Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Starmer is eminently beatable – politicalbetting.com

123457

Comments

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    Jake Berry, chairman of the influential NRG, comes out for Tom Tugendhat in the Tory leadership contest. @JakeBerry says @TomTugendhat was the only candidate turned up to the group’s conference in Doncaster and 'see the potential in what we had to say'
    https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1638367/Tom-Tugendhat-conservative-party-next-prime-minister
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Roger said:

    That's why 97% of the advertising industry voted to Remain according to polls. . We were indisputably the second most successful advertising industry in the world and probably rated the most creative. British crews and production were in demand everywhere which had knock on effects all over the place.

    The film business flourished as did British studios which meant model making special effects music studios construction etc. Germany always had the best equiptment but we had a hugely successful service industry

    In 2016 we wantonly committed harakiri. I still find it unbelievable
    Really?

    According to the film and TV industry itself the UK now has the fastest growing film and TV sector in the world with a massive growth in inward investment. It was worth $7.6 billion in 2021 and is predicted to be worth $9.4 billion in 2025.

    The idea that post Brexit we are losing market share or that the film and TV industry is failing is utter garbage.

    9.4 billion in 2025 being the price of a Mars bar.
    You think the value of the dollar is going to collapse? Brave suggestion.
    I’m actually dollar heavy. And pound light.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    💥 NEW: Senior Tories want to rapidly thin out the field of leadership candidates

    One senior MP close to 1922 committee it was “likely” candidates must secure the support of at least 10% of the parliamentary party to get on to the ballot paper - 36 MPs

    https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1546214174883303427

    Apologies if I have missed this while being a long way up a misty moody Norwegian fjord but has the timetable been set yet?
    It will be announced tomorrow. Sounds like it may be formal nominations in by Weds, get it down to the final 2 by the end of July, and a new leader in place for early September.
    Thanks but, Jeez, why so long?

    By the end of August the leading candidates will be promising tax cuts equal to twice the GDP, all refugees to be packed off the the British Antarctic Territory before they leave France, and the Magna Carta to be repealed (rules created by nasty foreign barons from Normandy).
    It will take probably a couple of weeks to print and dispatch all the postal ballots to the the membership (they seem to be able to arrange it faster than me though), and they want to give them a reasonable amount of time to hear from the candidates, but I'd agree with you.

    Even taking it slow, I'd say

    11 July - rules announced
    13 July - closing date of nominations
    18 July - First ballot
    20 July - second ballot
    22 July - third and subsequent ballots as needed - final two announced
    1 August - postal ballots out
    19 August - closing date
    22 August - new leader announced, takes over

    Gives them a couple of weeks to prepare ahead of the first PMQs

    Why not daily or twice-daily MP ballots?
    Go full papal conclave on them? It has its appeal - lock them in a room with two ballots a day, and they'd narrow it down quickly.

    I suspect they'll want a bit longer because maybe 6-8 will actually even get on the ballot. If they provide a threshold at each stage (rather than just next one out) then you should only need 3.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,224

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Scott_xP said:

    💰 £13bn! £39bn! £49bn!

    The huge tax pledges of Liz Truss, Jeremy Hunt and Sajid Javid are going to be expensive - with few explanations of how it’s going to be paid for. All part of their plans to win MPs.

    @FinancialTimes analysis with @ChrisGiles_ https://www.ft.com/content/11e6a49b-ec21-405d-8bf9-8644c4042d4e


    They are going to trash each other to try and get the gig. Labour will just watch and laugh

    First it was "Party before Country" as the Tories used Brexit to get the UKIP tanks off their lawn.

    Now it is just naked, personal ambition which comes ahead of Party interests with the country in a poor 3rd place. They will promise anything to become PM, even if the result of their promises is massively increasing the national debt or just trashing their Party's chances in the next election.
    Do we know the latest tory membership figures? It seems to me that an ageing, Brexit-obsessed cohort whose prime political memory is of Thatcher's time of what maybe 150k people will decide the next PM?
    Yes, but there is a sort of gap in the reasoning. Let's say 150,000 people get to choose the next PM. If this is terrible the reason is nothing whatever to do with those people. They are the only people not responsible for the problem.

    100% of the responsibility (which is not the same as blame) lies with the other 58,000,000 (or whatever number) who could be members but are not.

    So it is partly my fault for not joining the Tory party? It is not free to join and I disagree profoundly with their aims and policies.

    Am I also supposed to be a member of the LibDems and of Labour to make sure that I can shape their policies?

    When am I allowed to stop joining parties?
    Read it more carefully. I am not making a moral point, and said so clearly.

    But you do seem to be saying that everyone in the country should join every party so that policy and leaders is controlled better.

    I thought that was rationale behind General Elections rather than Party membership
    No seeming, no shoulds. Read what I said.

    You said: "100% of the responsibility (which is not the same as blame) lies with the other 58,000,000 (or whatever number) who could be members but are not."

    So according to you, we all have a responsibility to be Tory members. That is exactly what that says. What other interpretation is there?
    algakirk is saying that the rest of us are responsible for the outcome, not that we have a responsibility to change it. There's no judgement in the post as I read it, just a statement of fact. Though I'd argue we don't have 100% of the responsibility - the Conservative party could choose to ballot us even though we're not members. That would be fun.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103

    Scott_xP said:

    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    That's a big endorsement. It will be interesting to see how the voting pans out.
    Badenoch now shorter than Hunt for next Conservative leader
    Makes sense to me. Untested unknown probably has more appeal when thinking it is time for renewal, than going for yesterday's man.
  • TresTres Posts: 2,696
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Mrs Stodge in far from a happy mood after the fortnightly shop at our local Sainsbury's, Not the prices so much - an occasional seethe but as I pay for the scoff, that's my problem.

    What irritated her was the 25 minutes it took from joining one of the checkout queues to actually paying.

    Just three tills open on a busy Sunday - it seems as with so many other places there is a desperate shortage of staff and those left cannot cope with the customer demand.

    It did occur to me one way to alleviate the problem was to suspend the Sunday Trading Laws for 6 months to allow businesses to adapt, adjust and recruit.

    It also occurred to me we could all cope with having a quieter day to each week - perhaps a winning message for a social conservative (or perhaps not).

    Where have all the workers gone?

    Delivering groceries to those of us who fell out the habit of actually visiting supermarkets a long time ago.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,635
    ydoethur said:

    Scott_xP said:

    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    That's a big endorsement. It will be interesting to see how the voting pans out.
    Badenoch now shorter than Hunt for next Conservative leader
    Will she end up shorter than Sunak?
    His only competition there would be if Patel enters the race.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863
    The race to replace Boris Johnson, update:

    Sunak: 30 MPs (+12)
    Mordaunt: 18 (+11)
    Hunt: 12 (+10)
    Truss: 12 (+6)
    Tugendhat: 12 (+6)
    Badenoch: 11 (+5)
    Zahawi: 10 (+7)
    Braverman: 9 (-)

    Chgs. w/ 24hrs ago
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    Key moment in the Tory leadership contest tomorrow - which looks to the quickest of recent times.

    New 1922 committee exec will decide timetable, expected to be down to final two before recess, and threshold - with calls for it to be 20-25 in first ballot to whittle down fast.

    First ballot planned for weds morning, even before any hustings can be held, to directly compare candidates.

    Further rounds of votes expected this coming week, if the final two are to be decided by July 21.


    https://twitter.com/tamcohen/status/1546225018400563203
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,497
    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    Cicero said:

    Leon said:

    Let me sketch again what I witnessed in Rose, Montenegro

    It’s a sizeable, very pretty seaside village, with one large resort hotel, several smaller hotels, a little marina, water sports, half a dozen bustling bars and restaurants. I imagine in winter it is deeply quiet but on a summer Sunday it was rammed with tourists, with people parked all the way up the hill behind

    The beaches were crowded but I wasn’t on a beach, I was 20 metres away in a big well-known seafood restaurant which was also rammed with lunchers and drinkers, mainly Montenegrin/Croatian/Serb tourists but I heard some Germans, French etc

    The table next to me was hosting a crowd of people in their late 20s. One by one they got up to head off, mostly to go swimming (I saw them). They were gone 40 minutes at least (by that time I had to go myself, so they might have been gone for much longer), they left behind everything, quite casually: phones, bags, purses, money, sunnies, everything (as the picture shows)

    I do not believe you would do this in a big pub in a crowded holiday village anywhere in the UK, nor anywhere I know in the rest of Western Europe, with the POSSIBLE exception of Switzerland. No one leaves behind their phone in a big bustling bar for 40 minutes (minimum). It is not a thing

    The Wikipedia article you posted says that there are only 10 people who live in Rose off season, (Montenegro is pretty small, of course) which may not challenge your thinking, but which does suggest that the village is mostly incomers at this time of year. Estonia is also pretty small (though more than twice the size of MNE) and similar levels of trust seem to apply here. Trust societies are so much more pleasent to live in.
    Eastern Europe is doing much better at retaining that high trust cohesiveness. And it’s not *just* smallness. It helps to be ethnically and culturally homogenous. If you know everyone around and they all know you, it is much harder to get away with crime. And if you are also probably related to the person you steal from or reliant on them in some way, that is another big disincentive for crime

    Big transient individualistic multicultural “western” societies have much more crime

    The one outlier is possibly Switzerland? Which has very low crime, yet is not smal, and is quite individualistic (but also officious) and multicultural and multiracial.
    Perhaps it is so rich no one needs to steal? or maybe it is Calvinism

    I can absolutely assure you that you would never leave your belongings unattended in a bar or cafe in Geneva - even though supremely Calvinistic.

    You have to be careful with your belongings in your pockets there yet alone on the table.

    All my female friends there would have to be very careful with their bags whilst out to ensure they were safely under the table even when we were sitting there.

    It’s the only place I’ve ever been mugged (attempted as my friend and I delivered a beating to the two muggers) and I had a friend there who had been mugged five times in three years living there.

    I would think that other larger cities in Switzerland are similar so it’s not the bucolic land of people respecting the law you might think.

    Fair enough!

    I have been to Switzerland a lot and always felt remarkably safe, but that's interesting to hear
    There's a massive rural / urban split in most countries. If you are in a small village in Switzerland, then you could probably leave your possessions on a table in a restaraunt for hours without worry. But at a crowded bar in Geneva, not a chance.
    It's exactly the same here: I'm 15 miles from Oxford in a (very) small rural town and would happily leave my phone/wallet on the table in the pub while I went to the toilet. When people lock their bikes up outside the pub they get laughed at.

    Last time I locked my bike outside the pub in Oxford, I came out half an hour later to find someone wheeling it up the road, bolt-cutters in the other arm.
    But you wouldn’t leave your phone on the table for FORTY MINUTES in a big busy pub, even in rural Oxon, would you?

    That’s what marks out my experience
    Having spent last night in Banbury, I would avoid busy pubs there period. The one I was staying in, with rooms, was hosting a private party for some middle aged people celebrating a wedding anniversary; the Birdie Song and Agadoo pumped out at maximum volume from the marquee behind the hotel was enough to send me out into the town in search of a quiet drink; Banbury, contrary to first impressions, on a Saturday night is host to large groups of younger people staggering about drunk and urinating in the street, with pubs that open to 2 am and lots of them pumping out party music. Who knew?

    I feel sorry for any foreign tourists who imagine they might be wandering the streets of a historic English town, taking in the atmosphere and stopping by a quiet bar or restaurant, as I was in similar sized places in Italy last month.
    Anyone visiting England needs to know, in advance, that except for touristic hotspots kept for their expensive purposes of fleecing the innocent, England has a long history of barbaric, popular working class culture derived from paganism, Vikings, Anglo Saxons, Celts, with recent exotic additions and fuelled by multiple forms of drug abuse. It also has public sanitation services that rival those of Lagos and Mariupol.

    And curiously we love it that way, and the world keeps complaining it is getting harder to join our number. 29% of UK babies are born to foreign born mothers, while Italy's birthrate is approximately zero.

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,220

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Mrs Stodge in far from a happy mood after the fortnightly shop at our local Sainsbury's, Not the prices so much - an occasional seethe but as I pay for the scoff, that's my problem.

    What irritated her was the 25 minutes it took from joining one of the checkout queues to actually paying.

    Just three tills open on a busy Sunday - it seems as with so many other places there is a desperate shortage of staff and those left cannot cope with the customer demand.

    It did occur to me one way to alleviate the problem was to suspend the Sunday Trading Laws for 6 months to allow businesses to adapt, adjust and recruit.

    It also occurred to me we could all cope with having a quieter day to each week - perhaps a winning message for a social conservative (or perhaps not).

    Where have all the workers gone?

    Back home to the EU?
    Some have, and others have decided to retire early.

    Anyone got a plan to deal with that?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    kle4 said:

    Does anyone else find it odd, that Tory leadership contest as commenced, without any actual rules yet being established to govern it?

    The fix is already in? Or just in process of being put in?

    I don't know why you'd assume a fix on the basis they've started their campaigning before knowing the timetable or entry criteria (it's not like other rules are going to be changed much).

    They know it is happening, and they know they will need the support of fellow MPs to get on the ballot, they can start that process before knowing anything else.
    Minimum number of nominators of more than nominally interesting methinks.

    Esp. to those with way more than minimal interests & stakes.
  • BlancheLivermoreBlancheLivermore Posts: 5,916
    edited July 2022
    I've thought for a while that CHB's vendetta against BigG was the weirdest that we had

    I've reconsidered

    Dickson's maniacal malice against long lamented poster SeanT is somewhat stranger
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,447
    IanB2 said:

    The race to replace Boris Johnson, update:

    Sunak: 30 MPs (+12)
    Mordaunt: 18 (+11)
    Hunt: 12 (+10)
    Truss: 12 (+6)
    Tugendhat: 12 (+6)
    Badenoch: 11 (+5)
    Zahawi: 10 (+7)
    Braverman: 9 (-)

    Chgs. w/ 24hrs ago

    You missed Javid out the list.

    Says a lot.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    algarkirk said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do any other party leaders do book reviews?

    Nicola Sturgeon on Instagram: “📚 Time for a mid-year book review. My top ten novels of 2022 so far 📚”

    Val McDermid, 1989
    Douglas Stuart, Young Mungo
    Jenni Fagan, Hex
    Ali Smith, Companion piece
    Emilie Pine, Ruth & Pen
    etc

    Perhaps they're too busy running their countries?
    Huh?
    What country is Keir Starmer running?!
    So she's even less busy than somebody who has nothing to do?
    Only people with “nothing to do” read books?

    That would certainly explain the number of complete ignorants in public life.
    Read my first ever P G Wodehouse earlier today. It was fairly entertaining, but more importantly I can now rest easy should I ever meet Hugh Laurie or Stephen Fry.

    “Mr. Wodehouse's idyllic world can never stale. He will continue to release future generations from captivity that may be more irksome than our own."

    Evelyn Waugh 1961. Exactly right.
    The question that hasn't been seriously addressed (lit crit being snobbish about very popular stuff) is whether in fact the Wodehouse oeuvre has a deeper message or sub-text. It's too good to be without meaning.
    I’ll give it a stab: the aristocracy are an economic burden on the rest of society… except for members of the Junior Ganymede Club.

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,434

    Scott_xP said:

    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    That's a big endorsement. It will be interesting to see how the voting pans out.
    Well that I was not expecting.

    I like what I've seen of her so far (obviously). I wouldn't mind at all if she won - still a bit of a mountain to climb, but Gove's endorsement is an important one.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,497
    maxh said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Scott_xP said:

    💰 £13bn! £39bn! £49bn!

    The huge tax pledges of Liz Truss, Jeremy Hunt and Sajid Javid are going to be expensive - with few explanations of how it’s going to be paid for. All part of their plans to win MPs.

    @FinancialTimes analysis with @ChrisGiles_ https://www.ft.com/content/11e6a49b-ec21-405d-8bf9-8644c4042d4e


    They are going to trash each other to try and get the gig. Labour will just watch and laugh

    First it was "Party before Country" as the Tories used Brexit to get the UKIP tanks off their lawn.

    Now it is just naked, personal ambition which comes ahead of Party interests with the country in a poor 3rd place. They will promise anything to become PM, even if the result of their promises is massively increasing the national debt or just trashing their Party's chances in the next election.
    Do we know the latest tory membership figures? It seems to me that an ageing, Brexit-obsessed cohort whose prime political memory is of Thatcher's time of what maybe 150k people will decide the next PM?
    Yes, but there is a sort of gap in the reasoning. Let's say 150,000 people get to choose the next PM. If this is terrible the reason is nothing whatever to do with those people. They are the only people not responsible for the problem.

    100% of the responsibility (which is not the same as blame) lies with the other 58,000,000 (or whatever number) who could be members but are not.

    So it is partly my fault for not joining the Tory party? It is not free to join and I disagree profoundly with their aims and policies.

    Am I also supposed to be a member of the LibDems and of Labour to make sure that I can shape their policies?

    When am I allowed to stop joining parties?
    Read it more carefully. I am not making a moral point, and said so clearly.

    But you do seem to be saying that everyone in the country should join every party so that policy and leaders is controlled better.

    I thought that was rationale behind General Elections rather than Party membership
    No seeming, no shoulds. Read what I said.

    You said: "100% of the responsibility (which is not the same as blame) lies with the other 58,000,000 (or whatever number) who could be members but are not."

    So according to you, we all have a responsibility to be Tory members. That is exactly what that says. What other interpretation is there?
    algakirk is saying that the rest of us are responsible for the outcome, not that we have a responsibility to change it. There's no judgement in the post as I read it, just a statement of fact. Though I'd argue we don't have 100% of the responsibility - the Conservative party could choose to ballot us even though we're not members. That would be fun.
    This is absolutely a correct reading of what I said.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838
    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    Cicero said:

    Leon said:

    Let me sketch again what I witnessed in Rose, Montenegro

    It’s a sizeable, very pretty seaside village, with one large resort hotel, several smaller hotels, a little marina, water sports, half a dozen bustling bars and restaurants. I imagine in winter it is deeply quiet but on a summer Sunday it was rammed with tourists, with people parked all the way up the hill behind

    The beaches were crowded but I wasn’t on a beach, I was 20 metres away in a big well-known seafood restaurant which was also rammed with lunchers and drinkers, mainly Montenegrin/Croatian/Serb tourists but I heard some Germans, French etc

    The table next to me was hosting a crowd of people in their late 20s. One by one they got up to head off, mostly to go swimming (I saw them). They were gone 40 minutes at least (by that time I had to go myself, so they might have been gone for much longer), they left behind everything, quite casually: phones, bags, purses, money, sunnies, everything (as the picture shows)

    I do not believe you would do this in a big pub in a crowded holiday village anywhere in the UK, nor anywhere I know in the rest of Western Europe, with the POSSIBLE exception of Switzerland. No one leaves behind their phone in a big bustling bar for 40 minutes (minimum). It is not a thing

    The Wikipedia article you posted says that there are only 10 people who live in Rose off season, (Montenegro is pretty small, of course) which may not challenge your thinking, but which does suggest that the village is mostly incomers at this time of year. Estonia is also pretty small (though more than twice the size of MNE) and similar levels of trust seem to apply here. Trust societies are so much more pleasent to live in.
    Eastern Europe is doing much better at retaining that high trust cohesiveness. And it’s not *just* smallness. It helps to be ethnically and culturally homogenous. If you know everyone around and they all know you, it is much harder to get away with crime. And if you are also probably related to the person you steal from or reliant on them in some way, that is another big disincentive for crime

    Big transient individualistic multicultural “western” societies have much more crime

    The one outlier is possibly Switzerland? Which has very low crime, yet is not smal, and is quite individualistic (but also officious) and multicultural and multiracial.
    Perhaps it is so rich no one needs to steal? or maybe it is Calvinism

    I can absolutely assure you that you would never leave your belongings unattended in a bar or cafe in Geneva - even though supremely Calvinistic.

    You have to be careful with your belongings in your pockets there yet alone on the table.

    All my female friends there would have to be very careful with their bags whilst out to ensure they were safely under the table even when we were sitting there.

    It’s the only place I’ve ever been mugged (attempted as my friend and I delivered a beating to the two muggers) and I had a friend there who had been mugged five times in three years living there.

    I would think that other larger cities in Switzerland are similar so it’s not the bucolic land of people respecting the law you might think.

    Fair enough!

    I have been to Switzerland a lot and always felt remarkably safe, but that's interesting to hear
    There's a massive rural / urban split in most countries. If you are in a small village in Switzerland, then you could probably leave your possessions on a table in a restaraunt for hours without worry. But at a crowded bar in Geneva, not a chance.
    It's exactly the same here: I'm 15 miles from Oxford in a (very) small rural town and would happily leave my phone/wallet on the table in the pub while I went to the toilet. When people lock their bikes up outside the pub they get laughed at.

    Last time I locked my bike outside the pub in Oxford, I came out half an hour later to find someone wheeling it up the road, bolt-cutters in the other arm.
    But you wouldn’t leave your phone on the table for FORTY MINUTES in a big busy pub, even in rural Oxon, would you?

    That’s what marks out my experience
    Having spent last night in Banbury, I would avoid busy pubs there period. The one I was staying in, with rooms, was hosting a private party for some middle aged people celebrating a wedding anniversary; the Birdie Song and Agadoo pumped out at maximum volume from the marquee behind the hotel was enough to send me out into the town in search of a quiet drink; Banbury, contrary to first impressions, on a Saturday night is host to large groups of younger people staggering about drunk and urinating in the street, with pubs that open to 2 am and lots of them pumping out party music. Who knew?

    I feel sorry for any foreign tourists who imagine they might be wandering the streets of a historic English town, taking in the atmosphere and stopping by a quiet bar or restaurant, as I was in similar sized places in Italy last month.
    Isn't that bog standard for Banbury-like towns anyway?
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. My apologies. I asked you a question this morning and then I buggered off before your reply. I didn't mean to ignore you.

    To reiterate I was commenting on the reports today of senior constitution experts and senior Conservatives who were very worried about Boris breaking the constitution apart. Gillian Shepherd relieved it survived. They were particularly concerned about him asking for a dissolution.

    I asked you whether you were concerned about this. You replied that we don't have a written constitution. I don't think I can let you get away with that. Written or not we do have a constitution and of all the people who post here I expect you to be the greatest defender of such. You post frequently such.

    So what do you think of these senior experts and Conservatives who were so worried about his behaviour. Surely they are your type of Conservative.

    As I posted we have a constitution based on crown in Parliament. Technically Boris was only the Queen’s chief minister, he had no power in government without the Queen's consent and no power to call a general election if the Queen disagreed.

    If he had asked for a general election it was still up to the Queen. Had she agreed that would have been within the constitution, had she disagreed and asked Parliament to confirm a snap general election that would also have been within the constitution
    "constitution" = whatever Tories make up on the spur of the moment. Usually drawn from '1066 and all that', sorry pardon me I mean 'Our Island Story'.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,044
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Mrs Stodge in far from a happy mood after the fortnightly shop at our local Sainsbury's, Not the prices so much - an occasional seethe but as I pay for the scoff, that's my problem.

    What irritated her was the 25 minutes it took from joining one of the checkout queues to actually paying.

    Just three tills open on a busy Sunday - it seems as with so many other places there is a desperate shortage of staff and those left cannot cope with the customer demand.

    It did occur to me one way to alleviate the problem was to suspend the Sunday Trading Laws for 6 months to allow businesses to adapt, adjust and recruit.

    It also occurred to me we could all cope with having a quieter day to each week - perhaps a winning message for a social conservative (or perhaps not).

    Where have all the workers gone?

    I haven't used the check out for years

    Mind you we do have a weekly delivery so the self check outs are quicker and easier
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    Jake Berry is a great endorsement for Tugendhat; likewise Gove for Badenoch.

    Amazing how well the “unknowns” (TT, KB, PM) are doing.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    edited July 2022
    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990

    You missed Javid out the list.

    Says a lot.

    I don’t have a fancy new video.

    So here’s one I made earlier… https://twitter.com/sajidjavid/status/1546226346539483136/video/1
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,044

    Jake Berry is a great endorsement for Tugendhat; likewise Gove for Badenoch.

    Amazing how well the “unknowns” (TT, KB, PM) are doing.

    I find that very refreshing
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990

    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.

    He is the continuity BoZo candidate
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,922
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. My apologies. I asked you a question this morning and then I buggered off before your reply. I didn't mean to ignore you.

    To reiterate I was commenting on the reports today of senior constitution experts and senior Conservatives who were very worried about Boris breaking the constitution apart. Gillian Shepherd relieved it survived. They were particularly concerned about him asking for a dissolution.

    I asked you whether you were concerned about this. You replied that we don't have a written constitution. I don't think I can let you get away with that. Written or not we do have a constitution and of all the people who post here I expect you to be the greatest defender of such. You post frequently such.

    So what do you think of these senior experts and Conservatives who were so worried about his behaviour. Surely they are your type of Conservative.

    As I posted we have a constitution based on crown in Parliament. Technically Boris was only the Queen’s chief minister, he had no power in government without the Queen's consent and no power to call a general election if the Queen disagreed.

    If he had asked for a general election it was still up to the Queen. Had she agreed that would have been within the constitution, had she disagreed and asked Parliament to confirm a snap general election that would also have been within the constitution
    Thanks for the reply @HYUFD

    OK but there is still my initial question which seems even more pertinent now: Why were constitutional experts and senior Tories so worried then that Boris has been destroying the constitution? Lord Peter Hennessy and Baroness Gillian Shephard are both highly respected and are both conservative with a big and little 'c' and they both disagree with you.

    Also and related surely the Queen should never be put into such a position. She does not do politics. As soon as she does you are on the slippery slope to republicanism surely which is not what you want.
    Of course the Monarch does politics to at least a minimal degree, as would even a ceremonial President. The Monarch is Head of State not the PM it is for the Monarch to decide when to call a general election and who to appoint as her PM who can command the confidence of Parliament.

    That has nothing whatsoever to do with any argument for a republic eg the Monarch vetoing bills passed by Parliament
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,706
    edited July 2022
    Maggie Throup for Zahawi who is now astonishingly in 4th place - though it's very close and numbers are all incredibly low compared to what will be needed.

    Sunak - 34
    Mordaunt - 21
    Tugendhat - 16
    Zahawi - 14
    Truss - 13
    Hunt - 13
    Badenoch - 13
    Patel -12
    Braverman - 10
    Javid - 10
    Shapps - 8

    It seems to me that it's going to boil down to who will be more transfer friendly - Mordaunt or Truss.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,447
    Scott_xP said:

    You missed Javid out the list.

    Says a lot.

    I don’t have a fancy new video.

    So here’s one I made earlier… https://twitter.com/sajidjavid/status/1546226346539483136/video/1
    Jesus.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    edited July 2022
    Scott_xP said:

    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.

    He is the continuity BoZo candidate
    Him and Shapps.

    The other fascinating thing is how factions can’t even decide on a single unifying candidate.

    Zahawi v Shapps
    Patel v Braverman
    Hunt v Tugendhat

    Etc
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,447

    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.

    I think he's well liked by many in the party, so has a few supporters accordingly.

    That's it.
  • Have we done this? Could be huge..

    Kate Ferguson
    @kateferguson4
    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1546219768411209729

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. My apologies. I asked you a question this morning and then I buggered off before your reply. I didn't mean to ignore you.

    To reiterate I was commenting on the reports today of senior constitution experts and senior Conservatives who were very worried about Boris breaking the constitution apart. Gillian Shepherd relieved it survived. They were particularly concerned about him asking for a dissolution.

    I asked you whether you were concerned about this. You replied that we don't have a written constitution. I don't think I can let you get away with that. Written or not we do have a constitution and of all the people who post here I expect you to be the greatest defender of such. You post frequently such.

    So what do you think of these senior experts and Conservatives who were so worried about his behaviour. Surely they are your type of Conservative.

    As I posted we have a constitution based on crown in Parliament. Technically Boris was only the Queen’s chief minister, he had no power in government without the Queen's consent and no power to call a general election if the Queen disagreed.

    If he had asked for a general election it was still up to the Queen. Had she agreed that would have been within the constitution, had she disagreed and asked Parliament to confirm a snap general election that would also have been within the constitution
    Thanks for the reply @HYUFD

    OK but there is still my initial question which seems even more pertinent now: Why were constitutional experts and senior Tories so worried then that Boris has been destroying the constitution? Lord Peter Hennessy and Baroness Gillian Shephard are both highly respected and are both conservative with a big and little 'c' and they both disagree with you.

    Also and related surely the Queen should never be put into such a position. She does not do politics. As soon as she does you are on the slippery slope to republicanism surely which is not what you want.
    Of course the Monarch does politics to at least a minimal degree, as would even a ceremonial President. The Monarch is Head of State not the PM it is for the Monarch to decide when to call a general election and who to appoint as her PM who can command the confidence of Parliament.

    That has nothing whatsoever to do with any argument for a republic eg the Monarch vetoing bills passed by Parliament
    YOu said the other week HMTQ doesn't interfere in politics, but she did in the referendum in 2014, and she and her son do in legislation affecting their interests.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    Gove backing Badenoch?!

    Didn’t see that coming.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874
    edited July 2022


    I haven't used the check out for years

    Mind you we do have a weekly delivery so the self check outs are quicker and easier

    Mrs Stodge had a couple of bad experiences with deliveries during lockdown and quite enjoys going round the supermarket to see what's available and looking at what's on discount.

    Looking at the other comments, I don't know what Sainsbury's pay their till-trained staff but I do agree this is not a good climate to be paying less than the competition.

    As for "not going to the supermarket", all I can evidence is a lot of people still do at least at the weekend. During the week, it is quieter and much more pleasant but unfortunately for many including families the weekend shop remains the only option.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    Tory donor Lord Cruddas backs @pritipatel for PM. I understand the Home Secretary is likely to decide tomorrow whether she will run for leader or not. https://twitter.com/peteratcmc/status/1546225095386988549
  • Have we done this? Could be huge..

    Kate Ferguson
    @kateferguson4
    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1546219768411209729

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    Gove has clearly lost it.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    ping said:

    Gove backing Badenoch?!

    Didn’t see that coming.

    Now has full house of level-uppers.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,289

    💥 NEW: Senior Tories want to rapidly thin out the field of leadership candidates

    One senior MP close to 1922 committee it was “likely” candidates must secure the support of at least 10% of the parliamentary party to get on to the ballot paper - 36 MPs

    https://twitter.com/SebastianEPayne/status/1546214174883303427

    Apologies if I have missed this while being a long way up a misty moody Norwegian fjord but has the timetable been set yet?

    Oldevatnet, Norway:
    image
    Superb. I really want to go now
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821

    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.

    It's all very taxing, isn't it?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,922
    edited July 2022
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    Foxy said:

    kjh said:

    MISTY said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    MISTY said:

    HYUFD said:

    Tom Tugendhat leaps to third place in Tory MPs endorsements behind Sunak and Mordaunt after Karen
    Bradley's backing

    https://twitter.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1546162976104878081?s=20&t=6s-mAMl327v6ChyfYsFZWA

    I think this is starting to shape up very, very badly for the conservatives.

    The members are going to get a choice of tweedle dum or tweedle dee from the left of the party. Sunak plus one.

    However a Sunday Times poll today had Sunak, Mordaunt and Tugendhat polling equal best in the redwall seats of the Tory leadership contenders in terms of net approval.

    Even though Starmer polls better than all the Tory contenders now in the redwall with Boris gone

    https://twitter.com/thom_brooks/status/1546148929229692930?s=20&t=6s-mAMl327v6ChyfYsFZWA
    Do you ever have a view independent from your choice of polls

    Half the point of this site is polls
    Surely that poll is essentially driven by recognition. Most voters can name very few politicos, much less what they stand for.

    Nobody knows what Mordaunt and Tugendhat stand for. Not even the Spectator. They tried to find Mordaunt's policies in vain through the vacuous bullsh8t of her launch.

    I made that point earlier today, HYUFD didn't accept it.
    She laid out her ideas in her recent book. Not everything I would agree with, but a coherent philosophy.

    https://www.londonreviewbookshop.co.uk/stock/greater-britain-after-the-storm-penny-mordaunt
    Sorry not the point I was referring to. My mistake for not making clear. I was referring to polls being driven by recognition. Actually as I have said as a LD she is my biggest fear as Tory leader.
    You are wrong on that.

    If you were correct Sunak followed by Hunt and Truss would be doing best on the net approval rating polls as the most well known candidates. Not Mordaunt and Tugendhat.

    Instead Hunt and Patel do worst on the net approval rating polls despite being amongst the best known candidates being a former Foreign Secretary and final round leadership contender and the current Home Secretary
    No I am not. You can't deduce that at all. You are making assumptions, which you shouldn't do. As I posted earlier today recognition can work both ways. So for example Boris compared to A N Other may get a good score because he is recognised or a bad score because people don't like him, whereas they don't know the other person. Or it can be a mix of both. The numbers can be anything so you can deduce nothing.

    When carrying out a statistical test for say light bulb longevity you only have the MOE and the probability that it will be within the MOE to worry about. So typically 95% sure it will be within 5% of the result.

    However as soon as you poll people you have other variables with regard to the sample you select and the question you ask. Both can completely bugger up a result. Hence polling companies do so much work on this, and still get it wrong.

    A question on popularity when some are significantly more well known than others is intrinsically flawed and you don't know in which direction the flaws are going to apply, so your assumption about the results above is worthless.

    It is fun, hence they are done, and maybe you can make a gut deduction from it, from what you perceive as commonsense. as you have done, but you must be aware it is mathematically useless.
    No it isn't at all as it is not a favourable or popularity poll which would be name recognition but a NET favourable poll ie comparing positive and negative ratings of each candidate which is relevant however many have heard of them in showing how actually popular they are.

  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507

    ydoethur said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Do any other party leaders do book reviews?

    Nicola Sturgeon on Instagram: “📚 Time for a mid-year book review. My top ten novels of 2022 so far 📚”

    Val McDermid, 1989
    Douglas Stuart, Young Mungo
    Jenni Fagan, Hex
    Ali Smith, Companion piece
    Emilie Pine, Ruth & Pen
    etc

    Perhaps they're too busy running their countries?
    Huh?
    What country is Keir Starmer running?!
    So she's even less busy than somebody who has nothing to do?
    Only people with “nothing to do” read books?

    That would certainly explain the number of complete ignorants in public life.
    I'm sure you read many books, Stuart.
    Not all of them illustrated.
    De Pfeffel got a very sympathetic treatment in Kenneth Grahame’s illustrated classic.
    As the rat, the toad, the weasel or the mole?
    Even you can work that one out. But I won’t badger you.

    The Washerwoman!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863
    Penny’s initials are PM; I only just realised. Silly me.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited July 2022
    maxh said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    Scott_xP said:

    💰 £13bn! £39bn! £49bn!

    The huge tax pledges of Liz Truss, Jeremy Hunt and Sajid Javid are going to be expensive - with few explanations of how it’s going to be paid for. All part of their plans to win MPs.

    @FinancialTimes analysis with @ChrisGiles_ https://www.ft.com/content/11e6a49b-ec21-405d-8bf9-8644c4042d4e


    They are going to trash each other to try and get the gig. Labour will just watch and laugh

    First it was "Party before Country" as the Tories used Brexit to get the UKIP tanks off their lawn.

    Now it is just naked, personal ambition which comes ahead of Party interests with the country in a poor 3rd place. They will promise anything to become PM, even if the result of their promises is massively increasing the national debt or just trashing their Party's chances in the next election.
    Do we know the latest tory membership figures? It seems to me that an ageing, Brexit-obsessed cohort whose prime political memory is of Thatcher's time of what maybe 150k people will decide the next PM?
    Yes, but there is a sort of gap in the reasoning. Let's say 150,000 people get to choose the next PM. If this is terrible the reason is nothing whatever to do with those people. They are the only people not responsible for the problem.

    100% of the responsibility (which is not the same as blame) lies with the other 58,000,000 (or whatever number) who could be members but are not.

    So it is partly my fault for not joining the Tory party? It is not free to join and I disagree profoundly with their aims and policies.

    Am I also supposed to be a member of the LibDems and of Labour to make sure that I can shape their policies?

    When am I allowed to stop joining parties?
    Read it more carefully. I am not making a moral point, and said so clearly.

    But you do seem to be saying that everyone in the country should join every party so that policy and leaders is controlled better.

    I thought that was rationale behind General Elections rather than Party membership
    No seeming, no shoulds. Read what I said.

    You said: "100% of the responsibility (which is not the same as blame) lies with the other 58,000,000 (or whatever number) who could be members but are not."

    So according to you, we all have a responsibility to be Tory members. That is exactly what that says. What other interpretation is there?
    algakirk is saying that the rest of us are responsible for the outcome, not that we have a responsibility to change it. There's no judgement in the post as I read it, just a statement of fact. Though I'd argue we don't have 100% of the responsibility - the Conservative party could choose to ballot us even though we're not members. That would be fun.
    I disagree. If we have a responsibility for something then that implies that we have a responsibility to act upon it to ensure the correct result or outcome.

    Conversely, if we have no responsibility for the outcome of something then we are not responsible for it in any way at all.

    Responsibility implies the need for action
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,913
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Mrs Stodge in far from a happy mood after the fortnightly shop at our local Sainsbury's, Not the prices so much - an occasional seethe but as I pay for the scoff, that's my problem.

    What irritated her was the 25 minutes it took from joining one of the checkout queues to actually paying.

    Just three tills open on a busy Sunday - it seems as with so many other places there is a desperate shortage of staff and those left cannot cope with the customer demand.

    It did occur to me one way to alleviate the problem was to suspend the Sunday Trading Laws for 6 months to allow businesses to adapt, adjust and recruit.

    It also occurred to me we could all cope with having a quieter day to each week - perhaps a winning message for a social conservative (or perhaps not).

    Where have all the workers gone?

    Did you explain to Mrs Stodge that unfortunately when you voted for Brexit you hadn't thought that when all the bright young things that came to England to learn the language and have fun wouldn't be allowed to come anymore so we'd have a hollowed out workforce so she'd have to wait 25 minutes. If you ever take her out for a meal she'll probably find it even worse
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,447
    IanB2 said:

    Penny’s initials are PM; I only just realised. Silly me.

    Silly you.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    IanB2 said:

    Penny’s initials are PM; I only just realised. Silly me.

    Hence PM4PM
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,652

    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.

    Considering his background in polling, he doesn't seem to take a hint.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 3,379
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. My apologies. I asked you a question this morning and then I buggered off before your reply. I didn't mean to ignore you.

    To reiterate I was commenting on the reports today of senior constitution experts and senior Conservatives who were very worried about Boris breaking the constitution apart. Gillian Shepherd relieved it survived. They were particularly concerned about him asking for a dissolution.

    I asked you whether you were concerned about this. You replied that we don't have a written constitution. I don't think I can let you get away with that. Written or not we do have a constitution and of all the people who post here I expect you to be the greatest defender of such. You post frequently such.

    So what do you think of these senior experts and Conservatives who were so worried about his behaviour. Surely they are your type of Conservative.

    As I posted we have a constitution based on crown in Parliament. Technically Boris was only the Queen’s chief minister, he had no power in government without the Queen's consent and no power to call a general election if the Queen disagreed.

    If he had asked for a general election it was still up to the Queen. Had she agreed that would have been within the constitution, had she disagreed and asked Parliament to confirm a snap general election that would also have been within the constitution
    Thanks for the reply @HYUFD

    OK but there is still my initial question which seems even more pertinent now: Why were constitutional experts and senior Tories so worried then that Boris has been destroying the constitution? Lord Peter Hennessy and Baroness Gillian Shephard are both highly respected and are both conservative with a big and little 'c' and they both disagree with you.

    Also and related surely the Queen should never be put into such a position. She does not do politics. As soon as she does you are on the slippery slope to republicanism surely which is not what you want.
    Of course the Monarch does politics to at least a minimal degree, as would even a ceremonial President. The Monarch is Head of State not the PM it is for the Monarch to decide when to call a general election and who to appoint as her PM who can command the confidence of Parliament.

    That has nothing whatsoever to do with any argument for a republic eg the Monarch vetoing bills passed by Parliament
    YOu said the other week HMTQ doesn't interfere in politics, but she did in the referendum in 2014, and she and her son do in legislation affecting their interests.
    Telling people to think before voting is common sense advice. It isn't interfering in politics.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,922
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. My apologies. I asked you a question this morning and then I buggered off before your reply. I didn't mean to ignore you.

    To reiterate I was commenting on the reports today of senior constitution experts and senior Conservatives who were very worried about Boris breaking the constitution apart. Gillian Shepherd relieved it survived. They were particularly concerned about him asking for a dissolution.

    I asked you whether you were concerned about this. You replied that we don't have a written constitution. I don't think I can let you get away with that. Written or not we do have a constitution and of all the people who post here I expect you to be the greatest defender of such. You post frequently such.

    So what do you think of these senior experts and Conservatives who were so worried about his behaviour. Surely they are your type of Conservative.

    As I posted we have a constitution based on crown in Parliament. Technically Boris was only the Queen’s chief minister, he had no power in government without the Queen's consent and no power to call a general election if the Queen disagreed.

    If he had asked for a general election it was still up to the Queen. Had she agreed that would have been within the constitution, had she disagreed and asked Parliament to confirm a snap general election that would also have been within the constitution
    Thanks for the reply @HYUFD

    OK but there is still my initial question which seems even more pertinent now: Why were constitutional experts and senior Tories so worried then that Boris has been destroying the constitution? Lord Peter Hennessy and Baroness Gillian Shephard are both highly respected and are both conservative with a big and little 'c' and they both disagree with you.

    Also and related surely the Queen should never be put into such a position. She does not do politics. As soon as she does you are on the slippery slope to republicanism surely which is not what you want.
    Of course the Monarch does politics to at least a minimal degree, as would even a ceremonial President. The Monarch is Head of State not the PM it is for the Monarch to decide when to call a general election and who to appoint as her PM who can command the confidence of Parliament.

    That has nothing whatsoever to do with any argument for a republic eg the Monarch vetoing bills passed by Parliament
    YOu said the other week HMTQ doesn't interfere in politics, but she did in the referendum in 2014, and she and her son do in legislation affecting their interests.
    No she didn't, she didn't even tell people to vote No.

    The fact far left Scottish Nationalist Republicans with an anti monarchy agenda like you think she did is irrelevant.

    The Monarch is perfectly entitled to request amendments affecting her personal property, it is up to Parliament to agree
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838
    Applicant said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. My apologies. I asked you a question this morning and then I buggered off before your reply. I didn't mean to ignore you.

    To reiterate I was commenting on the reports today of senior constitution experts and senior Conservatives who were very worried about Boris breaking the constitution apart. Gillian Shepherd relieved it survived. They were particularly concerned about him asking for a dissolution.

    I asked you whether you were concerned about this. You replied that we don't have a written constitution. I don't think I can let you get away with that. Written or not we do have a constitution and of all the people who post here I expect you to be the greatest defender of such. You post frequently such.

    So what do you think of these senior experts and Conservatives who were so worried about his behaviour. Surely they are your type of Conservative.

    As I posted we have a constitution based on crown in Parliament. Technically Boris was only the Queen’s chief minister, he had no power in government without the Queen's consent and no power to call a general election if the Queen disagreed.

    If he had asked for a general election it was still up to the Queen. Had she agreed that would have been within the constitution, had she disagreed and asked Parliament to confirm a snap general election that would also have been within the constitution
    Thanks for the reply @HYUFD

    OK but there is still my initial question which seems even more pertinent now: Why were constitutional experts and senior Tories so worried then that Boris has been destroying the constitution? Lord Peter Hennessy and Baroness Gillian Shephard are both highly respected and are both conservative with a big and little 'c' and they both disagree with you.

    Also and related surely the Queen should never be put into such a position. She does not do politics. As soon as she does you are on the slippery slope to republicanism surely which is not what you want.
    Of course the Monarch does politics to at least a minimal degree, as would even a ceremonial President. The Monarch is Head of State not the PM it is for the Monarch to decide when to call a general election and who to appoint as her PM who can command the confidence of Parliament.

    That has nothing whatsoever to do with any argument for a republic eg the Monarch vetoing bills passed by Parliament
    YOu said the other week HMTQ doesn't interfere in politics, but she did in the referendum in 2014, and she and her son do in legislation affecting their interests.
    Telling people to think before voting is common sense advice. It isn't interfering in politics.
    The way it was - as the PAlace knew - presented in the UNionist media? Come off it.
  • Have we done this? Could be huge..

    Kate Ferguson
    @kateferguson4
    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1546219768411209729

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    Gove has clearly lost it.
    I expect this might mean that Murdoch is keen on Kemi
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,267
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Mrs Stodge in far from a happy mood after the fortnightly shop at our local Sainsbury's, Not the prices so much - an occasional seethe but as I pay for the scoff, that's my problem.

    What irritated her was the 25 minutes it took from joining one of the checkout queues to actually paying.

    Just three tills open on a busy Sunday - it seems as with so many other places there is a desperate shortage of staff and those left cannot cope with the customer demand.

    It did occur to me one way to alleviate the problem was to suspend the Sunday Trading Laws for 6 months to allow businesses to adapt, adjust and recruit.

    It also occurred to me we could all cope with having a quieter day to each week - perhaps a winning message for a social conservative (or perhaps not).

    Where have all the workers gone?

    Quite a few have retired. Others are not interested in shit jobs that that pay, minimum wage. Or use piece work pay to get round minimum wages. The phenomenon is being seen round the developed world.

    The future of food shopping, by the way, is Amazon Fresh - one person managing a medium sized store, with automated tech taking an inventory of what you are packing in tote shopping back.

  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    England 1.7
    Draw 4.2
    Norway 5.9

    Group match
    Tomorrow
    Brighton & Hove Community Stadium

    Form:
    E WWWWW
    N WWWWW
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,662

    IanB2 said:

    Penny’s initials are PM; I only just realised. Silly me.

    Hence PM4PM
    PMT 4PM surely

    As in Penny Mordant Tory
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    edited July 2022
    Excellent

    I’d previously laid Raab for next PM @ absurdly low odds. Finally managed to re-back @ >500/1 to release my stake money.

    I got money in my BF bank again. Whose odds are most wrong, PB’ers? Where is the value?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    MikeL said:

    Maggie Throup for Zahawi who is now astonishingly in 4th place - though it's very close and numbers are all incredibly low compared to what will be needed.

    Sunak - 34
    Mordaunt - 21
    Tugendhat - 16
    Zahawi - 14
    Truss - 13
    Hunt - 13
    Badenoch - 13
    Patel -12
    Braverman - 10
    Javid - 10
    Shapps - 8

    It seems to me that it's going to boil down to who will be more transfer friendly - Mordaunt or Truss.

    Mordaunt

    (Truss is a looney.)
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
     

    IanB2 said:

    Penny’s initials are PM; I only just realised. Silly me.

    Hence PM4PM
    PMT 4PM surely

    As in Penny Mordant Tory
    PMMP4PM

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838
    edited July 2022
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    @hyufd. My apologies. I asked you a question this morning and then I buggered off before your reply. I didn't mean to ignore you.

    To reiterate I was commenting on the reports today of senior constitution experts and senior Conservatives who were very worried about Boris breaking the constitution apart. Gillian Shepherd relieved it survived. They were particularly concerned about him asking for a dissolution.

    I asked you whether you were concerned about this. You replied that we don't have a written constitution. I don't think I can let you get away with that. Written or not we do have a constitution and of all the people who post here I expect you to be the greatest defender of such. You post frequently such.

    So what do you think of these senior experts and Conservatives who were so worried about his behaviour. Surely they are your type of Conservative.

    As I posted we have a constitution based on crown in Parliament. Technically Boris was only the Queen’s chief minister, he had no power in government without the Queen's consent and no power to call a general election if the Queen disagreed.

    If he had asked for a general election it was still up to the Queen. Had she agreed that would have been within the constitution, had she disagreed and asked Parliament to confirm a snap general election that would also have been within the constitution
    Thanks for the reply @HYUFD

    OK but there is still my initial question which seems even more pertinent now: Why were constitutional experts and senior Tories so worried then that Boris has been destroying the constitution? Lord Peter Hennessy and Baroness Gillian Shephard are both highly respected and are both conservative with a big and little 'c' and they both disagree with you.

    Also and related surely the Queen should never be put into such a position. She does not do politics. As soon as she does you are on the slippery slope to republicanism surely which is not what you want.
    Of course the Monarch does politics to at least a minimal degree, as would even a ceremonial President. The Monarch is Head of State not the PM it is for the Monarch to decide when to call a general election and who to appoint as her PM who can command the confidence of Parliament.

    That has nothing whatsoever to do with any argument for a republic eg the Monarch vetoing bills passed by Parliament
    YOu said the other week HMTQ doesn't interfere in politics, but she did in the referendum in 2014, and she and her son do in legislation affecting their interests.
    No she didn't, she didn't even tell people to vote No.

    The fact far left Scottish Nationalist Republicans with an anti monarchy agenda like you think she did is irrelevant.

    The Monarch is perfectly entitled to request amendments affecting her personal property, it is up to Parliament to agree
    But she's in a different position from the rest of us. She can refuse. Think about that. As for republicanism, I'm actrually *complaining* about the sort of behaviour which gives royalism a bad name. And I'm a centrist dad, I can't help it if you are so far to the right of Genghis Khan you are falling off the graph paper.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    ping said:

    Excellent

    I’d previously laid Raab for next PM @ very low odds. Finally managed to re-back @ >500/1 to release my stake money.

    I got money in my BF bank again. Whose odds are most wrong, PB’ers? Where is the value?

    Nice play Sir!
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,434

    ping said:

    Gove backing Badenoch?!

    Didn’t see that coming.

    Now has full house of level-uppers.
    I think JRM supports her too - he spoke of 'no baggage' earlier, and judging from another MP's endorsement Tweet, 'no baggage' is a Kemi campaign theme. It's a pre-attack defence to make up for 'lack of experience'.
  • Has to be Penny, the rest are lost causes
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,557
    ping said:

    Gove backing Badenoch?!

    Didn’t see that coming.

    Really excellent news. Well done Gove.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402
    edited July 2022
    IF they put the threshold at 36 MP's, then who doesn't make the starting line?
    Javid, Shapps, Braverman. Possibly one or two others?
    I don't like this. A high threshold on the first ballot is much fairer.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    Has to be Penny, the rest are lost causes

    I tend to agree.

    (I was a Wallace man until yesterday.)
  • MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    I was at a media lunch last week where the guest speaker was ITV's Deputy Political Editor. She said TT impressed the NRG MPs by stepping into BJ's place at short notice and even more so by giving a great speech. Many of those present were apparently very like ' wow'.

    Still don't rate his chances but...
    Scott_xP said:

    Jake Berry, chairman of the influential NRG, comes out for Tom Tugendhat in the Tory leadership contest. @JakeBerry says @TomTugendhat was the only candidate turned up to the group’s conference in Doncaster and 'see the potential in what we had to say'
    https://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/1638367/Tom-Tugendhat-conservative-party-next-prime-minister

  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507

    Scott_xP said:

    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.

    He is the continuity BoZo candidate
    Him and Shapps.

    The other fascinating thing is how factions can’t even decide on a single unifying candidate.

    Zahawi v Shapps
    Patel v Braverman
    Hunt v Tugendhat

    Etc
    They can’t all win into member vote Its how the factions eventually line up as candidates eliminated in a Sunak v stop Sunak (with Mordant or Truss).

    Fair play for outsiders in the race, for the new leader will feel obliged to offer them a favourable cabinet position now, as the party unites to turn its firepower on crushing Labour.

    My Dad is sticking with Rishi, my mum is sticking with Truss. My Dad seems certain Truss tops the first ballot, and is not too happy about her winning the whole thing.

    I suppose she has been fizzing with Liz for a long time, so would be surprise the Johnson loyalist Foreign Secretary bombs so quickly. Worse, as the little factions get mopped up, how do they break between Rishi, Truss and Mourdant?

    Hope this helps.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874


    Quite a few have retired. Others are not interested in shit jobs that that pay, minimum wage. Or use piece work pay to get round minimum wages. The phenomenon is being seen round the developed world.

    The future of food shopping, by the way, is Amazon Fresh - one person managing a medium sized store, with automated tech taking an inventory of what you are packing in tote shopping back.

    Well, In East Ham High Street there are plenty of small to medium sized stores which look like they have only one person - not much sign of automated tech in all honesty.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    MrEd said:

    I was at a media lunch last week where the guest speaker was ITV's Deputy Political Editor. She said TT impressed the NRG MPs by stepping into BJ's place at short notice and even more so by giving a great speech. Many of those present were apparently very like ' wow'.

    Still don't rate his chances but...

    Skipping the NRG for a photo-op for Zelensky looked stupid for Johnson at the time. It looks dramatically more so now.
    https://twitter.com/jamesrbuk/status/1546228243916881923
    https://twitter.com/sam_lister_/status/1546223542685110273
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    MikeL said:

    Maggie Throup for Zahawi who is now astonishingly in 4th place - though it's very close and numbers are all incredibly low compared to what will be needed.

    Sunak - 34
    Mordaunt - 21
    Tugendhat - 16
    Zahawi - 14
    Truss - 13
    Hunt - 13
    Badenoch - 13
    Patel -12
    Braverman - 10
    Javid - 10
    Shapps - 8

    It seems to me that it's going to boil down to who will be more transfer friendly - Mordaunt or Truss.

    What happens if the 1922 set a ballot threshold that only one candidate reaches?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,913

    Have we done this? Could be huge..

    Kate Ferguson
    @kateferguson4
    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1546219768411209729

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    He wants to be Prince Regent
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146

    We know enough already. When even Jeremy Hunt and Tom Tugendhat - supposed to be the sane wing of the party - feel they have to continue with the looniest Boris policies such as the NI Protocol Bill and Rwanda, it's clear that the party isn't yet on speaking terms with reality. Labour can safely sit back and enjoy the spectacle.

    And not just Labour…
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507

    We know enough already. When even Jeremy Hunt and Tom Tugendhat - supposed to be the sane wing of the party - feel they have to continue with the looniest Boris policies such as the NI Protocol Bill and Rwanda, it's clear that the party isn't yet on speaking terms with reality. Labour can safely sit back and enjoy the spectacle.

    I back the NI protocol revisit, it’s not entirely bonkers. But has hunt and Tom really backed the Rwanda madness?

    Rwanda is a right of the party stitch up in this situation really, because if in the contest you say you don’t, you are instantly challenged then what?

    Politics is about managing delicate situations, where it’s better to be on side of a simple argument than a complicated one.

    What I would say to you Richard is don’t take it at face value? Both you and I would say what was needed to get the crown, and then retire the stupid policies inherited?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664

    Scott_xP said:

    Zahawi’s support mystifies me.
    Unless it is some kind of crypto-Boris gambit.

    He is the continuity BoZo candidate
    Him and Shapps.

    The other fascinating thing is how factions can’t even decide on a single unifying candidate.

    Zahawi v Shapps
    Patel v Braverman
    Hunt v Tugendhat

    Etc
    They can’t all win into member vote Its how the factions eventually line up as candidates eliminated in a Sunak v stop Sunak (with Mordant or Truss).

    Fair play for outsiders in the race, for the new leader will feel obliged to offer them a favourable cabinet position now, as the party unites to turn its firepower on crushing Labour.

    My Dad is sticking with Rishi, my mum is sticking with Truss. My Dad seems certain Truss tops the first ballot, and is not too happy about her winning the whole thing.

    I suppose she has been fizzing with Liz for a long time, so would be surprise the Johnson loyalist Foreign Secretary bombs so quickly. Worse, as the little factions get mopped up, how do they break between Rishi, Truss and Mourdant?

    Hope this helps.
    Lol for your last sentence!
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,044

    We know enough already. When even Jeremy Hunt and Tom Tugendhat - supposed to be the sane wing of the party - feel they have to continue with the looniest Boris policies such as the NI Protocol Bill and Rwanda, it's clear that the party isn't yet on speaking terms with reality. Labour can safely sit back and enjoy the spectacle.

    I back the NI protocol revisit, it’s not entirely bonkers. But has hunt and Tom really backed the Rwanda madness?

    Rwanda is a right of the party stitch up in this situation really, because if in the contest you say you don’t, you are instantly challenged then what?

    Politics is about managing delicate situations, where it’s better to be on side of a simple argument than a complicated one.

    What I would say to you Richard is don’t take it at face value? Both you and I would say what was needed to get the crown, and then retire the stupid policies inherited?
    Hunt backed Rwanda policy live on BBC this morning
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,719

    We know enough already. When even Jeremy Hunt and Tom Tugendhat - supposed to be the sane wing of the party - feel they have to continue with the looniest Boris policies such as the NI Protocol Bill and Rwanda, it's clear that the party isn't yet on speaking terms with reality. Labour can safely sit back and enjoy the spectacle.

    I back the NI protocol revisit, it’s not entirely bonkers. But has hunt and Tom really backed the Rwanda madness?

    Rwanda is a right of the party stitch up in this situation really, because if in the contest you say you don’t, you are instantly challenged then what?

    Politics is about managing delicate situations, where it’s better to be on side of a simple argument than a complicated one.

    What I would say to you Richard is don’t take it at face value? Both you and I would say what was needed to get the crown, and then retire the stupid policies inherited?
    Hunt backed Rwanda policy live on BBC this morning
    Like most of them, what every they say will be ditched the minute they win and start to think about GE 2024/5
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,507

    MikeL said:

    Maggie Throup for Zahawi who is now astonishingly in 4th place - though it's very close and numbers are all incredibly low compared to what will be needed.

    Sunak - 34
    Mordaunt - 21
    Tugendhat - 16
    Zahawi - 14
    Truss - 13
    Hunt - 13
    Badenoch - 13
    Patel -12
    Braverman - 10
    Javid - 10
    Shapps - 8

    It seems to me that it's going to boil down to who will be more transfer friendly - Mordaunt or Truss.

    Mordaunt

    (Truss is a looney.)
    If only you were the electorate in this Dixo and not the MPs piling in behind Badenoch Braverman and Patel and then 100,000 blukip like my mum.

    Got to go now, we are at a party and someone else wants to use the loo.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,799
    Andy_JS said:

    ping said:

    Gove backing Badenoch?!

    Didn’t see that coming.

    Really excellent news. Well done Gove.
    Spent the day discussing cabbages and Kings with a friend. He surprised me by his enthusiasm for Badenoch.
    His least favoured candidate Rishi, whom he feels 'hates SMEs'.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    For @Scott_xP

    Professor John Curtice says Scottish independence won't be hurt by resignation of Boris Johnson

    THE resignation of Boris Johnson will not impact on support for independence as his Brexit legacy will not disappear with him, Scotland’s leading pollster has said.

    As the Prime Minister who was dubbed the “best recruiting sergeant” for independence, questions have been raised over whether Johnson’s departure will make a difference to the campaign to leave the UK.

    (The National; €)
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,719
    Roger said:

    Have we done this? Could be huge..

    Kate Ferguson
    @kateferguson4
    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1546219768411209729

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    He wants to be Prince Regent
    LOL
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990

    For @Scott_xP

    Professor John Curtice says Scottish independence won't be hurt by resignation of Boris Johnson

    Just a year and a half between these stories, both in @ScotNational, and Prof Curtice is starting to look a tad silly … https://twitter.com/Fyrishsunset/status/1546150617508417536/photo/1
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,922

    For @Scott_xP

    Professor John Curtice says Scottish independence won't be hurt by resignation of Boris Johnson

    THE resignation of Boris Johnson will not impact on support for independence as his Brexit legacy will not disappear with him, Scotland’s leading pollster has said.

    As the Prime Minister who was dubbed the “best recruiting sergeant” for independence, questions have been raised over whether Johnson’s departure will make a difference to the campaign to leave the UK.

    (The National; €)

    It won't affect the UK government's refusal of an official indyref2 either!!
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,828
    Michael Gove and Neil O'Brien supporting Badenoch. Didn't see that coming. That's impressive I have to say.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,388
    ping said:

    Gove backing Badenoch?!

    Didn’t see that coming.

    In light of this, is there a candidate left who hasn't been backed by at least one certifiable nutter?
  • northern_monkeynorthern_monkey Posts: 1,639
    Scott_xP said:

    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    Jesus Christ, Gove’s getting some good shit. He’s off his tits.

    I know Badenoch is unlikely to get through to the membership, but I’m worried she will by some fluke, and if she does the batshit crazy membership might just give it to her.

    On a positive note, it would be great to see a black woman as PM.

    That’s the only positive I can see. Well, maybe the other one would be to make the Tories unelectable. Nothing to do with her gender, or colour. Entirely to do with the fact that she’s absolutely fucking mental.

    She’s the Tory id personified, right there before our eyes. Reduce the state to its bare essentials? I wonder what she sees as essential and what can be happily sacrificed as non-essential. You can guess, can’t you?

    Johnson’s done his job for the Tories. The conventional wisdom is that he has used the party simply to achieve power. Perhaps with time we’ll come to think that it was the party that has used Johnson. An unconventional politician who appealed to Leavers across the traditional spectrum and got us out of the EU. Jettisoned when his magic started to fade along,
    perhaps, with any pretence of levelling up; the party can bin all the Brexit ‘benefits’ the Red Wall seem to think is their due, that Johnson is the hapless face of, and shamelessly return to cutting and slashing and reducing the services that mean so much to the Red Wallers.

    Tragic, really, and completely amoral. But, hey, Tories gonna Tory.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    Scott_xP said:

    For @Scott_xP

    Professor John Curtice says Scottish independence won't be hurt by resignation of Boris Johnson

    Just a year and a half between these stories, both in @ScotNational, and Prof Curtice is starting to look a tad silly … https://twitter.com/Fyrishsunset/status/1546150617508417536/photo/1
    Killer point. You win.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,913

    We know enough already. When even Jeremy Hunt and Tom Tugendhat - supposed to be the sane wing of the party - feel they have to continue with the looniest Boris policies such as the NI Protocol Bill and Rwanda, it's clear that the party isn't yet on speaking terms with reality. Labour can safely sit back and enjoy the spectacle.

    They're laughing all the way to the booth.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,388

    Have we done this? Could be huge..

    Kate Ferguson
    @kateferguson4
    TOP EXCL in today's Paper
    Tory big beast (and king maker?) @michaelgove BACKS @KemiBadenoch to be the next Tory leader and PM.

    Writing for @TheSun he says Kemi has the "right stuff" to lead the UK

    https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1546219768411209729

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19155009/gove-backs-badenoch-tory-leadership/

    Gove has clearly lost it.
    I expect this might mean that Murdoch is keen on Kemi
    Well, I know Jerry Hall is getting shot of him, but I didn't realise he'd set his sights on a younger one already...
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402
    Truss declares says BBC.
    Ten.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    [snip!]
    What I would say to you Richard is don’t take it at face value? Both you and I would say what was needed to get the crown, and then retire the stupid policies inherited?

    The end justifies the means? Promise one thing and then do something else?

    You think that this is acceptable behaviour?

    Perhaps you should be PM...
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028
    I don’t know enough about Badenoch but she seems to be gaining momentum

    Is she any good?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    🚨EXCLUSIVE🚨

    THREE Tory leadership hopefuls reveal policy plans in @Telegraph

    * Liz Truss goes public with bid, vowing “day one” tax cuts

    * Zahawi signals cuts to corp tax, income tax, biz rates

    * Morduant: *halve* fuel VAT, raise i-tax thresholds
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/10/liz-truss-launches-leadership-bid-tax-cut-challenge-rishi-sunak/
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    The Conservative party are obviously suffering, following the departure of its 'moderate' wing.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,298
    Everyone now has at least 10 supporters, except Shapps.

    Since he effectively launched this morning, I wonder if it’s already over for the “spreadsheet guy”.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    NEW: Liz Truss has launched her bid to become the next Prime Minister with a pledge to cut taxes "from day one".

    Full story in the @Telegraph

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/10/liz-truss-launches-leadership-bid-tax-cut-challenge-rishi-sunak/
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    HYUFD said:

    For @Scott_xP

    Professor John Curtice says Scottish independence won't be hurt by resignation of Boris Johnson

    THE resignation of Boris Johnson will not impact on support for independence as his Brexit legacy will not disappear with him, Scotland’s leading pollster has said.

    As the Prime Minister who was dubbed the “best recruiting sergeant” for independence, questions have been raised over whether Johnson’s departure will make a difference to the campaign to leave the UK.

    (The National; €)

    It won't affect the UK government's refusal of an official indyref2 either!!
    You’d still be saying that if support for Scottish independence was 60%+, which seems to be the objective of current Conservative policy.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838
    HYUFD said:

    For @Scott_xP

    Professor John Curtice says Scottish independence won't be hurt by resignation of Boris Johnson

    THE resignation of Boris Johnson will not impact on support for independence as his Brexit legacy will not disappear with him, Scotland’s leading pollster has said.

    As the Prime Minister who was dubbed the “best recruiting sergeant” for independence, questions have been raised over whether Johnson’s departure will make a difference to the campaign to leave the UK.

    (The National; €)

    It won't affect the UK government's refusal of an official indyref2 either!!
    Away and polish your granny-bashing baseball bat.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,388
    Scott_xP said:

    🚨EXCLUSIVE🚨

    THREE Tory leadership hopefuls reveal policy plans in @Telegraph

    * Liz Truss goes public with bid, vowing “day one” tax cuts

    * Zahawi signals cuts to corp tax, income tax, biz rates

    * Morduant: *halve* fuel VAT, raise i-tax thresholds
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/10/liz-truss-launches-leadership-bid-tax-cut-challenge-rishi-sunak/

    In order to cut taxes, they will have to squeeze public sector pay even harder.

    At a time when discontent is rife and numerous vacancies are unfilled.

    This could be a very, very nasty autumn.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited July 2022

    The next round of commenting is now open

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,719
    Liz Truss has launched her Tory leadership bid by promising to cut tax from “day one” in office, declaring it is time to get back to Conservative values.

    Telegraph blog
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,388

    HYUFD said:

    For @Scott_xP

    Professor John Curtice says Scottish independence won't be hurt by resignation of Boris Johnson

    THE resignation of Boris Johnson will not impact on support for independence as his Brexit legacy will not disappear with him, Scotland’s leading pollster has said.

    As the Prime Minister who was dubbed the “best recruiting sergeant” for independence, questions have been raised over whether Johnson’s departure will make a difference to the campaign to leave the UK.

    (The National; €)

    It won't affect the UK government's refusal of an official indyref2 either!!
    You’d still be saying that if support for Scottish independence was 60%+, which seems to be the objective of current Conservative policy.
    Don't be ridiculous, Stuart. Surely even you don't think there's an objective to current Conservative policy?
This discussion has been closed.