If Jenrick really has enough supporters to lend some out and still come top, he's a shoe-in for the final round.
Which might be why Team Kemi now are portraying her as the mod(chortle)... the cent(giggle)... the less right wing option. I mean, that's insane, isn't it?
Finally, I can sort of see how boosting a beatable Cleverly at the expense of Badenoch is a race thing, but it's awfully subtle, and I suspect the subtleties will be lost on most. It doesn't sit well with the anti-woke thing.
I think the race is so close, as the first round shows, that no candidate has enough spare votes to allow their supporters to indulge in tactical voting. I suspect MPs are actually just voting for the candidate they prefer, but where's the story in that?
'It is so woke to complain about tactical voting. Kemi needs to stop being such a snowflake.'
I don’t know… comparing Kemi favourably to something that is white… that’s a bit woke isn’t it?
See, I did think about saying 'There's something about the night about Kemi Badenoch badmouthing James Cleverly because she's worrying about not making the final two'
'It is so woke to complain about tactical voting. Kemi needs to stop being such a snowflake.'
I don’t know… comparing Kemi favourably to something that is white… that’s a bit woke isn’t it?
See, I did think about saying 'There's something about the night about Kemi Badenoch badmouthing James Cleverly because she's worrying about not making the final two'
Golly gosh, that would have been a shocking thing to write
'It is so woke to complain about tactical voting. Kemi needs to stop being such a snowflake.'
I don’t know… comparing Kemi favourably to something that is white… that’s a bit woke isn’t it?
See, I did think about saying 'There's something about the night about Kemi Badenoch badmouthing James Cleverly because she's worrying about not making the final two'
Golly gosh, that would have been a shocking thing to write
The thing for me that is truly shocking is that Ann Widdecombe made that comment about a Jewish man.
To my innocent ears that sounded very antisemitic.
'It is so woke to complain about tactical voting. Kemi needs to stop being such a snowflake.'
I don’t know… comparing Kemi favourably to something that is white… that’s a bit woke isn’t it?
See, I did think about saying 'There's something about the night about Kemi Badenoch badmouthing James Cleverly because she's worrying about not making the final two'
Golly gosh, that would have been a shocking thing to write
The thing for me that is truly shocking is that Ann Widdecombe made that comment about a Jewish man.
To my innocent ears that sounded very antisemitic.
Not convinced about this - wouldn’t immediately associate Jewish with darkness/night. More an allusion to his Romanian heritage.
Now Labour’s Fagin posters were - and still are - a stain on them
I think the race is so close, as the first round shows, that no candidate has enough spare votes to allow their supporters to indulge in tactical voting. I suspect MPs are actually just voting for the candidate they prefer, but where's the story in that?
The race is so close as the first round shows, because there is nobody head and shoulders above the rest in a field of political pygmies.
Mr. B, " I get the impression that Badenoch believes she deserves the leadership, and is working backwards from that conclusion. "
That's a posteriori thinking, used by the religious. And also by others in many ways. If someone has a cause they just believe it's inherently right then hunt for evidence to support the conclusion rather than assessing evidence to come to a conclusion.
The whole conservative leadership race is a complete switch off for me
Just elect a leader and get on with it
Just elect a leader and get on with realising they are very poor and then get on with replacing them...
If Robert Jenrick is elected, the 'them' being replaced will be the party as a whole, and the replacers will be the Liberal Democrats.
Nah, they will cycle through until they find a leader that has an effective voice and presence. But they aren't on that list offered up this time.
Maybe.
Cleverly is probably the best option on the menu- though Patel might have been able to do the Michael Howard thing. But the succession planning has been awful, mostly because the Conservatives have burnt through a couple of generations of potential talent in the last five years.
And yes, there probably is another effective Conservative leader out there, they just don't know it yet. Heck, they might not even be an MP yet. Whether there will be a meaningful Conservative party from them to lead is another matter. There should be, but it won't take that much bad luck/judgement for a tumble in third party irrelevance.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far too focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking (or wheeling or cycling) there, and would be likely repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence; that's a lot of lost potential members. They are starting to address that.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
The whole conservative leadership race is a complete switch off for me
Just elect a leader and get on with it
Just elect a leader and get on with realising they are very poor and then get on with replacing them...
If Robert Jenrick is elected, the 'them' being replaced will be the party as a whole, and the replacers will be the Liberal Democrats.
Nah, they will cycle through until they find a leader that has an effective voice and presence. But they aren't on that list offered up this time.
Maybe.
Cleverly is probably the best option on the menu- though Patel might have been able to do the Michael Howard thing. But the succession planning has been awful, mostly because the Conservatives have burnt through a couple of generations of potential talent in the last five years.
And yes, there probably is another effective Conservative leader out there, they just don't know it yet. Heck, they might not even be an MP yet. Whether there will be a meaningful Conservative party from them to lead is another matter. There should be, but it won't take that much bad luck/judgement for a tumble in third party irrelevance.
I hope that the Conservative Party can restore itself to sanity and good health. The country benefits from all decent parties being decent.
Of the remaining candidates I look at Stride and remember the guy grifting away during the election campaign, literally delivering the most absurd laughable spin lines and trying to insist he and they were serious. Sorry mate, no. Tugenhat seems to have grafted away in the background out of view, had a good reputation but has soiled himself prostrate before the membership. No.
That leaves Jenrick, Badenoch and Cleverley. The latter is the least worst option by a considerable distance. Still a toad, but not as reprehensible a toad as Jenrick is. And Badenoch? As prickly as Truss without the talent.
If they go for the wrong leader, we'll have another leadership contest before the next election. Probably. Unless they are so mad that they leave Jenrick in place despite the obvious drawbacks.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
The whole conservative leadership race is a complete switch off for me
Just elect a leader and get on with it
Just elect a leader and get on with realising they are very poor and then get on with replacing them...
If Robert Jenrick is elected, the 'them' being replaced will be the party as a whole, and the replacers will be the Liberal Democrats.
Nah, they will cycle through until they find a leader that has an effective voice and presence. But they aren't on that list offered up this time.
Maybe.
Cleverly is probably the best option on the menu- though Patel might have been able to do the Michael Howard thing. But the succession planning has been awful, mostly because the Conservatives have burnt through a couple of generations of potential talent in the last five years.
And yes, there probably is another effective Conservative leader out there, they just don't know it yet. Heck, they might not even be an MP yet. Whether there will be a meaningful Conservative party from them to lead is another matter. There should be, but it won't take that much bad luck/judgement for a tumble in third party irrelevance.
I hope that the Conservative Party can restore itself to sanity and good health. The country benefits from all decent parties being decent.
Of the remaining candidates I look at Stride and remember the guy grifting away during the election campaign, literally delivering the most absurd laughable spin lines and trying to insist he and they were serious. Sorry mate, no. Tugenhat seems to have grafted away in the background out of view, had a good reputation but has soiled himself prostrate before the membership. No.
That leaves Jenrick, Badenoch and Cleverley. The latter is the least worst option by a considerable distance. Still a toad, but not as reprehensible a toad as Jenrick is. And Badenoch? As prickly as Truss without the talent.
If they go for the wrong leader, we'll have another leadership contest before the next election. Probably. Unless they are so mad that they leave Jenrick in place despite the obvious drawbacks.
At the start line Patel seemed to me to be the most credible candidate (if one conveniently ignores her back story).
Maybe like Starmer for Labour in 2020 the next leader is the Kinnock/ Howard candidate. Not there to win an election but appointed to steady the ship.
To be clear, I won't be voting in the leadership. There is just such a collective lack of self-awareness amongst those standing. They are the problem. There is nobody there who will enthuse the public to vote for them, even if Starmer crashes and burns.
As I told my (ex)MP, the best bet is probably to put Cleverly in charge, on the basis that he will oversee a two or three year beauty parade, where some new talent can develop their own manifesto to attract the lost voters.
Leadership elections post defeat are interesting. Compared to the Tories now, Labour had a mountain of talent in 2010 and 2015, but in both cases contrived to pick someone ill suited to the task.
It seems to be happening to the Tories. I still don’t understand how anyone in the Tory party can possibly believe that Jenrick is the answer. Davey and Farage will be delighted.
If I had to choose from who is left Cleverly stands out as someone with a bit of wit and warmth . Stride is the safe back to the 90s candidate. Interesting in a way. Old school.
Badenoch clearly has potential star quality. She’s will grab attention and could take on Farage. However she loves herself slightly too much and her politicking is clumsy and therefore hugely risky. I imagine her abrasive style has limited appeal to blue wall Tories.
Cleverly is probably the best one unless they want to roll the dice with Kemi and the bet comes good because her abrasive style is just a persona.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
So vegan apples taste worse than....apples? Seriously, mention the word vegan,and people lose their shit over it.
The whole conservative leadership race is a complete switch off for me
Just elect a leader and get on with it
Just elect a leader and get on with realising they are very poor and then get on with replacing them...
If Robert Jenrick is elected, the 'them' being replaced will be the party as a whole, and the replacers will be the Liberal Democrats.
Nah, they will cycle through until they find a leader that has an effective voice and presence. But they aren't on that list offered up this time.
Maybe.
Cleverly is probably the best option on the menu- though Patel might have been able to do the Michael Howard thing. But the succession planning has been awful, mostly because the Conservatives have burnt through a couple of generations of potential talent in the last five years.
And yes, there probably is another effective Conservative leader out there, they just don't know it yet. Heck, they might not even be an MP yet. Whether there will be a meaningful Conservative party from them to lead is another matter. There should be, but it won't take that much bad luck/judgement for a tumble in third party irrelevance.
I hope that the Conservative Party can restore itself to sanity and good health. The country benefits from all decent parties being decent.
Of the remaining candidates I look at Stride and remember the guy grifting away during the election campaign, literally delivering the most absurd laughable spin lines and trying to insist he and they were serious. Sorry mate, no. Tugenhat seems to have grafted away in the background out of view, had a good reputation but has soiled himself prostrate before the membership. No.
That leaves Jenrick, Badenoch and Cleverley. The latter is the least worst option by a considerable distance. Still a toad, but not as reprehensible a toad as Jenrick is. And Badenoch? As prickly as Truss without the talent.
If they go for the wrong leader, we'll have another leadership contest before the next election. Probably. Unless they are so mad that they leave Jenrick in place despite the obvious drawbacks.
At the start line Patel seemed to me to be the most credible candidate (if one conveniently ignores her back story).
Maybe like Starmer for Labour in 2020 the next leader is the Kinnock/ Howard candidate. Not there to win an election but appointed to steady the ship.
Steadying the ship would be Cleverly. Another thing going for him is a much better track record than the others in government. He got through the Home Office graveyard gig more or less unscathed. While none of these candidates is likely to be PM the possiblity you might is the reason why you do this. Cleverly is the most plausible prime minister.
To be clear, I won't be voting in the leadership. There is just such a collective lack of self-awareness amongst those standing. They are the problem. There is nobody there who will enthuse the public to vote for them, even if Starmer crashes and burns.
As I told my (ex)MP, the best bet is probably to put Cleverly in charge, on the basis that he will oversee a two or three year beauty parade, where some new talent can develop their own manifesto to attract the lost voters.
On that latter point, isn't the truth that the party doesn't understand - or even accept - that it has lost the voters? On the outside I look at the contest and sit agog at the complete lack of self-awareness. Its not just that you got demolished, its *why* you got demolished.
If the Tories want to return to Conservatism - sound finance, pro business, internationalist - then Labour are there begging to be attacked. But instead of that, there seems to be this desperate push to go further down the rabbit hole. The rabbit hole that got you first hated and then demolished.
Mr. Stopper, I remember hearing about halal bread once, which did make me wonder what bread wouldn't qualify and if there's some sort of porkbread or hambread I didn't know about.
To be clear, I won't be voting in the leadership. There is just such a collective lack of self-awareness amongst those standing. They are the problem. There is nobody there who will enthuse the public to vote for them, even if Starmer crashes and burns.
As I told my (ex)MP, the best bet is probably to put Cleverly in charge, on the basis that he will oversee a two or three year beauty parade, where some new talent can develop their own manifesto to attract the lost voters.
On that latter point, isn't the truth that the party doesn't understand - or even accept - that it has lost the voters? On the outside I look at the contest and sit agog at the complete lack of self-awareness. Its not just that you got demolished, its *why* you got demolished.
If the Tories want to return to Conservatism - sound finance, pro business, internationalist - then Labour are there begging to be attacked. But instead of that, there seems to be this desperate push to go further down the rabbit hole. The rabbit hole that got you first hated and then demolished.
I don't get it.
Labour and the Lib Dem’s are currently more conservative in the traditional , sound money pragmatist, patriotic sense than the Conservatives, which is a problem for them. It’s also a problem for Labour and the LibDems as expectation for change mount.
Many Tories seem to want to be right wing radicals, conservative in name only
Mr. Stopper, I remember hearing about halal bread once, which did make me wonder what bread wouldn't qualify and if there's some sort of porkbread or hambread I didn't know about.
You made me look. Sounds delicious actually. No doubt numerous posts revealing it was invented in 1998 to follow.
Nothing important in any possible tactics. If Kemi has the real and wholehearted support of 41 MPs she will be on the final ballot and if she doesn't, she should not be there.
Tory MPs are small in number and (I suspect) about the inflict a major disaster on their party, but collectively there is nothing the 80 can do to any group of 41 to keep the '41 group' candidate off the cup final.
Mr. Stopper, I remember hearing about halal bread once, which did make me wonder what bread wouldn't qualify and if there's some sort of porkbread or hambread I didn't know about.
Presumably something like this, which I’ve made a few times and is tremendous, I have his book on my IPad.
I don't buy the stuff about him not appealing to Reform; I think he'd have made a solid and serious Conservative offer on that, and he'd be great at fighting Labour on the economy and winning back LD seats.
To be clear, I won't be voting in the leadership. There is just such a collective lack of self-awareness amongst those standing. They are the problem. There is nobody there who will enthuse the public to vote for them, even if Starmer crashes and burns.
As I told my (ex)MP, the best bet is probably to put Cleverly in charge, on the basis that he will oversee a two or three year beauty parade, where some new talent can develop their own manifesto to attract the lost voters.
On that latter point, isn't the truth that the party doesn't understand - or even accept - that it has lost the voters? On the outside I look at the contest and sit agog at the complete lack of self-awareness. Its not just that you got demolished, its *why* you got demolished.
If the Tories want to return to Conservatism - sound finance, pro business, internationalist - then Labour are there begging to be attacked. But instead of that, there seems to be this desperate push to go further down the rabbit hole. The rabbit hole that got you first hated and then demolished.
I don't get it.
Human nature.
To admit "we got an unparalleled tonking, despite our opponent being the textbook definition of "adequate but uninspiring" and it was deserved because we were that awful" requires a lot of honesty. Few of us possess that.
Much easier to think "one more heave" and draw fantasy arrows on the battle plan. (See "we'll spend a couple of years reabsorbing Reform, then go for the not currently blue wall".)
In recent cycles, it has taken multiple defeats for Red or Blue to act on the message from the electorate. Partly because each defeat gets harder to ignore. But also because it means that the "we" becomes a "they", which is much easier to handle objectively.
Mr. Stopper, I remember hearing about halal bread once, which did make me wonder what bread wouldn't qualify and if there's some sort of porkbread or hambread I didn't know about.
You made me look. Sounds delicious actually. No doubt numerous posts revealing it was invented in 1998 to follow.
To be clear, I won't be voting in the leadership. There is just such a collective lack of self-awareness amongst those standing. They are the problem. There is nobody there who will enthuse the public to vote for them, even if Starmer crashes and burns.
As I told my (ex)MP, the best bet is probably to put Cleverly in charge, on the basis that he will oversee a two or three year beauty parade, where some new talent can develop their own manifesto to attract the lost voters.
On that latter point, isn't the truth that the party doesn't understand - or even accept - that it has lost the voters? On the outside I look at the contest and sit agog at the complete lack of self-awareness. Its not just that you got demolished, its *why* you got demolished.
If the Tories want to return to Conservatism - sound finance, pro business, internationalist - then Labour are there begging to be attacked. But instead of that, there seems to be this desperate push to go further down the rabbit hole. The rabbit hole that got you first hated and then demolished.
I don't get it.
Conservatism isn't internationalist; that's a Labour/LD philosophy.
It isn't "nationalist" either - or isolationist - it's about constructively engaging with other nations with the British national interest at heart and robustly defending those interests.
I don't buy the stuff about him not appealing to Reform; I think he'd have made a solid and serious Conservative offer on that, and he'd be great at fighting Labour on the economy and winning back LD seats.
Hunt won in 2024 in a seat he really should have lost. He knows a few things.
I think the race is so close, as the first round shows, that no candidate has enough spare votes to allow their supporters to indulge in tactical voting. I suspect MPs are actually just voting for the candidate they prefer, but where's the story in that?
Yes, I think so too, though they may not have known how even the votes were.
I suspect the reason that many MPs of the Cleverly vote didn't declare is that they are keeping their powder dry to declare in later rounds and finish on the winning side.
I don't buy the stuff about him not appealing to Reform; I think he'd have made a solid and serious Conservative offer on that, and he'd be great at fighting Labour on the economy and winning back LD seats.
The country and party would be in a far better place had he beaten Johnson in 2019.
Mr. Stopper, I remember hearing about halal bread once, which did make me wonder what bread wouldn't qualify and if there's some sort of porkbread or hambread I didn't know about.
It didn’t occur to you that you might not understand what ‘halal’ means?
This has to be one of the funniest stories in ages.
A TikTok viral “ATM Glitch” was reportedly used by thousands of people to withdraw “Free money” from Chase Bank ATMs.
Unfortunately, banks and police see it rather differently. People were paying in cheques for large amounts, and withdrawing it quickly before the cheque bounced.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
Pre-covid, the staff canteen at my global megacorp employer sold more plant-based sausage rolls than animal-based sausage rolls. It might be there is more scope here, although since I rarely eat meat, I'm not best-placed to judge. I have heard that plant-based burgers are good but too expensive, and plant-based milk substitutes proliferate in supermarkets.
So it might be that rather than dictate a universal changeover, we concentrate on what works best.
To be clear, I won't be voting in the leadership. There is just such a collective lack of self-awareness amongst those standing. They are the problem. There is nobody there who will enthuse the public to vote for them, even if Starmer crashes and burns.
As I told my (ex)MP, the best bet is probably to put Cleverly in charge, on the basis that he will oversee a two or three year beauty parade, where some new talent can develop their own manifesto to attract the lost voters.
On that latter point, isn't the truth that the party doesn't understand - or even accept - that it has lost the voters? On the outside I look at the contest and sit agog at the complete lack of self-awareness. Its not just that you got demolished, its *why* you got demolished.
If the Tories want to return to Conservatism - sound finance, pro business, internationalist - then Labour are there begging to be attacked. But instead of that, there seems to be this desperate push to go further down the rabbit hole. The rabbit hole that got you first hated and then demolished.
I don't get it.
Conservatism isn't internationalist; that's a Labour/LD philosophy.
It isn't "nationalist" either - or isolationist - it's about constructively engaging with other nations with the British national interest at heart and robustly defending those interests.
Oh dear. They’ve deviated a long way from that. Part of the party’s problem. They are weak on all counts there.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
So vegan apples taste worse than....apples? Seriously, mention the word vegan,and people lose their shit over it.
Agreed. I rmember when my church was thinking of allowing part of the premises to be used by a couple that wanted to run a vegan coffee shop. They brought some cakes along to one meeting which were lovely. One church member point blank refused to even try them because they were vegan.
I don't buy the stuff about him not appealing to Reform; I think he'd have made a solid and serious Conservative offer on that, and he'd be great at fighting Labour on the economy and winning back LD seats.
Hunt won in 2024 in a seat he really should have lost. He knows a few things.
That alone should qualify him
Hunt was very lucky in that the big issue in his constituency (a dodgy contaminated village water supply) was fixed 2 days before the election. That is probably what won it for him..
I quite like Jacob Rees Mogg's idea (if it was him) delivered in the Liz Truss blue sky thinking session that we could plug a nuclear submarine into the grid and get free power.
I have no idea whether it would work, perhaps someone with greater nuclear knowledge than myself (almost everyone here) could opine.
This easily must be one of the biggest unforced errors a Chancellor has made so early in their time in No. 11 for a very very long time:
Labour MP: “It hasn’t even been thought through properly. We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that,”
A third Labour MP who represents a marginal seat said they had received about 200 emails on the issue, many of them along the lines of: “I’ve just voted Labour for the first time but never again”
Labour ministers reveal grave concerns about winter fuel payment cut Frontbenchers say they have had string of complaints from constituents and policy ‘won’t be worth the political hit’
I'd see it as being from the same tradition as the people who gave us TheyWorkForYou and WhatDoTheyKnow.
My only caveat would be to run a couple of sanity checks to make sure you trust the results, as we do not have immediate visibility of the quality of the underlying data, unless it is in the website somewhere else. But that's a standard check we all do anyway, just as we all read the article behind a tweeted headline . It seems to be about right in my area.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
So vegan apples taste worse than....apples? Seriously, mention the word vegan,and people lose their shit over it.
Agreed. I rmember when my church was thinking of allowing part of the premises to be used by a couple that wanted to run a vegan coffee shop. They brought some cakes along to one meeting which were lovely. One church member point blank refused to even try them because they were vegan.
Vegans refuse to try bacon sandwiches - they can hardly object when the opposite is true. I have a friend with a coffee shop who makes great vegan bakery - I always ask her what she has with eggs and milk and butter in and buy that because those are going to be better, with less crappy fake ingredients.
I quite like Jacob Rees Mogg's idea (if it was him) delivered in the Liz Truss blue sky thinking session that we could plug a nuclear submarine into the grid and get free power.
I have no idea whether it would work, perhaps someone with greater nuclear knowledge than myself (almost everyone here) could opine.
Not much use for the decaying ones. Mind you the ‘active’ ones aren’t much better.
Everyone knows that backbench tory MPs are the most sophisticated electorate in the world when it comes to leadership voting.
It's quite funny because Sunak lending Kemi votes to knock better rivals than Liz out of the members' ballot was what thrust her into the limelight in the first place.
I quite like Jacob Rees Mogg's idea (if it was him) delivered in the Liz Truss blue sky thinking session that we could plug a nuclear submarine into the grid and get free power.
I have no idea whether it would work, perhaps someone with greater nuclear knowledge than myself (almost everyone here) could opine.
Not much use for the decaying ones. Mind you the ‘active’ ones aren’t much better.
This easily must be one of the biggest unforced errors a Chancellor has made so early in their time in No. 11 for a very very long time:
Labour MP: “It hasn’t even been thought through properly. We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that,”
A third Labour MP who represents a marginal seat said they had received about 200 emails on the issue, many of them along the lines of: “I’ve just voted Labour for the first time but never again”
Labour ministers reveal grave concerns about winter fuel payment cut Frontbenchers say they have had string of complaints from constituents and policy ‘won’t be worth the political hit’
Agreed . I’m shocked that any politician was so tone deaf to think there wouldn’t be a furore . And the sums raised are paltry. Starmer should have vetoed this move and told Reeves to find the money elsewhere . The WFA debacle has now overtaken everything . Clueless is being kind to both Reeves and Starmer . Labour need to put forward some mitigation for the WFA removal .
The "crypto ally" quoted there is Nic Carter, who is one of the stupidest people in crypto, and there are some very stupid people in crypto.
It makes the Trump family money and loses basically zero votes. Apparently Nic is worried that embracing an obvious grift will lose support from the crypto industry, but everybody except him knows perfectly well that Trump is a scammer. The crypto industry is giving him bribes because they know he can be bribed.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far too focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking (or wheeling or cycling) there, and would be likely repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence; that's a lot of lost potential members. They are starting to address that.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
Indeed. Families are a vital market both today and for the future - and overlap with the grandparents taking their grandweans out.
And your point leads to greater usage by locals as opposed to the single time in a lifetime visit syndrome.
I think, for me, the anti-wokists really discredited themselves when they complained - effectively - about Armstrong having been so woke 150 years ago as to buy and display an anti-slavery statue at Cragside, where it remains in the niche which Armstrong allocated to it ...
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
So vegan apples taste worse than....apples? Seriously, mention the word vegan,and people lose their shit over it.
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
So vegan apples taste worse than....apples? Seriously, mention the word vegan,and people lose their shit over it.
I’m not the one losing my shit here…
It weird how wound up some people get about what other people eat. It stems from deep childhood memories and being forced to eat your greens. Anyone who likes their greens is deeply suspicious to them.
This easily must be one of the biggest unforced errors a Chancellor has made so early in their time in No. 11 for a very very long time:
Labour MP: “It hasn’t even been thought through properly. We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that,”
A third Labour MP who represents a marginal seat said they had received about 200 emails on the issue, many of them along the lines of: “I’ve just voted Labour for the first time but never again”
Labour ministers reveal grave concerns about winter fuel payment cut Frontbenchers say they have had string of complaints from constituents and policy ‘won’t be worth the political hit’
Agreed . I’m shocked that any politician was so tone deaf to think there wouldn’t be a furore . And the sums raised are paltry. Starmer should have vetoed this move and told Reeves to find the money elsewhere . The WFA debacle has now overtaken everything . Clueless is being kind to both Reeves and Starmer . Labour need to put forward some mitigation for the WFA removal .
Whatever your views on the policy, Reeves announced it in an utterly cack-handed, tone deaf way that was always going to store up problems. Her first test and she really flubbed it.
Everyone knows that backbench tory MPs are the most sophisticated electorate in the world when it comes to leadership voting.
It's quite funny because Sunak lending Kemi votes to knock better rivals than Liz out of the members' ballot was what thrust her into the limelight in the first place.
This easily must be one of the biggest unforced errors a Chancellor has made so early in their time in No. 11 for a very very long time:
Labour MP: “It hasn’t even been thought through properly. We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that,”
A third Labour MP who represents a marginal seat said they had received about 200 emails on the issue, many of them along the lines of: “I’ve just voted Labour for the first time but never again”
Labour ministers reveal grave concerns about winter fuel payment cut Frontbenchers say they have had string of complaints from constituents and policy ‘won’t be worth the political hit’
Agreed . I’m shocked that any politician was so tone deaf to think there wouldn’t be a furore . And the sums raised are paltry. Starmer should have vetoed this move and told Reeves to find the money elsewhere . The WFA debacle has now overtaken everything . Clueless is being kind to both Reeves and Starmer . Labour need to put forward some mitigation for the WFA removal .
Does this tell us that Starmer is just stepping back and letting Reeves get on with the economics because it an area in knows absolutely nothing about? Or was he involved in the decision and agreed it was a good move?
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
Pre-covid, the staff canteen at my global megacorp employer sold more plant-based sausage rolls than animal-based sausage rolls. It might be there is more scope here, although since I rarely eat meat, I'm not best-placed to judge. I have heard that plant-based burgers are good but too expensive, and plant-based milk substitutes proliferate in supermarkets.
So it might be that rather than dictate a universal changeover, we concentrate on what works best.
Sure. I’m all for options and responding to customer demand. (Although the unit economics of plant based burgers make me smile. Talking about burning money!)
If they sell, stock them.
But your stock policies shouldn’t be determined by a vote
I don't buy the stuff about him not appealing to Reform; I think he'd have made a solid and serious Conservative offer on that, and he'd be great at fighting Labour on the economy and winning back LD seats.
The Tories made a big mistake from a long term point of view in choosing Johnson over Hunt, when all the Tory MPs knew damn well that Johnson lacked the character to be PM. Hunt is a good communicator, a serious person and is rooted close to the political centre ground. They would not be in the mess they are now if they had not made the Faustian pact of electing Johnson.
This easily must be one of the biggest unforced errors a Chancellor has made so early in their time in No. 11 for a very very long time:
Labour MP: “It hasn’t even been thought through properly. We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that,”
A third Labour MP who represents a marginal seat said they had received about 200 emails on the issue, many of them along the lines of: “I’ve just voted Labour for the first time but never again”
Labour ministers reveal grave concerns about winter fuel payment cut Frontbenchers say they have had string of complaints from constituents and policy ‘won’t be worth the political hit’
Agreed . I’m shocked that any politician was so tone deaf to think there wouldn’t be a furore . And the sums raised are paltry. Starmer should have vetoed this move and told Reeves to find the money elsewhere . The WFA debacle has now overtaken everything . Clueless is being kind to both Reeves and Starmer . Labour need to put forward some mitigation for the WFA removal .
Meh. They just got elected, the voters will have forgotten about it in 5 years. This is the right time to hose out the bad policies that are unpopular to end.
I quite like Jacob Rees Mogg's idea (if it was him) delivered in the Liz Truss blue sky thinking session that we could plug a nuclear submarine into the grid and get free power.
I have no idea whether it would work, perhaps someone with greater nuclear knowledge than myself (almost everyone here) could opine.
They considered it during the early years of the Troubles. When strikes threatened power production they considered parking a nukesub in Belfast and running cables thru. But there are logistic problems: the reactor doesn't have a handy output socket and getting the cables out is difficult
Everything in a submarine that goes in or out has to fit thru a hatch. The submarines weren't built to allow cables to be run from the hatch to the reactor and I'm not sure the cable diameter was smaller than the hatch diameter. They thought they'd have to carve a hole in the hull.
Perhaps they could have done it eventually (military move fast when needed) but the urgency went away
Not such a big move, then, from 40 to 50 per cent.
But why do they need a plan? Surely you just cater to all customers and stock what sells?
Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far to focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking there, and would be repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
I’m sure that the Telegraph is pushing an agenda.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
So vegan apples taste worse than....apples? Seriously, mention the word vegan,and people lose their shit over it.
I’m not the one losing my shit here…
It weird how wound up some people get about what other people eat. It stems from deep childhood memories and being forced to eat your greens. Anyone who likes their greens is deeply suspicious to them.
Anyone who likes broccoli is surely somebody you should be deeply suspicious of?
Comments
Good morning PB.
'It is so woke to complain about tactical voting. Kemi needs to stop being such a snowflake.'
The whole conservative leadership race is a complete switch off for me
Just elect a leader and get on with it
Understanding tactical voting is important. It played a part in the Conservative woe at the recent election.
Slept rather terribly. Not sure this bodes well for the DC20 one shot I'm running this evening, but we shall see.
If Jenrick really has enough supporters to lend some out and still come top, he's a shoe-in for the final round.
Which might be why Team Kemi now are portraying her as the mod(chortle)... the cent(giggle)... the less right wing option. I mean, that's insane, isn't it?
Finally, I can sort of see how boosting a beatable Cleverly at the expense of Badenoch is a race thing, but it's awfully subtle, and I suspect the subtleties will be lost on most. It doesn't sit well with the anti-woke thing.
At this rate, there will be another Conservative leadership election soon.
To my innocent ears that sounded very antisemitic.
Now Labour’s Fagin posters were - and still are - a stain on them
I had her down as "right wing but realistic"; which bit of that is more important to her supporters?
That's a posteriori thinking, used by the religious. And also by others in many ways. If someone has a cause they just believe it's inherently right then hunt for evidence to support the conclusion rather than assessing evidence to come to a conclusion.
Tugsy is ok if he drops the faux right wing rhetoric.
Shame.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZOb2maZH6U&ab_channel=Kanal13
Cleverly is probably the best option on the menu- though Patel might have been able to do the Michael Howard thing. But the succession planning has been awful, mostly because the Conservatives have burnt through a couple of generations of potential talent in the last five years.
And yes, there probably is another effective Conservative leader out there, they just don't know it yet. Heck, they might not even be an MP yet. Whether there will be a meaningful Conservative party from them to lead is another matter. There should be, but it won't take that much bad luck/judgement for a tumble in third party irrelevance.
I've had another little nibble, laying Kemi.
Several interesting FPTs that I missed: Speaking as an NT life member since just post-University, I don't see how this change undermines catering to all members. That is reflecting social trends, and compared to all of our political parties (for example), and the Telegraph readership, the National Trust has a good age profile, with an average membership age somewhere in the mid-40s. Attention needs to paid to all groups, not just near pensioners and older.
I don't even see the Telegraph showing that the number of meat etc dishes will be reduced in any signficant way; they assume it's a zero sum game. Clearly the customers and marketing and product quality need to match. I'd be concerned if it goes much higher - say to 70-80%.
NT need to keep up with their customers, and there are plenty of things to be addressed. There are certain advantages to reducing the numbers of cattle, such as increased accessibility being possible by the removal of cattle-grids (there are alternative strategies).
NT properties are far too focused on "drive here and walk around" by assumed culture; my local NT rural estate has 175k people within 5 miles who could be walking (or wheeling or cycling) there, and would be likely repeat visitors; but it is not seriously addressed. The focus has been more heavily on tourists. And 25% of adults do not, or cannot, have a driving licence; that's a lot of lost potential members. They are starting to address that.
Reading the Telegraph piece and preceding articles they have published puffing, for example, the "Restore Trust" campaign group, I'd say it's just another element in their culture war, and a farmer is a useful walk-on cameo.
Of the remaining candidates I look at Stride and remember the guy grifting away during the election campaign, literally delivering the most absurd laughable spin lines and trying to insist he and they were serious. Sorry mate, no. Tugenhat seems to have grafted away in the background out of view, had a good reputation but has soiled himself prostrate before the membership. No.
That leaves Jenrick, Badenoch and Cleverley. The latter is the least worst option by a considerable distance. Still a toad, but not as reprehensible a toad as Jenrick is. And Badenoch? As prickly as Truss without the talent.
If they go for the wrong leader, we'll have another leadership contest before the next election. Probably. Unless they are so mad that they leave Jenrick in place despite the obvious drawbacks.
Generally, though, vegan food tastes (to me) less good than traditional food. Of course you have it on offer and if it sells better you adjust your stocking policies.
But it seems very odd to have a strategic objective to increase stocking of a product that some customers don’t like as much. It’s a bureaucratic mindset.
(FWIW I spend a considerable amount of time thinking about burping cows and how to manage their methane emissions)
Maybe like Starmer for Labour in 2020 the next leader is the Kinnock/ Howard candidate. Not there to win an election but appointed to steady the ship.
As I told my (ex)MP, the best bet is probably to put Cleverly in charge, on the basis that he will oversee a two or three year beauty parade, where some new talent can develop their own manifesto to attract the lost voters.
https://www.tomforth.co.uk/circlepopulations/
It seems to be happening to the Tories. I still don’t understand how anyone in the Tory party can possibly believe that Jenrick is the answer. Davey and Farage will be delighted.
If I had to choose from who is left Cleverly stands out as someone with a bit of wit and warmth . Stride is the safe back to the 90s candidate. Interesting in a way. Old school.
Badenoch clearly has potential star quality. She’s will grab attention and could take on Farage. However she loves herself slightly too much and her politicking is clumsy and therefore hugely risky. I imagine her abrasive style has limited appeal to blue wall Tories.
Cleverly is probably the best one unless they want to roll the dice with Kemi and the bet comes good because her abrasive style is just a persona.
Seriously, mention the word vegan,and people lose their shit over it.
If the Tories want to return to Conservatism - sound finance, pro business, internationalist - then Labour are there begging to be attacked. But instead of that, there seems to be this desperate push to go further down the rabbit hole. The rabbit hole that got you first hated and then demolished.
I don't get it.
Many Tories seem to want to be right wing radicals, conservative in name only
Sounds delicious actually. No doubt numerous posts revealing it was invented in 1998 to follow.
https://www.theitaliangardenproject.com/blog/a-new-york-treat-pane-con-ciccioli
Tory MPs are small in number and (I suspect) about the inflict a major disaster on their party, but collectively there is nothing the 80 can do to any group of 41 to keep the '41 group' candidate off the cup final.
https://www.thefreshloaf.com/node/33280/pain-au-bacon-ken-forkish
I don't buy the stuff about him not appealing to Reform; I think he'd have made a solid and serious Conservative offer on that, and he'd be great at fighting Labour on the economy and winning back LD seats.
To admit "we got an unparalleled tonking, despite our opponent being the textbook definition of "adequate but uninspiring" and it was deserved because we were that awful" requires a lot of honesty. Few of us possess that.
Much easier to think "one more heave" and draw fantasy arrows on the battle plan. (See "we'll spend a couple of years reabsorbing Reform, then go for the not currently blue wall".)
In recent cycles, it has taken multiple defeats for Red or Blue to act on the message from the electorate. Partly because each defeat gets harder to ignore. But also because it means that the "we" becomes a "they", which is much easier to handle objectively.
And lard can be used in bread recipes (though rare in the UK).
But it actually makes more sense than putting a "suitable for vegetarians" mark on a carton of pure orange juice.
It isn't "nationalist" either - or isolationist - it's about constructively engaging with other nations with the British national interest at heart and robustly defending those interests.
That alone should qualify him
I suspect the reason that many MPs of the Cleverly vote didn't declare is that they are keeping their powder dry to declare in later rounds and finish on the winning side.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/labour-drops-plans-to-teach-nuanced-history-of-british-empire-s0lzx2fb0
A TikTok viral “ATM Glitch” was reportedly used by thousands of people to withdraw “Free money” from Chase Bank ATMs.
Unfortunately, banks and police see it rather differently. People were paying in cheques for large amounts, and withdrawing it quickly before the cheque bounced.
Err, that’s fraud and theft guys, not a “glitch”.
https://gizmodo.com/idiots-who-tried-tiktoks-viral-free-money-glitch-at-atms-are-getting-reported-for-fraud-2000495838
So it might be that rather than dictate a universal changeover, we concentrate on what works best.
Maitland Road, Rosyth: https://maps.app.goo.gl/4T5aP7mqy6DN5u7A8
‘A huge mistake’: Trump’s crypto allies cringe over family’s startup
The crypto venture is attracting what appear to be hacks and attempted scams ahead of its launch.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/09/06/trump-family-crypto-startup-00177566
Why should his actual sons be denied?
I have no idea whether it would work, perhaps someone with greater nuclear knowledge than myself (almost everyone here) could opine.
Labour MP: “It hasn’t even been thought through properly. We’re going to end up with more old people in hospital or care as a result, with all the costs involved in that,”
A third Labour MP who represents a marginal seat said they had received about 200 emails on the issue, many of them along the lines of: “I’ve just voted Labour for the first time but never again”
Labour ministers reveal grave concerns about winter fuel payment cut
Frontbenchers say they have had string of complaints from constituents and policy ‘won’t be worth the political hit’
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/sep/07/labour-ministers-reveal-grave-concerns-about-winter-fuel-payment-cut
My only caveat would be to run a couple of sanity checks to make sure you trust the results, as we do not have immediate visibility of the quality of the underlying data, unless it is in the website somewhere else. But that's a standard check we all do anyway, just as we all read the article behind a tweeted headline . It seems to be about right in my area.
Thanks for the link in your reply.
Everyone knows that backbench tory MPs are the most sophisticated electorate in the world when it comes to leadership voting.
https://x.com/navylookout/status/1832327498454950046?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
It makes the Trump family money and loses basically zero votes. Apparently Nic is worried that embracing an obvious grift will lose support from the crypto industry, but everybody except him knows perfectly well that Trump is a scammer. The crypto industry is giving him bribes because they know he can be bribed.
And your point leads to greater usage by locals as opposed to the single time in a lifetime visit syndrome.
I think, for me, the anti-wokists really discredited themselves when they complained - effectively - about Armstrong having been so woke 150 years ago as to buy and display an anti-slavery statue at Cragside, where it remains in the niche which Armstrong allocated to it ...
The latter is even worse than the former.
https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/1832222481890803964
If they sell, stock them.
But your stock policies shouldn’t be determined by a vote
Everything in a submarine that goes in or out has to fit thru a hatch. The submarines weren't built to allow cables to be run from the hatch to the reactor and I'm not sure the cable diameter was smaller than the hatch diameter. They thought they'd have to carve a hole in the hull.
Perhaps they could have done it eventually (military move fast when needed) but the urgency went away
TLDR: subs aren't built to do this