tory prime minister to be brought down by Boris Johnson.
Someone asked @rcs1000 what they didn't like about Sunak. Can't answer for him but here's mine.
- Slimy / untrustworthy - Totally wrong policies for what is happening - we are facing a bunch of the population not being able to heat their homes and he talks about cutting costs. How about raising wealth taxes / eliminating loopholes for the wealthy (eg the tax rate on PE investments) to get money from those who benefited off the years of cheap money? - Hypocrisy - he talks about balancing the books and the need to make sacrifices except when it comes to his wife's non-dom's status - Obviously couldn't give a fuck about the poor - Worked for TCI - which, for me, would raise possible red flags
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
Sri Lanka instituted major tax cuts and now it’s about to default on its debts.
A lesson for some Tory leadership candidates?
What the President and his family did was substantially cut taxes for the very wealthy many of whom were their friends and associates.
This of course meant there was no money coming in to the Treasury and ultimately this led to the country being unable to buy imported goods so there are massive shortages of food, fuel, medicine and God knows what else.
The notion a very rich man should be popular because he cuts taxes for primarily his very rich friends (look how much tax they are paying! We must help them) while the poor run out of food and medicine seems absurd.
Putting a bloke being investigated by HMRC in charge of the Treasury surely tops everything else Boris has done by a country mile, doesn't it?
Edit:
Makes Zahawi's behaviour entirely explicable.
Tbf the article also says 'there is no suggestion Mr Zahawi has done anything wrong' So it would be a bit odd for him to stand down
There is, though, isn't there? SFO and HMRC don't investigate you with a view to awarding good conduct certificates
But then as Keir has just shown us, being investigated doesnt mean youve been a naughty boy. Short of specifics its just a 'look, manure!' story
That’s fair. I think this reflects more badly on Johnson. He appointed someone being investigated for some tax issue to No 11. As the internet saying goes: dafuq?
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
My concern for Mordaunt would be over her non-married status. It wouldn't bother me but it would be an issue for a fair number of ordinary voters.
I would rather have an unmarried Mordaunt than another Cherie type spouse....
ah time for the PB misogynists to come out and play
A prime example of the PB gammon-dressed-as-woke. Mordaunt is straight so any spouse would be male, so where does misogyny come in to that? Cherie Blair was a ghastly human being in her own right, but you secretly think that it's just not on to have a go at the memsahibs, do you hear, because you can't apply the same high standards to the laydeez as the chaps. Weaker sex, what?
- Hunt - basically out - Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating - Zahawi - taken down - Truss - struggling to get momentum - Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
I know there are two different answers; who would be easiest to beat, or if you can't beat them who would be best as PM?
I think Libdems would fear Truss or Mourdant most for swing back of female voters in blue wall?
Surely Mordaunt would scare anyone more than Truss?
I agree yes, but at same time try to think it not as myself but as a Tory member. In a way it’s easy for me as both my mum and dad have a vote. My mum voted leave and wants Truss. My dad voted remain but wants Rishi to restore Conservative fiscal policies. I’ve never voted Conservative but am rooting for the woke Penny Mourdant.
Secondly it’s women the Tories lost under the laddish Johnson, more than men, surely this is built into the good Libdem results?
Comments
Okay I will have a go, 38 to 32/33 is my best guess.
So Boris Johnson knew this and still decided to make Zahawi his Chancellor.
If you want a painting, hire an artist.
Popcorn Popcorn Popcorn
Worth adding this to the talk about attacking weapons depots. Ukraine also using its new range systems to go after Russian command and control. That’s definitely US doctrine, and if they can seriously degrade both Russian supply and command in the Kherson area, watch out.
https://twitter.com/phillipspobrien/status/1545816560564146176
Speculative possibility: BJ asks Z to be CoE, they discuss economics but NOT politics; BJ assumes Z's his man, whereas Z has made zero pledge on THAT score. Agreed to become CoE at time of obvious crisis NOT to shore up BJ. He (and others) say - or rather sputter - but, but, that was understood! However, with zero explicit commitment.
Just speculation, but is there any evidence refuting it?
EDIT - had NOT seen news re: Z's tax issue before posting above, though unsure how it might have affected his appt as CoE by BJ.
Pass the popcorn.
I know there are two different answers; who would be easiest to beat, or if you can't beat them who would be best as PM?
If your children have a wider variety of major histocompatibility complex molecules, they will be better able to resist a wider variety of diseases, giving them an evolutionary advantage.
(As far as I know, none of the match-making internet sites currently offer a smell test, but I could wrong.)
Who gets axed from round to round, and who benefits from transfer patterns AND strategic vote-hording AND -lending? With the end game being almost all.
Can't see why the party would risk it though - what if he is wrong after all?
My guess is that, while there is almost certainly going to be an attack vs Kherson, where the Ukrainians will really launch their strike is against the Melitopol / Mariupol area. If they make major advances there, it leaves the Russian forces in Kherson in a potential pincer trap.
I picked a poor week to go on a diet. The amount of popcorn I could consume…
Edit:
Makes Zahawi's behaviour entirely explicable.
Only a small minority of us are very good looking or will be very rich so better to settle for what you have
...........But they were being serious. Anyone with a vote must listen to Dead Ringers.
Secondly it’s women the Tories lost under the laddish Johnson, more than men, surely this is built into the good Libdem results?
- Hunt - basically out
- Sunak - about to get taken down with his comments about the working class already circulating
- Zahawi - taken down
- Truss - struggling to get momentum
- Badenoch - surprisingly getting some momentum from the RW crowd but can it be sustained.
This is going to be a great contest from a betting standpoint
ps please let Nadine run - it would be hilarious.
So it would be a bit odd for him to stand down
Another minister contrasted this record with the Downing Street parties: “Boris couldn’t run a piss-up in a brewery, but he did run a piss-up in Downing Street.”
Sunak was also clear that he would not go out and defend Downing Street disinformation on Pincher — a view widely shared by cabinet ministers. A cabinet source said: “The Tory party has finally come to the realisation that it’s in an abusive relationship with the prime minister.”
Another minister said: “The problem with Boris is his personal pronouns, which are me, me and me.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/boris-the-cat-with-nine-lives-has-finally-been-neutered-nq7hnwndv
There’s no way in hell he should be anywhere an economic post.
The PM's "preferred pronouns are me, me and me.
Someone asked @rcs1000 what they didn't like about Sunak. Can't answer for him but here's mine.
- Slimy / untrustworthy
- Totally wrong policies for what is happening - we are facing a bunch of the population not being able to heat their homes and he talks about cutting costs. How about raising wealth taxes / eliminating loopholes for the wealthy (eg the tax rate on PE investments) to get money from those who benefited off the years of cheap money?
- Hypocrisy - he talks about balancing the books and the need to make sacrifices except when it comes to his wife's non-dom's status
- Obviously couldn't give a fuck about the poor
- Worked for TCI - which, for me, would raise possible red flags
That’s a fantastic quote.
I’m gonna use it.
https://twitter.com/tadeuszgiczan/status/1545831789553491968
A lesson for some Tory leadership candidates?
Andrew Neil@afneil·4m
Great quote from tomorrow’s Sunday Times - Boris Johnson is the 3rd Tory prime minister to be brought down by Boris Johnson.
Can't argue with any of those to be fair...
I suppose it depends what you mean by "know"? The college catering staff were probably working class.
This of course meant there was no money coming in to the Treasury and ultimately this led to the country being unable to buy imported goods so there are massive shortages of food, fuel, medicine and God knows what else.
The notion a very rich man should be popular because he cuts taxes for primarily his very rich friends (look how much tax they are paying! We must help them) while the poor run out of food and medicine seems absurd.
Could never happen here...
But you need to show you can understand real life concerns .
People are allowed to have had lives that were less than perfect before entering politics.
If the best they can do is dig up 20 year old stuff like that, they don't have a lot of dirt.
Let's also remember that the new leader will be facing two knights as leaders on the opposition benches...
Who could that be?