That's excellent - spot on - Portillo nails the current situation.
I think that his confidence that Boris would win the members is slightly misplaced, that is not a given. But be afraid, yes, certainly.
If Boris wins we likely go to a snap general election before Christmas, enough Tory Rishi backers would make a sustainable Boris premiership impossible and many would vote with the Opposition for an election.
Only Rishi has enough support amongst Tory MPs to sustain a government for a year or 2 until the next general election
I think Portillo is certainly right about the cabinet. It had fallen apart before he quit and I don't see humpty dumpty managing to put it together again.
Portillo is about the only decent Tory in the country ( politician's past and present ), apart from Clarke of course.
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Stop digging Australia beckons
You'll roo the day you said that.
Edit - incidentally, on a point of punctuation, there should be a comma between 'digging' and 'Australia.'
I think if Boris does make the final two then MPs who have voted for Rishi should make it clear to members that they would refuse to serve under Boris and will leave the party as he is completely unsuitable to be PM, as we have already seen. If the members see it as blackmail and don't like it that can leave.
Not much movement for Boris, still stuck on under 60 declarations of support. Rishi now over 130. I don't see where Boris picks up the 45 additional votes now that high profile right wingers have backed Rishi. Kemi's piece today was devastating for Boris and once again shows that she is a future PM, clear and consistent.
He has completely stalled out over the last 24 hours, and all the briefings are not what you'd associate with a campaign that is going well and going to reach 100 easily.
Wonder how much work they are having to do to stop people switching away from them.
That's excellent - spot on - Portillo nails the current situation.
I think that his confidence that Boris would win the members is slightly misplaced, that is not a given. But be afraid, yes, certainly.
If Boris wins we likely go to a snap general election before Christmas, enough Tory Rishi backers would make a sustainable Boris premiership impossible and many would vote with the Opposition for an election.
Only Rishi has enough support amongst Tory MPs to sustain a government for a year or 2 until the next general election
Now that is some rare common sense
On the contrary, if we were sure enough Tories would be willing to sacrifice their jobs in that way, then picking Johnson isn't such a bad option. But they won't.
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Stop digging Australia beckons
You'll roo the day you said that.
Edit - incidentally, on a point of punctuation, there should be a comma between 'digging' and 'Australia.'
If Johnson, Sunak and Mordaunt all reach 100 then there is a vote of Tory MPs to establish the final two AIUI.
How is that vote conducted? Is it secret? Do they just vote for their choice or do they give a second choice?
If Boris just crawls over the 100 line, then as I have said repeatedly, if he has enough to lend to Penny, Rishi should indeed lend enough to put Penny over the line. Easier to manipulate that vote to exclude Boris from the final 2 than to risk a straight Rishi v Boris members vote that Rishi may well lose.
Obs, the deal is then that Penny drops out for a immediate Rishi coronation.
If Sunak has twice as many as Johnson, I bet this is already being spreadsheeted. Whether they have the intelligence (in both senses) to pull it off is another matter. The counter-strategy is a huge MP endorsement for Sunak giving him the best chance with the members
Not sure a huge win with the MPs translates into any advantage for Rishi with the members.
Much more likely to think "Rishi's going to win, so I'll stay true to my heart and vote Boris..."
That's excellent - spot on - Portillo nails the current situation.
I think that his confidence that Boris would win the members is slightly misplaced, that is not a given. But be afraid, yes, certainly.
Not a given but a strong likelihood IMO. The "Boris has a mandate" point is, for them, a strong one and the indicative vote, which will be designed to steer the membership in the direction the MPs want, will prove to be counter-productive as the membership will not want to be preached to.
Before the disaster of Truss that might have been true but now, surely, there will be a desperation for something sane and stable. Hunt has an important role here. If he makes it clear that he will not serve under Boris then he doesn't make the 100.
That's excellent - spot on - Portillo nails the current situation.
I think that his confidence that Boris would win the members is slightly misplaced, that is not a given. But be afraid, yes, certainly.
If Boris wins we likely go to a snap general election before Christmas, enough Tory Rishi backers would make a sustainable Boris premiership impossible and many would vote with the Opposition for an election.
Only Rishi has enough support amongst Tory MPs to sustain a government for a year or 2 until the next general election
I think Portillo is certainly right about the cabinet. It had fallen apart before he quit and I don't see humpty dumpty managing to put it together again.
Portillo is about the only decent Tory in the country ( politician's past and present ), apart from Clarke of course.
And who would have predicted that, thirty years ago?
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the
current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
'The Scottish Nationalist Party' for which it is short *is* a proper noun though.
Shocking ignorance on a politics site
A proper question then. How did Alba respond to Sturgeons big announcement on what Independence actually looks like, and the transition. It was quite a big declaration of things unfortunately lost beneath all these other shenanigans.
Did Alba pretty much agree with it all, or do they actually have a different vision and path to achieving it?
I think if Boris does make the final two then MPs who have voted for Rishi should make it clear to members that they would refuse to serve under Boris and will leave the party as he is completely unsuitable to be PM, as we have already seen. If the members see it as blackmail and don't like it that can leave.
Maybe the members will think that it ought to be MPs who leave the party, not them. (Not my position).
Boris on good form at the 8am meeting with MPs. Fly was done up, only asked four people for cash, ok he spent the first half of the meeting talking about that treehouse, but the rest was a rousing story about Caligula. Has 2000 MPs backing him now ✅🇬🇧
We’re heading toward an extinction level conservative event if Boris stands.
I just cannot comprehend how MPs in significant positions of power can re endorse Johnson. We head straight into more scandal from day one - and they actively welcome it?
36% of the vote on that JL Partners poll with Boris is not an 'extinction level event' it is what Cameron got in 2010.
Truss was leading the Tories to less than 20% of the vote and an 'extinction level event' neither Boris nor Rishi would be, both get well over 30% on the JL poll
It will be all over in weeks as tresignations and the privileges committee take him down and it is just shocking he and his supporters cannot see that they are in the process of destroying the conservative party
Absolutely this. There’s no stability from this point onwards - and I have no idea why Johnson backers somehow think all is forgiven and people will fail in behind him
I don't think it's only Johnson backers who are suffering from that delusion. I believe I am suffering from it myself.
Implicitly I am assuming that, if Sunak becomes leader instead of Johnson, and Hunt remains Chancellor, that they will manage to smooth things over for the next year or two until the general election. Yes, the economy will be a bit crap, and public services suffer, but subconsciously I'm essentially expecting nothing that dramatic will happen.
Intellectually I think this is denial. The Tories are deeply split, both politically and personally. Many proposed policies are unpopular with one faction or another. The budgets will contain many unpleasant measures that will provoke opposition. The Tories are already past the event horizon. The rest of their time in government holds out the prospect of only more infighting. Only the pain of electoral defeat and the impotence of opposition can teach them that what they have in common is more important than what they disagree on.
I agree. I am tending to the idea Boris is done. He won't make the 100, though it will be close. But I can't see a billionaire with a non-dom wife pushing through tax cuts and spending cuts in the teeth of falling wages and strikes, being a calm couple of years with a newly united, functioning Tory Party marching behind in lock step. 1% chance of that. Far too many aren't with the programme before the pain has even started.
Not getting on the ballot is better for the “Boris Myth” - stabbed in the back - by his own MPs - Denied a second chance to rescue the country, again, by his own MPs - Could have saved the Tory party from the electoral bloodbath of 2024
Of course it’s total rubbish - but when has Johnson ever let the truth get in the way of “a good story” (sic).
For the country better he gets his nonsense myth then the job.
I felt more confident yesterday but not today - still enough for MPs to act like he could save them.
There's loads of random capitalisation on the thread this morning. Why so touchy about mine?
The SNP could have called themselves simply the Scotland Pary, or the Scotland Independence Party, or a myriad of other possible names if they didn't want the word "National" to be in their party name and didn't want to be associated with the concept of Nationalism.
a hundred years ago they wanted to be the Scottish party for the nation, hence "National". The fact that unionists try to always misname them and imply they are some nasty "Nationalist" organisation with its connotations is a recent thing since the resurgence of the right wing Imperialism in England.
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
it's just a little bit of disrespectful, but also lots of history you may not be aware of due to the way Scottish Labour have always deliberately used the incorrect name to needle the SNP.
aka Bozo in the house of commons and the inept current speaker allowed it
We’re heading toward an extinction level conservative event if Boris stands.
I just cannot comprehend how MPs in significant positions of power can re endorse Johnson. We head straight into more scandal from day one - and they actively welcome it?
36% of the vote on that JL Partners poll with Boris is not an 'extinction level event' it is what Cameron got in 2010.
Truss was leading the Tories to less than 20% of the vote and an 'extinction level event' neither Boris nor Rishi would be, both get well over 30% on the JL poll
It will be all over in weeks as tresignations and the privileges committee take him down and it is just shocking he and his supporters cannot see that they are in the process of destroying the conservative party
Absolutely this. There’s no stability from this point onwards - and I have no idea why Johnson backers somehow think all is forgiven and people will fail in behind him
I don't think it's only Johnson backers who are suffering from that delusion. I believe I am suffering from it myself.
Implicitly I am assuming that, if Sunak becomes leader instead of Johnson, and Hunt remains Chancellor, that they will manage to smooth things over for the next year or two until the general election. Yes, the economy will be a bit crap, and public services suffer, but subconsciously I'm essentially expecting nothing that dramatic will happen.
Intellectually I think this is denial. The Tories are deeply split, both politically and personally. Many proposed policies are unpopular with one faction or another. The budgets will contain many unpleasant measures that will provoke opposition. The Tories are already past the event horizon. The rest of their time in government holds out the prospect of only more infighting. Only the pain of electoral defeat and the impotence of opposition can teach them that what they have in common is more important than what they disagree on.
I agree. I am tending to the idea Boris is done. He won't make the 100, though it will be close. But I can't see a billionaire with a non-dom wife pushing through tax cuts and spending cuts in the teeth of falling wages and strikes, being a calm couple of years with a newly united, functioning Tory Party marching behind in lock step.
1% chance of that. Far too many aren't with the programme before the pain has even started.
You have hit the nail on the head here re Rishi.
Many on here - as well as the commentariat - are saying how Johnson winning the contest would split the Tory party.
But what many are missing - and I suspect because their dislike of BJ is overwhelming their rational capabilities and / or they are viewing the Tory party through their own well-off, middle class lens - is that the chances of a split are maybe even higher with Rishi as leader.
The attack lines against Rishi are already written as you note - rich, smug, non-tax paying wife, didn't declare his Green Card (how do people think that's not an issue? oh, because it's the sort of thing they might do themselves). Labour would love it. More to the point, Farage et al would point to the "Globalists" now running the Tory party.
In that scenario, it's easy to see the populist wing decide to take their chances with a new Farage-influenced movement with possibly Johnson at its head. Would they keep many seats? Probably not but the damage would be done.
The attacks are there for Rushi and he will lose, but less chance of a split. He wont drive actual MPs out.
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Stop digging Australia beckons
You'll roo the day you said that.
Edit - incidentally, on a point of punctuation, there should be a comma between 'digging' and 'Australia.'
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Stop digging Australia beckons
You'll roo the day you said that.
Edit - incidentally, on a point of punctuation, there should be a comma between 'digging' and 'Australia.'
it is the internet punctuation , spelling and all else go out the windae
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Stop digging Australia beckons
You'll roo the day you said that.
Edit - incidentally, on a point of punctuation, there should be a comma between 'digging' and 'Australia.'
it is the internet punctuation , spelling and all else go out the windae
Given the way this whole discussion kicked off, that's deliciously ironic!
The longer version promising "integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level of government" amongst other things makes it a good initial pitch
Not with Tory members and 100 of their MPs.
Brady should have set the level at 180 - only someone with a majority to get nominated!
Nice idea, but it would have provoked a legal challenge as failing in his duty to provide a choice to the membership.
Should have set it at one third, where did they get 100 from?
Best guess, there were three obvious candidates, so the threshold was set at a level where it was possible but difficult for all three to qualify.
I think the 100 is meant to keep Johnson out. If it doesn't that's a screw up.
AS of now, I understand that @BorisJohnson is struggling to get the numbers. “I think he’s finished” says one backbencher who was asked for support. Still too early to say tho!!
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the
current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
'The Scottish Nationalist Party' for which it is short *is* a proper noun though.
Shocking ignorance on a politics site
Well, we all know your view that they're not nationalists...
Trying to hide schoolboy errors , not surprising the knowledge on Scotland is still totally lacking on here despite all the Scotch experts.
I've always thought of you and one or two other Scottish posters (Stuart Dickson) as more whine experts.
your spelling is shocking as well as your political nous, you added a stray "h" in wine there.
The longer version promising "integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level of government" amongst other things makes it a good initial pitch
Not with Tory members and 100 of their MPs.
Brady should have set the level at 180 - only someone with a majority to get nominated!
Nice idea, but it would have provoked a legal challenge as failing in his duty to provide a choice to the membership.
Should have set it at one third, where did they get 100 from?
I suspect because it didn't look so much of an attempt to fix the outcome....
Yes, they wanted to cut members out without formally doing so. But that left a gap big enough for Boris to slither through
If you can rely on the 22 for anything, it is a schoolboy error.....
There's loads of random capitalisation on the thread this morning. Why so touchy about mine?
The SNP could have called themselves simply the Scotland Pary, or the Scotland Independence Party, or a myriad of other possible names if they didn't want the word "National" to be in their party name and didn't want to be associated with the concept of Nationalism.
a hundred years ago they wanted to be the Scottish party for the nation, hence "National". The fact that unionists try to always misname them and imply they are some nasty "Nationalist" organisation with its connotations is a recent thing since the resurgence of the right wing Imperialism in England.
Not much movement for Boris, still stuck on under 60 declarations of support. Rishi now over 130. I don't see where Boris picks up the 45 additional votes now that high profile right wingers have backed Rishi. Kemi's piece today was devastating for Boris and once again shows that she is a future PM, clear and consistent.
He has completely stalled out over the last 24 hours, and all the briefings are not what you'd associate with a campaign that is going well and going to reach 100 easily.
Wonder how much work they are having to do to stop people switching away from them.
If he's close but short - and still "up for it" - I bet there's no end of horribly sleazy things going on to get there.
OT I was at the Formula Ford festival yesterday mainly watching from just passed Paddock Hill bend, because I was with a team and spent quite a bit of time in the paddock. The team had 2 cars running. The son of the owners was one of the drivers. He collided with another car just after the bend and went off harmlessly and rejoined. Later in another heat someone else wasn't as lucky. I would have thought it impossible to survive the crash, but the driver walked away. There was nothing left of the car when the recovery truck passed us. How he walked away I have no idea. It was sickening.
I was watching the faces of the parents. Don't let your sons and daughters race cars. It is not worth it.
On a lighter note I know the sponsor of a rally car. They were told that C4 was covering a rally and would be using a helicopter so they put a great big logo on the roof. The car got a huge amount of coverage from the helicopter. However he didn't have the foresight to put a logo on the underside of the car.
Got sent the video of that crash yesterday. Lucky he hit the wall with the underside of his car and not the top. However he did walk away and even if the car was in pieces it did it’s job.
His mum was apparently very upset all the same.
Brands is not a cheap circuit if you make a mistake.
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the
current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
'The Scottish Nationalist Party' for which it is short *is* a proper noun though.
Shocking ignorance on a politics site
Well, we all know your view that they're not nationalists...
Trying to hide schoolboy errors , not surprising the knowledge on Scotland is still totally lacking on here despite all the Scotch experts.
I've always thought of you and one or two other Scottish posters (Stuart Dickson) as more whine experts.
your spelling is shocking as well as your political nous, you added a stray "h" in wine there.
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Stop digging Australia beckons
You'll roo the day you said that.
Edit - incidentally, on a point of punctuation, there should be a comma between 'digging' and 'Australia.'
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the
current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
'The Scottish Nationalist Party' for which it is short *is* a proper noun though.
Shocking ignorance on a politics site
Well, we all know your view that they're not nationalists...
Trying to hide schoolboy errors , not surprising the knowledge on Scotland is still totally lacking on here despite all the Scotch experts.
I've always thought of you and one or two other Scottish posters (Stuart Dickson) as more whine experts.
your spelling is shocking as well as your political nous, you added a stray "h" in wine there.
That's excellent - spot on - Portillo nails the current situation.
I think that his confidence that Boris would win the members is slightly misplaced, that is not a given. But be afraid, yes, certainly.
If Boris wins we likely go to a snap general election before Christmas, enough Tory Rishi backers would make a sustainable Boris premiership impossible and many would vote with the Opposition for an election.
Only Rishi has enough support amongst Tory MPs to sustain a government for a year or 2 until the next general election
I like that post. You have made a gut reaction based upon an opinion that is based upon reasonable assumptions, whether others agree with it or not. I think it is sound personally.
You did a nice one earlier (I don't know whether I liked it or not) where you actually said 'my gut reaction' based upon a hypothetical polls mean you thought something or other.
There is nothing wrong with hypothetical polls if you treat them as such, so it is unfair of me to suggest they are complete nonsense, but they should be treated with a great deal of scepticism and we do need to identify in each case why they may be flawed (eg, events we know will happen afterwards that the poll respondent doesn't, polls comparing unknown people with well known people, polls where you see the result is actually wrong and therefore you know must be flawed but don't know why (people taking antidepressants being out by a factor of 10, IQ levels of underdeveloped countries being clearly wrong, etc).
You often treat them as fact. They are statistically correct within the parameters of the question, but there is the old saying garbage in garbage out. In fairness in your last two examples were excellent uses of hypothetical polls.
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Stop digging Australia beckons
You'll roo the day you said that.
Edit - incidentally, on a point of punctuation, there should be a comma between 'digging' and 'Australia.'
I think if Boris does make the final two then MPs who have voted for Rishi should make it clear to members that they would refuse to serve under Boris and will leave the party as he is completely unsuitable to be PM, as we have already seen. If the members see it as blackmail and don't like it that can leave.
Maybe the members will think that it ought to be MPs who leave the party, not them. (Not my position).
It would be poetic justice if it got to the members and they then absolutely stuck it to Boris going 70:30 for Sunak. More than Hunt lost by in 2019.
If Boris 2.0 has learnt from an extensive back catalogue of errors, he still has the potential to be a damn fine PM, to still be PM into the 2030s.
Honestly, what's the point of even writing this?
Johnson is not going to inwardly reflect, acheive moksha and be reborn with self-realisation as a better person. He's going to be exactly the same.
Clive James wrote about how he met Susannah York when she was 23. She was so beautiful that he just burst into tears. That's the exact emotion I'm going to experience if Johnson comes back and destroys the tory party.
I’m not proposing those thoughts as my own - I’m analysing if Boris wins this will be the reasoning of the membership to deliver his win. As I explained in the post, my time on ConHome this week leads to the complete opposite, little love for Boris 2.0 at all. The caveat is, ConHome commenterie are quite left leaning.
Also I detect much more positive support for Rishi on PB, than on ConHome, who would prefer the contest widened than Boris v Sunak.
“Boris tells porkies. Sunak talks like he is in a board meeting” was posted there this morning. So who do you want to campaign on your behalf? No. This is actually a Serious question. Here’s Sunak’s political obituary to explain what I mean. Though some people may list green cards, Tax havens, furlough schemes, and mining the dam for Truss to press the button, truth is all went wrong for Sunak because sunak is a terrible campaigner. He literally cannot understand what the voters who decide a contest want and moderate his pitch from "I know what's best for you so I don't need to listen". Truss was able to run rings around him even though she was only promising what she had no intention of delivering. Keir Starmer would do the same as Truss and wipe the floor with tin-eared Sunak.
Boris on good form at the 8am meeting with MPs. Fly was done up, only asked four people for cash, ok he spent the first half of the meeting talking about that treehouse, but the rest was a rousing story about Caligula. Has 2000 MPs backing him now ✅🇬🇧
Not much movement for Boris, still stuck on under 60 declarations of support. Rishi now over 130. I don't see where Boris picks up the 45 additional votes now that high profile right wingers have backed Rishi. Kemi's piece today was devastating for Boris and once again shows that she is a future PM, clear and consistent.
He has completely stalled out over the last 24 hours, and all the briefings are not what you'd associate with a campaign that is going well and going to reach 100 easily.
Wonder how much work they are having to do to stop people switching away from them.
If he's close but short - and still "up for it" - I bet there's no end of horribly sleazy things going on to get there.
Equally possible that dark arts are keeping him short.
We’re heading toward an extinction level conservative event if Boris stands.
I just cannot comprehend how MPs in significant positions of power can re endorse Johnson. We head straight into more scandal from day one - and they actively welcome it?
36% of the vote on that JL Partners poll with Boris is not an 'extinction level event' it is what Cameron got in 2010.
Truss was leading the Tories to less than 20% of the vote and an 'extinction level event' neither Boris nor Rishi would be, both get well over 30% on the JL poll
It will be all over in weeks as tresignations and the privileges committee take him down and it is just shocking he and his supporters cannot see that they are in the process of destroying the conservative party
Absolutely this. There’s no stability from this point onwards - and I have no idea why Johnson backers somehow think all is forgiven and people will fail in behind him
I don't think it's only Johnson backers who are suffering from that delusion. I believe I am suffering from it myself.
Implicitly I am assuming that, if Sunak becomes leader instead of Johnson, and Hunt remains Chancellor, that they will manage to smooth things over for the next year or two until the general election. Yes, the economy will be a bit crap, and public services suffer, but subconsciously I'm essentially expecting nothing that dramatic will happen.
Intellectually I think this is denial. The Tories are deeply split, both politically and personally. Many proposed policies are unpopular with one faction or another. The budgets will contain many unpleasant measures that will provoke opposition. The Tories are already past the event horizon. The rest of their time in government holds out the prospect of only more infighting. Only the pain of electoral defeat and the impotence of opposition can teach them that what they have in common is more important than what they disagree on.
I agree. I am tending to the idea Boris is done. He won't make the 100, though it will be close. But I can't see a billionaire with a non-dom wife pushing through tax cuts and spending cuts in the teeth of falling wages and strikes, being a calm couple of years with a newly united, functioning Tory Party marching behind in lock step.
1% chance of that. Far too many aren't with the programme before the pain has even started.
You have hit the nail on the head here re Rishi.
Many on here - as well as the commentariat - are saying how Johnson winning the contest would split the Tory party.
But what many are missing - and I suspect because their dislike of BJ is overwhelming their rational capabilities and / or they are viewing the Tory party through their own well-off, middle class lens - is that the chances of a split are maybe even higher with Rishi as leader.
The attack lines against Rishi are already written as you note - rich, smug, non-tax paying wife, didn't declare his Green Card (how do people think that's not an issue? oh, because it's the sort of thing they might do themselves). Labour would love it. More to the point, Farage et al would point to the "Globalists" now running the Tory party.
In that scenario, it's easy to see the populist wing decide to take their chances with a new Farage-influenced movement with possibly Johnson at its head. Would they keep many seats? Probably not but the damage would be done.
The attacks are there for Rushi and he will lose, but less chance of a split. He wont drive actual MPs out.
Not so sure. Sunak's enemies in the party are nasty nasty people, whereas Johnson's enemies aren't. Their "trouble per capita" quotient is much higher therefore the aggregate trouble caused (by them) could be off the scale.
Boris on good form at the 8am meeting with MPs. Fly was done up, only asked four people for cash, ok he spent the first half of the meeting talking about that treehouse, but the rest was a rousing story about Caligula. Has 2000 MPs backing him now ✅🇬🇧
The Scottish Nationalists like to make a lot of the voting intention differences between England and Scotland to argue that Scotland is politically distinct from England, that therefore there isn't a unified political demos, and so Scotland needs to be independent.
The issue with the age-divide in voting intention is that this divide is so large, that those aged 65+ are clearly inhabiting a different political world to the rest of the country. Even after all that has happened over the last year, they would still vote for a Tory government over a Labour one. It suggests that Britain (or England & Wales if you prefer), is deeply divided among itself, arguably we no longer have a unified political demos, and this internal division will make tackling our problems much more difficult. Most likely the country is not even united over what the problems are.
A certain amount of division and dissent is healthy, and too much consensus is a bad thing, but there has to be some common ground to make progress. Until this divide is reduced I think it is going to act as a barrier to reform, whether from the left or the right.
So the weirdly capitalised 'Scottish Nationalists' are right then?
I make no judgement in that comment whether the ScotNats are right (the capitalisation seems fairly standard to me), but I'm playing with the idea of it being a framework with which to think about the political divisions in Britain today.
Arguably the age division is the source of the divide in Scotland too, just that it has expressed itself slightly differently to England. The latest YouGov had the SNP lead Labour 45-31 overall, but behind 34-36 among over-65s.
Resolving the age divide across Britain might resolve the question of Scottish independence, one way or another, much more clearly than the current stalemate.
Nationalist is not a proper noun therefore you are wrong to capitalise it.
It is part of their party
name, so it is as correct to capitalise it as it is to capitalise Labour or Conservative, or Labourite,
etc.
Nope, it’s the Scottish National Party and you were talking about people who supported independence for Scotland, not the party - at least that was the clear implication from your post
You wouldn't say "Scottish Nationals" though would you? You say "Scottish Nationalists".
I don't see why this is such a bone of contention.
Because it has F all to do with the political party and you made a right tit of yourself by not even knowing the party name , getting it totally wrong and then conflating it with Independence supporters.
I know perfectly well what the name of the SNP is.
To be fair, I didn't. I thought it was 'Scottish Nationalist' because that's what everyone calls them, even though it's apparently not their official name.
I think it's irrelevant though. People call Plaid Cymru 'Nationalists' and that isn't even remotely part of their name (or for the matter of that their policy offering)!
Calling the Scottish Nationalists "Scottish Nationalists" really winds them up for some reason, even though that's exactly what they are...
To be honest, Steve Baker interests me, for two reasons, he interviews so well, quite a brilliant communicator. But he also knows his mind - he describes himself as Free Market Left, and if he wishes to expand on what that means anytime I would be keen to listen.
Compare and contrast Steve Baker so strong on media rounds this weekend with Penny Mourdant’s latest car crash interview. I am saying the differential between them is Steve Baker knows his mind, to answer questions he goes straight to that, out comes confident clear answers, Mourdant turns to a lot of empty space where there are no answers.
I’m not making an ideological point, the point I am making is politics works best, and more honestly, when politicians and parties have a clear ethos, and they just want to honestly talk about it and explain it.
That's excellent - spot on - Portillo nails the current situation.
I think that his confidence that Boris would win the members is slightly misplaced, that is not a given. But be afraid, yes, certainly.
If Boris wins we likely go to a snap general election before Christmas, enough Tory Rishi backers would make a sustainable Boris premiership impossible and many would vote with the Opposition for an election.
Only Rishi has enough support amongst Tory MPs to sustain a government for a year or 2 until the next general election
I like that post. You have made a gut reaction based upon an opinion that is based upon reasonable assumptions, whether others agree with it or not. I think it is sound personally.
You did a nice one earlier (I don't know whether I liked it or not) where you actually said 'my gut reaction' based upon a hypothetical polls mean you thought something or other.
There is nothing wrong with hypothetical polls if you treat them as such, so it is unfair of me to suggest they are complete nonsense, but they should be treated with a great deal of scepticism and we do need to identify in each case why they may be flawed (eg, events we know will happen afterwards that the poll respondent doesn't, polls comparing unknown people with well known people, polls where you see the result is actually wrong and therefore you know must be flawed but don't know why (people taking antidepressants being out by a factor of 10, IQ levels of underdeveloped countries being clearly wrong, etc).
You often treat them as fact. They are statistically correct within the parameters of the question, but there is the old saying garbage in garbage out. In fairness in your last two examples were excellent uses of hypothetical polls.
Alarming with HY is how high he often manages to push the GO:GI ratio.
I thought Shapps was reported yesterday as a Johnson supporter?
We need someone who can provide stability and proven economic competence in these challenging times, and @RishiSunak is that person. That's why I'm backing him in the Conservative leadership contest
16 an over for three overs, one bowled by Harris Rauf.
That ain't happening.
If they win, I'll gracefully accept I continue to be the second most impressive inverse cricket tipster on PB.
Rauf has been superb. Indeed Pakistan's death bowling has been excellent. 50 up again for Koli but he is going to have to accelerate to an incredible extent here.
Brands is not a cheap circuit if you make a mistake.
I think it's my favourite UK circuit for car trackdays but they rarely do them on the full GP circuit. I've seen loads of people bin their shit at Sheene. That unsighted uphill approach just draws you in, upsets brake balance and the tightening radius finishes the job off. It's very different from the modern Tilkedromes.
16 an over for three overs, one bowled by Harris Rauf.
That ain't happening.
If they win, I'll gracefully accept I continue to be the second most impressive inverse cricket tipster on PB.
Rauf has been superb. Indeed Pakistan's death bowling has been excellent. 50 up again for Koli but he is going to have to accelerate to an incredible extent here.
Now you and I have opined, India should be odds-on to win.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott · 14m AS of now, I understand that @BorisJohnson is struggling to get the numbers. “I think he’s finished” says one backbencher who was asked for support. Still too early to say tho!!
16 an over for three overs, one bowled by Harris Rauf.
That ain't happening.
If they win, I'll gracefully accept I continue to be the second most impressive inverse cricket tipster on PB.
Rauf has been superb. Indeed Pakistan's death bowling has been excellent. 50 up again for Koli but he is going to have to accelerate to an incredible extent here.
Now you and I have opined, India should be odds-on to win.
16 off that over with 3x4 and its only par. It's all on the 19th which will surely be Rauf.
Lot of polling data floating around. But one interesting one that is being shared amongst Tory MPs is on management of the economy. Most people obviously think that will be the key election battleground issue. Shows Rishi ahead of Boris by 20 points amongst all voters...
.and by 17 points amongst 2019 Tory voters. Clear from Rishi's statement that economic competence is going to be his defining argument, and that he thinks that's how he neutralises the "Boris has the electoral X-factor" line.
Boris on good form at the 8am meeting with MPs. Fly was done up, only asked four people for cash, ok he spent the first half of the meeting talking about that treehouse, but the rest was a rousing story about Caligula. Has 2000 MPs backing him now ✅🇬🇧
Lot of polling data floating around. But one interesting one that is being shared amongst Tory MPs is on management of the economy. Most people obviously think that will be the key election battleground issue. Shows Rishi ahead of Boris by 20 points amongst all voters...
...and by 17 points amongst 2019 Tory voters. Clear from Rishi's statement that economic competence is going to be his defining argument, and that he thinks that's how he neutralises the "Boris has the electoral X-factor" line.
I think as we get closer to the deadline more and more Boris supporters will start begging for votes from colleagues and we'll get editorials insisting that members be allowed to have their say and what an outrage it would be if MPs acted in a manner contrary to that by not giving Boris enough votes.
The Times tracker has Boris on 55, he's been stuck around that number since Friday evening. If the needle doesn't move today I fully expect JRM and Nadine to have pieces tomorrow morning calling the 100 threshold a fix for Rishi and lashing out at MPs for not giving Boris enough support.
The 100 is a fix for Rishi, one I wholeheartedly support!
Lot of polling data floating around. But one interesting one that is being shared amongst Tory MPs is on management of the economy. Most people obviously think that will be the key election battleground issue. Shows Rishi ahead of Boris by 20 points amongst all voters...
...and by 17 points amongst 2019 Tory voters. Clear from Rishi's statement that economic competence is going to be his defining argument, and that he thinks that's how he neutralises the "Boris has the electoral X-factor" line.
The killer point, rarely made, is that Boris and Hunt can't work together. Quite apart from the resultant political machinations, no Hunt means no statement to the markets. Which means even greater economic chaos as we get a fifth (? I've lost count) CofE in as many months. And another delay. It'd make Liz Truss' start look brilliant.
To be honest, Steve Baker interests me, for two reasons, he interviews so well, quite a brilliant communicator. But he also knows his mind - he describes himself as Free Market Left, and if he wishes to expand on what that means anytime I would be keen to listen.
Compare and contrast Steve Baker so strong on media rounds this weekend with Penny Mourdant’s latest car crash interview. I am saying the differential between them is Steve Baker knows his mind, to answer questions he goes straight to that, out comes confident clear answers, Mourdant turns to a lot of empty space where there are no answers.
I’m not making an ideological point, the point I am making is politics works best, and more honestly, when politicians and parties have a clear ethos, and they just want to honestly talk about it and explain it.
Yes, this is why Corbyn did better than expected in 2017. The problem is often that people who have a clear idea of what they believe in are nuts. Their thoughts are clear and easy to express because they can't engage with the complexity of the real world. I have the impression that Baker is in that camp. Johnson is nuts too of course, in a different way. He deals with the complexity of the world by believing in nothing except his own advancement, and simply tells people what they want to hear. This turns out to be a surprisingly successful strategy in the right hands. I suspect Sunak is not nuts but will struggle to get a hearing from the electorate. The Tories will get a bounce because he is an improvement on Truss. But I think they'd be better off choosing Johnson again. They're screwed whatever, anyway.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott · 14m AS of now, I understand that @BorisJohnson is struggling to get the numbers. “I think he’s finished” says one backbencher who was asked for support. Still too early to say tho!!
Time to book your flight back to Dominica. One way please.
There's loads of random capitalisation on the thread this morning. Why so touchy about mine?
The SNP could have called themselves simply the Scotland Pary, or the Scotland Independence Party, or a myriad of other possible names if they didn't want the word "National" to be in their party name and didn't want to be associated with the concept of Nationalism.
a hundred years ago they wanted to be the Scottish party for the nation, hence "National". The fact that unionists try to always misname them and imply they are some nasty "Nationalist" organisation with its connotations is a recent thing since the resurgence of the right wing Imperialism in England.
If they didn't want to be portrayed as a nasty nationalist organisation they could try not being a nasty nationalist organisation.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott · 14m AS of now, I understand that @BorisJohnson is struggling to get the numbers. “I think he’s finished” says one backbencher who was asked for support. Still too early to say tho!!
Time to book your flight back to Dominica. One way please.
That's really harsh. We'd miss @rottenborough if he left.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott · 14m AS of now, I understand that @BorisJohnson is struggling to get the numbers. “I think he’s finished” says one backbencher who was asked for support. Still too early to say tho!!
Time to book your flight back to Dominica. One way please.
That's really harsh. We'd miss @rottenborough if he left.
Isabel Oakeshott @IsabelOakeshott · 14m AS of now, I understand that @BorisJohnson is struggling to get the numbers. “I think he’s finished” says one backbencher who was asked for support. Still too early to say tho!!
Time to book your flight back to Dominica. One way please.
Where was he on holiday? I've heard Dominican Republic, Antigua and now Dominica! The latter is an absolutely beautiful country BTW, I would wholeheartedly recommend for a holiday but I doubt that that's where Johnson was.
Comments
Although admittedly they're frequently called much worse than that.
Wonder how much work they are having to do to stop people switching away from them.
Much more likely to think "Rishi's going to win, so I'll stay true to my heart and vote Boris..."
The important feature is Al is happy. If Al is happy, everyone is happy.
Did Alba pretty much agree with it all, or do they actually have a different vision and path to achieving it?
If the latter I think you owe us an apology for triggering Leon.
https://twitter.com/RupertMyers/status/1584102217367187456
I felt more confident yesterday but not today - still enough for MPs to act like he could save them.
The fact that unionists try to always misname them and imply they are some nasty "Nationalist" organisation with its connotations is a recent thing since the resurgence of the right wing Imperialism in England.
Betting PostF1: backed no safety car at 2.55.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2022/10/usa-pre-race-2022.html
Pass the mind bleach, please.
If he doesn't then Sunak is crowned leader and PM by Tuesday night
https://twitter.com/IsabelOakeshott/status/1584142807526440960
His mum was apparently very upset all the same.
Brands is not a cheap circuit if you make a mistake.
I don't regret that choice of words.
You did a nice one earlier (I don't know whether I liked it or not) where you actually said 'my gut reaction' based upon a hypothetical polls mean you thought something or other.
There is nothing wrong with hypothetical polls if you treat them as such, so it is unfair of me to suggest they are complete nonsense, but they should be treated with a great deal of scepticism and we do need to identify in each case why they may be flawed (eg, events we know will happen afterwards that the poll respondent doesn't, polls comparing unknown people with well known people, polls where you see the result is actually wrong and therefore you know must be flawed but don't know why (people taking antidepressants being out by a factor of 10, IQ levels of underdeveloped countries being clearly wrong, etc).
You often treat them as fact. They are statistically correct within the parameters of the question, but there is the old saying garbage in garbage out. In fairness in your last two examples were excellent uses of hypothetical polls.
incredibleno surprise at all that Johnson's ego is so big he'd risk the destruction of the Conservative Party.Also I detect much more positive support for Rishi on PB, than on ConHome, who would prefer the contest widened than Boris v Sunak.
“Boris tells porkies. Sunak talks like he is in a board meeting” was posted there this morning. So who do you want to campaign on your behalf? No. This is actually a Serious question.
Here’s Sunak’s political obituary to explain what I mean.
Though some people may list green cards, Tax havens, furlough schemes, and mining the dam for Truss to press the button, truth is all went wrong for Sunak because sunak is a terrible campaigner. He literally cannot understand what the voters who decide a contest want and moderate his pitch from "I know what's best for you so I don't need to listen". Truss was able to run rings around him even though she was only promising what she had no intention of delivering. Keir Starmer would do the same as Truss and wipe the floor with tin-eared Sunak.
Treehouse?
Who is Morton backing, I wonder?
Ah Junior Boris' version of Putin's Dacha.
That ain't happening.
If they win, I'll gracefully accept I continue to be the second most impressive inverse cricket tipster on PB.
Compare and contrast Steve Baker so strong on media rounds this weekend with Penny Mourdant’s latest car crash interview. I am saying the differential between them is Steve Baker knows his mind, to answer questions he goes straight to that, out comes confident clear answers, Mourdant turns to a lot of empty space where there are no answers.
I’m not making an ideological point, the point I am making is politics works best, and more honestly, when politicians and parties have a clear ethos, and they just want to honestly talk about it and explain it.
We need someone who can provide stability and proven economic competence in these challenging times, and @RishiSunak is that person. That's why I'm backing him in the Conservative leadership contest
https://twitter.com/grantshapps/status/1584127509997981696
All sensible people need to pray that Boris doesn't make it to 100.
@IsabelOakeshott
·
14m
AS of now, I understand that
@BorisJohnson
is struggling to get the numbers. “I think he’s finished” says one backbencher who was asked for support. Still too early to say tho!!
.and by 17 points amongst 2019 Tory voters. Clear from Rishi's statement that economic competence is going to be his defining argument, and that he thinks that's how he neutralises the "Boris has the electoral X-factor" line.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1584146368058126337
...and by 17 points amongst 2019 Tory voters. Clear from Rishi's statement that economic competence is going to be his defining argument, and that he thinks that's how he neutralises the "Boris has the electoral X-factor" line.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1584146368058126337
Quite apart from the resultant political machinations, no Hunt means no statement to the markets.
Which means even greater economic chaos as we get a fifth (? I've lost count) CofE in as many months.
And another delay.
It'd make Liz Truss' start look brilliant.
Johnson is nuts too of course, in a different way. He deals with the complexity of the world by believing in nothing except his own advancement, and simply tells people what they want to hear. This turns out to be a surprisingly successful strategy in the right hands.
I suspect Sunak is not nuts but will struggle to get a hearing from the electorate. The Tories will get a bounce because he is an improvement on Truss. But I think they'd be better off choosing Johnson again. They're screwed whatever, anyway.
I do hope he never finds out...
@DPJHodges
·
2m
In terms of MPs this is turning into a rout. Where are the 100 Boris backers. When are we going to se them.
https://twitter.com/Matt_VickersMP/status/1584145357251915776?