There is, of course, the possibility that Sunak, Penny and Boris knock each other out in a weekend of bloodletting, handing the crown to Hunt or Wallace on Monday.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
It is a recipe for making a bad situation worse. What does it achieve? Unless there is a secret subclause which says members get it right or get ignored.
There is, of course, the possibility that Sunak, Penny and Boris knock each other out in a weekend of bloodletting, handing the crown to Hunt or Wallace on Monday.
No. Sunak definitely has the noms in all scenarios.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
There is, of course, the possibility that Sunak, Penny and Boris knock each other out in a weekend of bloodletting, handing the crown to Hunt or Wallace on Monday.
I take it if nobody gets the required 100 nominations, then they decide a candidate among themselves on Monday and have them acclaimed like in the good ol' days of the Magic Circle?
That said, Sunak has one peerless advantage. He already has a hundred backers from the first round of the last election, and it's hard to see them switching away now.
From a Labour point of view. I don't think we really care whether it's Sunak, Mordaunt or Johnson - much of a muchness, even though they're all quite different characters. Each of the three have strengths and weaknesses, and all are beatable. If you could be so good as to go for Braverman or JRM, though, I'd be even more confident.
No, Al.
You must apply the Richie Benaud test to this. Ask yourself what the opposing Captain would most like you to do, and do the opposite.
Starmer would least like Sunak and/or Mordaunt. Boris would bring a broad grin to his face.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
If Sunak has any sense he should be heavily lobbying the Mail.
They all read The Mail. They believe what they read in The Mail.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
It’s still a bit confusing. It says indicative vote of needed . Who decides if it’s needed ?
So, once her successor is elected, will Truss stay on in the Commons? A by-election to come in South West Norfolk?
3 former PMs in the Commons? Fun stuff.
Her career is finished, her legacy that of a punchline, she might as well stick out the parliamentary term and pick up the paycheck - she won't be getting the big bucks May and Boris get on the speaking circuit.
It is quite sad for her because her fate is out of her control. To me she symbolises everything that is wrong: the flaws of Camerons A list, the absurdity in thinking that 'Thatcherism' is the answer to everything, the vacuity of the Instagram era, the deterioration of order and stability in Whitehall, the acquiescence of people who should know better with Boris Johnson and Brexit, and the fact that political parties have largely become the refuge of the mentally deranged.
The media are trying to boost Johnson. It might be the best route to a General Election.
There are many Conservatives who would sooner an election than having him back.
Much as I would love it, I cannot see any route whatever to an early GE.
It doesn't matter which pollster you take, just key in the numbers to Election Calculus and you will see why the Tories cannot allow it under any circumstances.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
It’s still a bit confusing. It says indicative vote of needed . Who decides if it’s needed ?
It's needed if there are still two candidates left.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
It’s still a bit confusing. It says indicative vote of needed . Who decides if it’s needed ?
Its needed if there were 3 in the first vote, if only 2 in the first it is itself the indicative vote
From a Labour point of view. I don't think we really care whether it's Sunak, Mordaunt or Johnson - much of a muchness, even though they're all quite different characters. Each of the three have strengths and weaknesses, and all are beatable. If you could be so good as to go for Braverman or JRM, though, I'd be even more confident.
No, Al.
You must apply the Richie Benaud test to this. Ask yourself what the opposing Captain would most like you to do, and do the opposite.
Starmer would least like Sunak and/or Mordaunt. Boris would bring a broad grin to his face.
The others are too ridiculous to contemplate.
Don't agree. Boris would win back many of the white male w/c. Mordaunt is highly risky and could backfire badly. Sunak I'm less sure about.
Anyway, Richie Benaud, as a leg spinner, says - bowl them a googly! JRM.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
It’s still a bit confusing. It says indicative vote of needed . Who decides if it’s needed ?
It's needed if there are still two candidates left.
Candidate 2 may back out.
Were 3 candidates get 100 nominations if the one that comes second pulled out the one that came 3rd goes to the members as the other choice
The media are trying to boost Johnson. It might be the best route to a General Election.
There are many Conservatives who would sooner an election than having him back.
Much as I would love it, I cannot see any route whatever to an early GE.
It doesn't matter which pollster you take, just key in the numbers to Election Calculus and you will see why the Tories cannot allow it under any circumstances.
The route to an immediate GE has closed, but early is still open.
Whomever becomes PM will have no mandate and a mountain of cuts to implement. They will not be popular and will not be seen as legitimate.
We are a representative democracy. When a retread of a retread of a PM is doing things that people didn't vote for and that people hate, and that polls show people Do Not Support, what do we say? That they have a majority so no election?
A spring 2023 election once the ship has been stabilised is still likely. Especially as the Tory MPs will endlessly attack whoever wins.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
It’s still a bit confusing. It says indicative vote of needed . Who decides if it’s needed ?
As it's a quiet day in British politics, time to look at the latest polling from Denmark where polling day is just 12 days away.
Three very interesting surveys starting with Kantar Gallup for the Berlingske Tidende (one of the main serious papers in Denmark):
Centre-Left Bloc: (Social Democrats, Radikale Venstre, Socialist People's Party and Red/Green List): 48% Centre-Right Bloc: (Venstre, Conservatives, Liberal Alliance, Denmark Democrats, New Right, Danish People's Party) 41.7%
Moderates: 7.3%
Yougov:
Centre-Left Bloc: 48.2% Centre-Right Bloc: 41.6%
Moderates: 7.9%
Voxmeter:
Centre-Left Bloc: 46.8% Centre-Right Bloc: 39.4%
Moderates: 9.2%
In essence, the Social Democrats are polling above the last election and are closing on 30%. The centre-right bloc vote is fragmented with the Denmark Democrats between 6 and 8.5%. Yougov has Venstre down at 10.6% but at 14.5% with other pollsters.
The Moderates are advancing and are polling an average 8% and Lars Lokke Rasmussen may yet lead his party above both the Denmark Democrats and the Conservatives.
Brady said: MPs WILL VOTE ON THE FINAL 2 - so the members will know who the MPs prefer.
That is surely key.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
It’s still a bit confusing. It says indicative vote of needed . Who decides if it’s needed ?
It's needed if there are still two candidates left.
Candidate 2 may back out.
Were 3 candidates get 100 nominations if the one that comes second pulled out the one that came 3rd goes to the members as the other choice
If candidate 2 pulls out before the MPs vote, I assume the MP indicative vote would be between 1 and 3, then on to the member vote if neither of those two pull out.
If candidate 2 pulls out after the MPs vote, no need for a members vote - candidate 1 wins.
To spice things up, Conservative MPs who voted for Truss in the first two or three rounds of the last contest should be barred from voting this time. Their judgement is obviously highly flawed...
The media are trying to boost Johnson. It might be the best route to a General Election.
There are many Conservatives who would sooner an election than having him back.
Much as I would love it, I cannot see any route whatever to an early GE.
It doesn't matter which pollster you take, just key in the numbers to Election Calculus and you will see why the Tories cannot allow it under any circumstances.
The route to an immediate GE has closed, but early is still open.
Whomever becomes PM will have no mandate and a mountain of cuts to implement. They will not be popular and will not be seen as legitimate.
We are a representative democracy. When a retread of a retread of a PM is doing things that people didn't vote for and that people hate, and that polls show people Do Not Support, what do we say? That they have a majority so no election?
A spring 2023 election once the ship has been stabilised is still likely. Especially as the Tory MPs will endlessly attack whoever wins.
WHOEVER
Bin the relative bit, and what are you saying about this person? S/he becomes PM. He = who, him=whom.
To spice things up, Conservative MPs who voted for Truss in the first two or three rounds of the last contest should be barred from voting this time. Their judgement is obviously highly flawed...
Amongst members that voted for Truss, Boris is miles ahead. Go figure.
From a Labour point of view. I don't think we really care whether it's Sunak, Mordaunt or Johnson - much of a muchness, even though they're all quite different characters. Each of the three have strengths and weaknesses, and all are beatable. If you could be so good as to go for Braverman or JRM, though, I'd be even more confident.
No, Al.
You must apply the Richie Benaud test to this. Ask yourself what the opposing Captain would most like you to do, and do the opposite.
Starmer would least like Sunak and/or Mordaunt. Boris would bring a broad grin to his face.
The others are too ridiculous to contemplate.
Don't agree. Boris would win back many of the white male w/c. Mordaunt is highly risky and could backfire badly. Sunak I'm less sure about.
Anyway, Richie Benaud, as a leg spinner, says - bowl them a googly! JRM.
Mordaunt is OK if she is a Vote Penny, get Hunt ticket. Otherwise not. Sunak is a boring technocrat which is OK in the circs. Loses me a ton but went to an OK school.
To spice things up, Conservative MPs who voted for Truss in the first two or three rounds of the last contest should be barred from voting this time. Their judgement is obviously highly flawed...
And what punishment do you propose for the Members who voted for her?
We have a set of stocks in Winchcombe High Street.
I don't think the indicative vote on the last two is going to make much difference in practice, given the nomination threshold. If they've got that far, each candidate must have at least 100+ backers, and either it will already be obvious that one of them is miles ahead, or more likely they'll both end up with a respectable chunk of the final indicative MP vote. It's only if there are three candidates each with around a third of the vote in the final elimination, and if the supporters of the eliminated candidate overwhelmingly transfer one way, that there would be a big steer from the indicative vote. That combination strikes me as fairly unlikely.
The media are trying to boost Johnson. It might be the best route to a General Election.
There are many Conservatives who would sooner an election than having him back.
Much as I would love it, I cannot see any route whatever to an early GE.
It doesn't matter which pollster you take, just key in the numbers to Election Calculus and you will see why the Tories cannot allow it under any circumstances.
The route to an immediate GE has closed, but early is still open.
Whomever becomes PM will have no mandate and a mountain of cuts to implement. They will not be popular and will not be seen as legitimate.
We are a representative democracy. When a retread of a retread of a PM is doing things that people didn't vote for and that people hate, and that polls show people Do Not Support, what do we say? That they have a majority so no election?
A spring 2023 election once the ship has been stabilised is still likely. Especially as the Tory MPs will endlessly attack whoever wins.
WHOEVER
Bin the relative bit, and what are you saying about this person? S/he becomes PM. He = who, him=whom.
As it's a quiet day in British politics, time to look at the latest polling from Denmark where polling day is just 12 days away.
Three very interesting surveys starting with Kantar Gallup for the Berlingske Tidende (one of the main serious papers in Denmark):
Centre-Left Bloc: (Social Democrats, Radikale Venstre, Socialist People's Party and Red/Green List): 48% Centre-Right Bloc: (Venstre, Conservatives, Liberal Alliance, Denmark Democrats, New Right, Danish People's Party) 41.7%
Moderates: 7.3%
Yougov:
Centre-Left Bloc: 48.2% Centre-Right Bloc: 41.6%
Moderates: 7.9%
Voxmeter:
Centre-Left Bloc: 46.8% Centre-Right Bloc: 39.4%
Moderates: 9.2%
In essence, the Social Democrats are polling above the last election and are closing on 30%. The centre-right bloc vote is fragmented with the Denmark Democrats between 6 and 8.5%. Yougov has Venstre down at 10.6% but at 14.5% with other pollsters.
The Moderates are advancing and are polling an average 8% and Lars Lokke Rasmussen may yet lead his party above both the Denmark Democrats and the Conservatives.
Thanks Stodge.
For those of us not entirely up to speed with Danish Politics can you just point out which of these Parties is proposing unfunded tax cuts for the rich?
In the interests of parliamentary governance, the rules of all the main parties should limit the leadership electorate to MPs when the party is in power.
In the interests of getting my vote again they should limit it thus all the time.
Tbf, if a party's members elect a leader while they are in opposition then at least the electorate get a chance to reject said leader (and party). Compare and contrast J Corbyn and L Truss.
Labour in theory could elect a Corbyn in power too. Once candidates are nominated by Labour MPs then Labour members, registered supporters and affiliated supporters get the final say. Labour MPs don't even get to pick the last 2.
If the idea is the membership only chooses the leader in opposition and MPs alone choose the leader in power it needs to apply to both parties.
In 2007 John McDonnell in theory could have become PM. He wanted to stand and it was only Brownites bullying Labour MPs not to nominate him and crown their man that stopped that
Totally agree. That's why I was explicitly said: the rules of all the main parties should limit the leadership electorate to MPs when the party is in power.
I'm sure we've all put the Redfield & Wilton numbers through Baxter and had a good giggle at the outcome.
Step forward John Hayes, leader of the Conservative MP and a very busy man as the only Tory MP.
Survation is slightly less dramatic - 29 Conservative MPs on the new boundaries with the Labour majority slashed to just 404 but apply the Redfield & Wilton tactical voting bias and the Conservatives drop to just 9 as Labour scrape home with an overall majority of 446 (compared to 1931 they're only just in).
Maybe the MPs will have a final vote on the top two, before they go to members? That would make sense of Brady’s comments earlier, and would allow the MPs to send a clear steer to members
Maybe the MPs will have a final vote on the top two, before they go to members? That would make sense of Brady’s comments earlier, and would allow the MPs to send a clear steer to members
Maybe the MPs will have a final vote on the top two, before they go to members? That would make sense of Brady’s comments earlier, and would allow the MPs to send a clear steer to members
Yes if there’s 3 going forward then that’s what happens . I got there eventually ! Lol
From a Labour point of view. I don't think we really care whether it's Sunak, Mordaunt or Johnson - much of a muchness, even though they're all quite different characters. Each of the three have strengths and weaknesses, and all are beatable. If you could be so good as to go for Braverman or JRM, though, I'd be even more confident.
No, Al.
You must apply the Richie Benaud test to this. Ask yourself what the opposing Captain would most like you to do, and do the opposite.
Starmer would least like Sunak and/or Mordaunt. Boris would bring a broad grin to his face.
The others are too ridiculous to contemplate.
Don't agree. Boris would win back many of the white male w/c. Mordaunt is highly risky and could backfire badly. Sunak I'm less sure about.
Anyway, Richie Benaud, as a leg spinner, says - bowl them a googly! JRM.
Fresh out the blocks to try and force a narrative. Sunak/Mordaunt need to announce alliance soon.
1. Sunak / Mordaunt announce an alliance 2. Its Boris vs Sunak Mordaunt in the final 2. Sunak wins comfortably 3. Members overwhelmingly back Boris 4. A run on popcorn.
“I didn’t want to be PM for myself, and indeed didn’t even stand last time. However, my friends and colleagues have forced me to reluctantly agree to stand”.
To spice things up, Conservative MPs who voted for Truss in the first two or three rounds of the last contest should be barred from voting this time. Their judgement is obviously highly flawed...
Amongst members that voted for Truss, Boris is miles ahead. Go figure.
To paraphrase & alter the old Planter's Peanuts slogan:
Sometimes you feel like a nut - and sometimes you ARE a nut!
“I didn’t want to be PM for myself, and indeed didn’t even stand last time. However, my friends and colleagues have forced me to reluctantly agree to stand”.
We don’t have an “economic crisis” as Sky News keep telling us. We have an acute political crisis. And we are essentially at war. War time leader needed. Why isn’t Wallace running?
“I didn’t want to be PM for myself, and indeed didn’t even stand last time. However, my friends and colleagues have forced me to reluctantly agree to stand”.
From a Labour point of view. I don't think we really care whether it's Sunak, Mordaunt or Johnson - much of a muchness, even though they're all quite different characters. Each of the three have strengths and weaknesses, and all are beatable. If you could be so good as to go for Braverman or JRM, though, I'd be even more confident.
No, Al.
You must apply the Richie Benaud test to this. Ask yourself what the opposing Captain would most like you to do, and do the opposite.
Starmer would least like Sunak and/or Mordaunt. Boris would bring a broad grin to his face.
The others are too ridiculous to contemplate.
Don't agree. Boris would win back many of the white male w/c. Mordaunt is highly risky and could backfire badly. Sunak I'm less sure about.
Anyway, Richie Benaud, as a leg spinner, says - bowl them a googly! JRM.
If I was Starmer I would be laughing all the way to the election if Johnson was re-instated. The Tories would be a laughing stock - forcing one unsuitable PM out, only to replace him with someone incompetent, then immediately change their minds again? Hahaha! And a large chunk of MPs won't support him.
Mordaunt is untested. I'd like to see her run a big department for more than a few months. On the evidence of the first leadership election I don't think she cuts it. Big risk. I don't think I'd worry.
Sunak has shown he has the capability, but again he hasn't been tested in a big spending department. And a (different) large chunk of the party won't support him and will make life difficult for him. Probably the one Starmer would prefer not to have given the choice but even then I don't think he'll lose any sleep.
(Edited - corrected accidentally deleted words on Mordaunt)
Imagine if the Final is Boris v Sunak and Sunak does win with the members.
Just think how strong a position that would put him in - and how much it would instantly improve the reputation of the Conservative Party with the wider public.
Comments
Nothing would surprise me, with this shitshow.
"There will be an indicative vote of MPs once there are two candidates.
The first ballot of MPs will then be held between 1530 and 1730 on Monday 24. If there are three candidates, the candidate with the fewest number of votes will be eliminated. The result will be announced at 1800hrs. If a second vote is needed (indicative), this will be held between 1830 and 2030 on Monday 24. The result will be announced at 2100."
From the CCHQ statement. Fascinating - and designed to maximally push for no members vote.
But knowing recent form the indicative vote will go 310-40 and the members will vote the other way by 50.1-49.9%
Correction: ... replace with a useless pathological liar PM
That said, Sunak has one peerless advantage. He already has a hundred backers from the first round of the last election, and it's hard to see them switching away now.
There are many Conservatives who would sooner an election than having him back.
You must apply the Richie Benaud test to this. Ask yourself what the opposing Captain would most like you to do, and do the opposite.
Starmer would least like Sunak and/or Mordaunt. Boris would bring a broad grin to his face.
The others are too ridiculous to contemplate.
They all read The Mail. They believe what they read in The Mail.
It doesn't matter which pollster you take, just key in the numbers to Election Calculus and you will see why the Tories cannot allow it under any circumstances.
Jesus Christ
Candidate 2 may back out.
Easy to say "yeah OK Sunak" a few days ago in Theory. But in practice...?
Anyway, Richie Benaud, as a leg spinner, says - bowl them a googly! JRM.
Whomever becomes PM will have no mandate and a mountain of cuts to implement. They will not be popular and will not be seen as legitimate.
We are a representative democracy. When a retread of a retread of a PM is doing things that people didn't vote for and that people hate, and that polls show people Do Not Support, what do we say? That they have a majority so no election?
A spring 2023 election once the ship has been stabilised is still likely. Especially as the Tory MPs will endlessly attack whoever wins.
Or indeed, that he was incompetent.
He could well win a members vote.
As it's a quiet day in British politics, time to look at the latest polling from Denmark where polling day is just 12 days away.
Three very interesting surveys starting with Kantar Gallup for the Berlingske Tidende (one of the main serious papers in Denmark):
Centre-Left Bloc: (Social Democrats, Radikale Venstre, Socialist People's Party and Red/Green List): 48%
Centre-Right Bloc: (Venstre, Conservatives, Liberal Alliance, Denmark Democrats, New Right, Danish People's Party) 41.7%
Moderates: 7.3%
Yougov:
Centre-Left Bloc: 48.2%
Centre-Right Bloc: 41.6%
Moderates: 7.9%
Voxmeter:
Centre-Left Bloc: 46.8%
Centre-Right Bloc: 39.4%
Moderates: 9.2%
In essence, the Social Democrats are polling above the last election and are closing on 30%. The centre-right bloc vote is fragmented with the Denmark Democrats between 6 and 8.5%. Yougov has Venstre down at 10.6% but at 14.5% with other pollsters.
The Moderates are advancing and are polling an average 8% and Lars Lokke Rasmussen may yet lead his party above both the Denmark Democrats and the Conservatives.
If candidate 2 pulls out after the MPs vote, no need for a members vote - candidate 1 wins.
Bin the relative bit, and what are you saying about this person? S/he becomes PM. He = who, him=whom.
Whereas whomever the tories elect as PM...
Could be Leon was referring to something OTHER than governmental/political performance?
We have a set of stocks in Winchcombe High Street.
https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1583119636903923712
For those of us not entirely up to speed with Danish Politics can you just point out which of these Parties is proposing unfunded tax cuts for the rich?
Step forward John Hayes, leader of the Conservative MP and a very busy man as the only Tory MP.
Survation is slightly less dramatic - 29 Conservative MPs on the new boundaries with the Labour majority slashed to just 404 but apply the Redfield & Wilton tactical voting bias and the Conservatives drop to just 9 as Labour scrape home with an overall majority of 446 (compared to 1931 they're only just in).
Thanks for the replies and I need to go and take my meds now !
'This was epitomised by Sir Stafford Cripps, who was not a vegetarian and a teetotaller but looked like one too.'
(And 27 Grant Shappses).
2. Its Boris vs Sunak Mordaunt in the final 2. Sunak wins comfortably
3. Members overwhelmingly back Boris
4. A run on popcorn.
This website seems mad but it is worth reading on Russian nukes
https://www.the-paladins.com/post/russia-s-anticipated-use-of-neutron-bombs-in-ukraine
TLDR: tactical/neutron bomb over Black Sea
“Do you not think the others are up to it”
“You may think that….”
Sometimes you feel like a nut - and sometimes you ARE a nut!
You’d have to have balls of steel to be confident that Boris can’t get 100 of those.
Mordaunt is untested. I'd like to see her run a big department for more than a few months. On the evidence of the first leadership election I don't think she cuts it. Big risk. I don't think I'd worry.
Sunak has shown he has the capability, but again he hasn't been tested in a big spending department. And a (different) large chunk of the party won't support him and will make life difficult for him. Probably the one Starmer would prefer not to have given the choice but even then I don't think he'll lose any sleep.
(Edited - corrected accidentally deleted words on Mordaunt)
Everyone knows this.
It’s a veritable Who’s Poo of the parliamentary party.
Just think how strong a position that would put him in - and how much it would instantly improve the reputation of the Conservative Party with the wider public.