politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Exactly ten years ago – the David Cameron David Davis CON l

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Exactly ten years ago – the David Cameron David Davis CON leadership live TV debate

Next month David Cameron will be celebrating ten years as Conservative leader and at this stage in November 2005 he faced what was his last big hurdle before securing the prize – the BBC Question Time leadership debate. It’s a fascinating watch.

Read the full story here

TheScreamingEagles

Irritant ? I'm certain Cameron and the Whips Office use stronger language.

Sandpit

24 hours in the life of an England cricket fan - this time yesterday I was royally peeved off that an inconveniently rescheduled meeting meant I couldn't go to the final day. Well I'm off to work now and don't give a crap that I'm not at the cricket!!

Plato_Says

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

SquareRoot

Those were the days .. when you could be more reliant on pollsters getting somewhere near the right answer

DavidL

Yes but the fact is that the Conservative party did not elect its moron. 1-0 to the Tories I think.

England make it to the first 100.

Gadfly

Looks like Plato is now working for the internet surveillance service...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

JackW

David Davis Will Never Be Prime Minister

DDWNBPM

TheScreamingEagles

If Davis had won the leadership election, Brown would have called and won an election in autumn 2007, ridden out the credit crisis and called an election in 2012 which Labour would have won again (remember when the electoral maths favoured Labour?)

Thank Allah for the innate good sense of the Tory members in 2005 for not electing the duffer

JosiasJessop

David Davis' behaviour since he lost the leadership election shows that the members made the correct choice.

He would have been a terrible party leader.

SquareRoot

Lets not be too harsh, would have made a poor PM but an honourable man.

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. L, I think Davis had good points (seems sound on civil liberties, unlike May) but his petulance and dummy-spitting has robbed him of all real influence.

FPT: Mr. Herdson, yes, I believe there was a race where Schumacher scored many points despite having one gear. I do have vague memories of his overwhelming superiority in the rain as well.

Always amuses me when people bash Schumacher, but Senna's ramming of Prost doesn't get a mention. Saw a documentary (not the film, I think) where a contemporary said Senna would put his car in a position whether the other driver would have to yield or there'd be a crash. Which makes me wonder if it's a direct inspiration for Hamilton's approach, (and could also explain the Spa contact last year, when he swiped across Rosberg's front and was appalled that 'Nico hit me').

MarqueeMark

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

Pulpstar

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. L, I think Davis had good points (seems sound on civil liberties, unlike May) but his petulance and dummy-spitting has robbed him of all real influence.

FPT: Mr. Herdson, yes, I believe there was a race where Schumacher scored many points despite having one gear. I do have vague memories of his overwhelming superiority in the rain as well.

Always amuses me when people bash Schumacher, but Senna's ramming of Prost doesn't get a mention. Saw a documentary (not the film, I think) where a contemporary said Senna would put his car in a position whether the other driver would have to yield or there'd be a crash. Which makes me wonder if it's a direct inspiration for Hamilton's approach, (and could also explain the Spa contact last year, when he swiped across Rosberg's front and was appalled that 'Nico hit me').

Had Prost been English then I'm sure Senna's ramming of him would have mentioned a lot.

Since Prost was French, Senna was lauded for it.

JEO

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

Pulpstar

Bloody hell, not much Rashid could do about that.

Plato_Says

Gadfly said:

Looks like Plato is now working for the internet surveillance service...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

DavidL

Pulpstar said:

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

Or England are overrated. England have 4 players and 1 of them unfortunately has not turned up for this match.

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

Or England are overrated. England have 4 players and 1 of them unfortunately has not turned up for this match.

Cook, Root, Anderson & Broad ?

JosiasJessop

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. L, I think Davis had good points (seems sound on civil liberties, unlike May) but his petulance and dummy-spitting has robbed him of all real influence.

FPT: Mr. Herdson, yes, I believe there was a race where Schumacher scored many points despite having one gear. I do have vague memories of his overwhelming superiority in the rain as well.

Always amuses me when people bash Schumacher, but Senna's ramming of Prost doesn't get a mention. Saw a documentary (not the film, I think) where a contemporary said Senna would put his car in a position whether the other driver would have to yield or there'd be a crash. Which makes me wonder if it's a direct inspiration for Hamilton's approach, (and could also explain the Spa contact last year, when he swiped across Rosberg's front and was appalled that 'Nico hit me').

It was Schumacher's approach as well in his early years, when I nicknamed him 'Schuntmaker'. Basically, bully the other driver into yielding if you get into a position to overtake, because they know if they do not, you will crash into them.

To be fair to Hamilton, most drivers have blamed other drivers for their own mistakes at one stage or another. It was particularly bad when Vettel and Webber had their coming together and Vettel and the team blamed Webber, when it was obviously Vettel's fault.

IMO there are two basic sorts of driving styles: instinctual (Senna, Hamilton), and the more thinking (Prost, Button). This was particularly obvious in the Prost/Senna days, but also when Hamilton and Button drove together.

Whilst all drivers exhibit both behaviours, ones such as Schumacher and Vettel seem to exhibit a mix of the two.

DavidL

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

Or England are overrated. England have 4 players and 1 of them unfortunately has not turned up for this match.

Cook, Root, Anderson & Broad ?

Yep.

Depressingly easy isn't it?

JackW

Gadfly said:

Looks like Plato is now working for the internet surveillance service...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

Pussy Internet Surveillance Services :

Clearly Plato on the PISS

AlastairMeeks

Defeat diminished David Davis. He was a more considerable politician once, but now is eaten up by his dislike of David Cameron. It is a real shame.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Jessop, the Vettel-Webber crash in Turkey (which may return to the calendar, apparently) was a bit more complicated than it appeared.

Webber was told to move over because the McLarens were catching Vettel, behind him but faster, and Red Bull wanted to do all they could for a win. Webber received the message and didn't exactly say he'd go along with it. Vettel moved to be let through, having been informed Webber had received the message [technically true, but misleading], and Webber didn't let him pass. Hence, collision.

At least, that's what I've heard. That doesn't necessarily make it Webber's fault, I'd have to see the footage again to try and form an opinion on that.

tlg86

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. L, I think Davis had good points (seems sound on civil liberties, unlike May) but his petulance and dummy-spitting has robbed him of all real influence.

FPT: Mr. Herdson, yes, I believe there was a race where Schumacher scored many points despite having one gear. I do have vague memories of his overwhelming superiority in the rain as well.

Always amuses me when people bash Schumacher, but Senna's ramming of Prost doesn't get a mention. Saw a documentary (not the film, I think) where a contemporary said Senna would put his car in a position whether the other driver would have to yield or there'd be a crash. Which makes me wonder if it's a direct inspiration for Hamilton's approach, (and could also explain the Spa contact last year, when he swiped across Rosberg's front and was appalled that 'Nico hit me').

Had Prost been English then I'm sure Senna's ramming of him would have mentioned a lot.

Since Prost was French, Senna was lauded for it.

The 1990 Japanese GP was interesting in that the FISA decided to put pole on the inside of the track. Senna, who took pole, protested that this was unfair as it was the dirty side of the track and basically made his intentions clear before the race. It didn't reflect well on Senna but then one could certainly have sympathy for him given the behaviour of Jean Marie Balestre (the President of FISA).

TheScreamingEagles

antifrank said:

Defeat diminished David Davis. He was a more considerable politician once, but now is eaten up by his dislike of David Cameron. It is a real shame.

The thing is David Davis has impeccable civil libertarian instincts but everyone now thinks he's doing it because he is a sore loser and a shit.

DavidL

antifrank said:

Defeat diminished David Davis. He was a more considerable politician once, but now is eaten up by his dislike of David Cameron. It is a real shame.

Not sure. He made some good libertarian noises, he had a decent back story but did he ever do anything of substance? Not entirely his fault as his career largely developed in the dark years for the Tories but opposition to things like ID cards, whilst sound, does not make a leader.

I also wonder if he was ever smart enough. I mean he's smarter than Corbyn, obviously, but enough? Had he had more self discipline he could have had a decent cabinet career but I don't think he ever had it in him to be leader.

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

Or England are overrated. England have 4 players and 1 of them unfortunately has not turned up for this match.

Cook, Root, Anderson & Broad ?

Yep.

Depressingly easy isn't it?

We have alot of bowlers who bat frequently well, and a fair few batsmen who often bat like bowlers.

HYUFD

Davis would have been the Steven Harper or Tony Abbott of the Tory Party. Brown would likely have won narrowly in 2007 as Paul Martin beat Harper in 2004 or Gillard beat Abbott in 2010 but post crash and the bailouts by Brown Davis would have likely led a minority government in 2010 though on a lower vote share than Cameron got

JackW

The Screaming Eagles Will Publish His Alternative Vote Magnus Opus On Political Betting.

TSEWNPHAVMOOPB

Morris_Dancer

Mr. 86, that's a good point on the dodgy side of the track being used for pole.

Mr. Eagles, but whose fault is that? Davis has rebelled all the time, so of course when he does it on civil liberties most people just think that's the reason why.

If he didn't bear such a grudge then his stance on civil liberties might look more principled [personally I do think he holds that view on principle, but it hardly stands out because he rebels so much, or is seen to, at least].

Casino_Royale

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Davis had won the leadership election, Brown would have called and won an election in autumn 2007, ridden out the credit crisis and called an election in 2012 which Labour would have won again (remember when the electoral maths favoured Labour?)

Thank Allah for the innate good sense of the Tory members in 2005 for not electing the duffer

You mean that Labour could not have been killed?

MarqueeMark

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

If everybody in the House argued for his principles by calling a by-election, we wouldn't have much of a functioning democracy.

Although, the betting opportunities would be fabulous!

Pulpstar

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Davis had won the leadership election, Brown would have called and won an election in autumn 2007, ridden out the credit crisis and called an election in 2012 which Labour would have won again (remember when the electoral maths favoured Labour?)

Thank Allah for the innate good sense of the Tory members in 2005 for not electing the duffer

We should all be thankful Brown isn't in charge still.

DavidL

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

Or England are overrated. England have 4 players and 1 of them unfortunately has not turned up for this match.

Cook, Root, Anderson & Broad ?

Yep.

Depressingly easy isn't it?

We have alot of bowlers who bat frequently well, and a fair few batsmen who often bat like bowlers.

What I find depressing is that even if England batsmen had not been throwing their wickets away (although Rashid got a beauty) they almost certainly would have run out of time and not made the runs anyway.

Scrapheap_as_was

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Davis had won the leadership election, Brown would have called and won an election in autumn 2007, ridden out the credit crisis and called an election in 2012 which Labour would have won again (remember when the electoral maths favoured Labour?)

Thank Allah for the innate good sense of the Tory members in 2005 for not electing the duffer

We should all be thankful Brown isn't in charge still.

Hear Hear.

Is David Davis the modern day Ted Heath, sulking ever since.

Spurs aren't playing today are they given the cricket calamity....

JackW

JackW said:

The Screaming Eagles Will Never Publish His Alternative Vote Magnus Opus On Political Betting.

TSEWNPHAVMOOPB

JackW

Deleted.

(Like David Davis ....)

Scrapheap_as_was

Pulpstar said:

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

now ranked 2nd in the world apparantly?

MarqueeMark

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

If everybody in the House argued for his principles by calling a by-election, we wouldn't have much of a functioning democracy.

Although, the betting opportunities would be fabulous!

Pulpstar

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

DavidL said:

Pulpstar said:

Pakistan are under rated as a team I think.

Or England are overrated. England have 4 players and 1 of them unfortunately has not turned up for this match.

Cook, Root, Anderson & Broad ?

Yep.

Depressingly easy isn't it?

We have alot of bowlers who bat frequently well, and a fair few batsmen who often bat like bowlers.

What I find depressing is that even if England batsmen had not been throwing their wickets away (although Rashid got a beauty) they almost certainly would have run out of time and not made the runs anyway.

Good partnerships tend to up the rate and needing if we were say 3 down by tea we could reassess even if behind the nominal rate !
I think just playing naturally (And correctly) and not worrying if it was a win or a draw was correct. Just blocking out or playing over flamboyantly tends not to work too well.

TOPPING

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

Casino_Royale

DavidL said:

antifrank said:

Defeat diminished David Davis. He was a more considerable politician once, but now is eaten up by his dislike of David Cameron. It is a real shame.

Not sure. He made some good libertarian noises, he had a decent back story but did he ever do anything of substance? Not entirely his fault as his career largely developed in the dark years for the Tories but opposition to things like ID cards, whilst sound, does not make a leader.

I also wonder if he was ever smart enough. I mean he's smarter than Corbyn, obviously, but enough? Had he had more self discipline he could have had a decent cabinet career but I don't think he ever had it in him to be leader.

I remember it like it was yesterday. Davis was seen as a heavyweight bruiser who could match Brown. He also had impressive "life story" and had a few succeses in the Commons.

But he was nowhere near an inspirational speaker, had no real vision (aside from civil libertarianism) that I could tell, and also gave a worrying impression of trying to wing it.

I also heard rumours that he was rather indiscreet - and certainly forthcoming - on his views of colleagues who were not supporters, which did not help.

Plato_Says

I think Davis developed a touch of the Julian Assange myself. It's all about his grandstanding. I used to like him quite a lot, then he just displayed poor judgment, a massive ego and no ability to move on from defeat.

He's the architect of his career cul-de-sac.

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

JosiasJessop

tlg86 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Good morning, everyone.

Mr. L, I think Davis had good points (seems sound on civil liberties, unlike May) but his petulance and dummy-spitting has robbed him of all real influence.

FPT: Mr. Herdson, yes, I believe there was a race where Schumacher scored many points despite having one gear. I do have vague memories of his overwhelming superiority in the rain as well.

Always amuses me when people bash Schumacher, but Senna's ramming of Prost doesn't get a mention. Saw a documentary (not the film, I think) where a contemporary said Senna would put his car in a position whether the other driver would have to yield or there'd be a crash. Which makes me wonder if it's a direct inspiration for Hamilton's approach, (and could also explain the Spa contact last year, when he swiped across Rosberg's front and was appalled that 'Nico hit me').

Had Prost been English then I'm sure Senna's ramming of him would have mentioned a lot.

Since Prost was French, Senna was lauded for it.

The 1990 Japanese GP was interesting in that the FISA decided to put pole on the inside of the track. Senna, who took pole, protested that this was unfair as it was the dirty side of the track and basically made his intentions clear before the race. It didn't reflect well on Senna but then one could certainly have sympathy for him given the behaviour of Jean Marie Balestre (the President of FISA).

It was quite clear over a number of years that Frenchman Ballestre wanted Frenchman Prost to win over Senna. It doesn't excuse Senna's behaviour, but you can understand his frustration when the race was rigged against him.

And it wasn't as if Prost was incapable of cold, calculating behaviour.

runnymede

When people start harping on about politicians' 'back stories' that's a pretty good sign there is a talent deficit lurking somewhere.

JosiasJessop

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Jessop, the Vettel-Webber crash in Turkey (which may return to the calendar, apparently) was a bit more complicated than it appeared.

Webber was told to move over because the McLarens were catching Vettel, behind him but faster, and Red Bull wanted to do all they could for a win. Webber received the message and didn't exactly say he'd go along with it. Vettel moved to be let through, having been informed Webber had received the message [technically true, but misleading], and Webber didn't let him pass. Hence, collision.

At least, that's what I've heard. That doesn't necessarily make it Webber's fault, I'd have to see the footage again to try and form an opinion on that.

Aye, I remember the background, but from memory it was quite clearly Vettel at fault, even given that context. Before that I'd really rated him as a driver (especially after his Torro Rosso win); after that I rapidly went off him.

TheScreamingEagles

JackW said:

The Screaming Eagles Will Publish His Alternative Vote Magnus Opus On Political Betting.

TSEWNPHAVMOOPB

I promise to publish it as soon as I'm over my writer's block.

I'm nearly over it.

TheScreamingEagles

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Davis had won the leadership election, Brown would have called and won an election in autumn 2007, ridden out the credit crisis and called an election in 2012 which Labour would have won again (remember when the electoral maths favoured Labour?)

Thank Allah for the innate good sense of the Tory members in 2005 for not electing the duffer

You mean that Labour could not have been killed?

Indeed. Davis would have made Sion Simon look like a visionary.

That's how bad Davis is.

HYUFD

HYUFD said:

Davis would have been the Steven Harper or Tony Abbott of the Tory Party. Brown would likely have won narrowly in 2007 as Paul Martin beat Harper in 2004 or Gillard beat Abbott in 2010 but post crash and the bailouts by Brown Davis would have likely led a minority government in 2010 though on a lower vote share than Cameron got

Ironically of course Australia has now replaced Abbott with a Cameron like PM and Canada has just replaced Harper with a Liberal

Scrapheap_as_was

runnymede said:

When people start harping on about politicians' 'back stories' that's a pretty good sign there is a talent deficit lurking somewhere.

x-factor rule.

isam

https://twitter.com/awsstats/status/662175922515152896

JackW

TheScreamingEagles said:

JackW said:

The Screaming Eagles Will Publish His Alternative Vote Magnus Opus On Political Betting.

TSEWNPHAVMOOPB

I promise to publish it as soon as I'm over my writer's block.

I'm nearly over it.

But will PBers be after publication ??

Therapists throughout the land need to be on standby.

TheScreamingEagles

Scrapheap_as_was said:

runnymede said:

When people start harping on about politicians' 'back stories' that's a pretty good sign there is a talent deficit lurking somewhere.

x-factor rule.

It's all about intellectual self confidence.

I mean I don't like to brag, which is one of my many many many fine qualities.

TOPPING

HYUFD said:

HYUFD said:

Davis would have been the Steven Harper or Tony Abbott of the Tory Party. Brown would likely have won narrowly in 2007 as Paul Martin beat Harper in 2004 or Gillard beat Abbott in 2010 but post crash and the bailouts by Brown Davis would have likely led a minority government in 2010 though on a lower vote share than Cameron got

Ironically of course Australia has now replaced Abbott with a Cameron like PM and Canada has just replaced Harper with a Liberal

which should I hope give some clue as to who the Cons will replace Cam with, come the time.

I know it won't be Boris but apart from that I don't know who fits into the heir to heir to Blair category.

Plato_Says

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11974835/Actually-British-voters-quite-like-spies-and-snoopers.html

Fewer than one in five voters (16 per cent), according to a survey by YouGov back in February, wanted the authorities' investigative powers to be curbed in order to protect privacy. By contrast, over half of them wanted spies to have greater capabilities "even if this means the privacy or human rights of ordinary people suffers".

JEO

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

I don't see any evidence that Davis lacks intelligence. I think there's a fair argument about his judgment, but he seems to have a very detailed understanding of civil liberties topics that an unintelligent man would not be able to grasp.

To be honest, I think there's just a general trend where those on the left of the party like to insult the intelligence of anyone to the right of them, based on scant evidence. It doesn't matter whether it is Tim Montgomery, David Davis, Owen Patterson or any right winger: they will just be attacked on any grounds possible based on flimsy evidence. Some people are just very intolerant of those who disagree with them if they don't inhabit the trendy consensus of 'acceptable' opinions.

JackW

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

runnymede said:

When people start harping on about politicians' 'back stories' that's a pretty good sign there is a talent deficit lurking somewhere.

x-factor rule.

It's all about intellectual self confidence.

I mean I don't like to brag, which is one of my many many many fine qualities.

Indeed so.

If only you had a better grasp of ancient history, voting systems and vibrant coloured footwear.

TheScreamingEagles

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JackW said:

The Screaming Eagles Will Publish His Alternative Vote Magnus Opus On Political Betting.

TSEWNPHAVMOOPB

I promise to publish it as soon as I'm over my writer's block.

I'm nearly over it.

But will PBers be after publication ??

Therapists throughout the land need to be on standby.

After reading it PBers will feel a special kind of euphoria. Like the euphoria The Duke of Cumberland experienced after the Battle of Culloden

TOPPING

JEO said:

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

I don't see any evidence that Davis lacks intelligence. I think there's a fair argument about his judgment, but he seems to have a very detailed understanding of civil liberties topics that an unintelligent man would not be able to grasp.

To be honest, I think there's just a general trend where those on the left of the party like to insult the intelligence of anyone to the right of them, based on scant evidence. It doesn't matter whether it is Tim Montgomery, David Davis, Owen Patterson or any right winger: they will just be attacked on any grounds possible based on flimsy evidence. Some people are just very intolerant of those who disagree with them if they don't inhabit the trendy consensus of 'acceptable' opinions.

Call it political intelligence, then. Or the x-factor.

Davis may well have had a grasp of those issues and some of his supporters certainly didn't lack any kind of intelligence, but like it or not we are in a post-Maggie, post-Blair world where such singularity of thought is off-putting. Do you think Owen Paterson will be next Cons leader? He is a great square peg in square hole man but successful politicians, today, require something more.

JackW

TheScreamingEagles said:

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JackW said:

The Screaming Eagles Will Publish His Alternative Vote Magnus Opus On Political Betting.

TSEWNPHAVMOOPB

I promise to publish it as soon as I'm over my writer's block.

I'm nearly over it.

But will PBers be after publication ??

Therapists throughout the land need to be on standby.

After reading it PBers will feel a special kind of euphoria. Like the euphoria The Duke of Cumberland experienced after the Battle of Culloden

You mean a blood lust and vengeful disposition that will ensure PBers demand your permanent exclusion to ConHome.

Plato_Says

A Party leader with a personal hobby-horse isn't attractive to me. It's a flaw IMO.

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

I don't see any evidence that Davis lacks intelligence. I think there's a fair argument about his judgment, but he seems to have a very detailed understanding of civil liberties topics that an unintelligent man would not be able to grasp.

To be honest, I think there's just a general trend where those on the left of the party like to insult the intelligence of anyone to the right of them, based on scant evidence. It doesn't matter whether it is Tim Montgomery, David Davis, Owen Patterson or any right winger: they will just be attacked on any grounds possible based on flimsy evidence. Some people are just very intolerant of those who disagree with them if they don't inhabit the trendy consensus of 'acceptable' opinions.

Call it political intelligence, then. Or the x-factor.

Davis may well have had a grasp of those issues and some of his supporters certainly didn't lack any kind of intelligence, but like it or not we are in a post-Maggie, post-Blair world where such singularity of thought is off-putting. Do you think Owen Paterson will be next Cons leader? He is a great square peg in square hole man but successful politicians, today, require something more.

TOPPING

Plato_Says said:

A Party leader with a personal hobby-horse isn't attractive to me. It's a flaw IMO.

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

I don't see any evidence that Davis lacks intelligence. I think there's a fair argument about his judgment, but he seems to have a very detailed understanding of civil liberties topics that an unintelligent man would not be able to grasp.

To be honest, I think there's just a general trend where those on the left of the party like to insult the intelligence of anyone to the right of them, based on scant evidence. It doesn't matter whether it is Tim Montgomery, David Davis, Owen Patterson or any right winger: they will just be attacked on any grounds possible based on flimsy evidence. Some people are just very intolerant of those who disagree with them if they don't inhabit the trendy consensus of 'acceptable' opinions.

Call it political intelligence, then. Or the x-factor.

Davis may well have had a grasp of those issues and some of his supporters certainly didn't lack any kind of intelligence, but like it or not we are in a post-Maggie, post-Blair world where such singularity of thought is off-putting. Do you think Owen Paterson will be next Cons leader? He is a great square peg in square hole man but successful politicians, today, require something more.

I think that's a good way of putting it and my "lacking intelligence" a bad way.

I want a leader to be able to be sympathetic and empathetic. I even want them to walk down the HoC aisle after a vote and be able to chat to their opposite number in a human-to-human way.

blackburn63

JEO said:

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

I don't see any evidence that Davis lacks intelligence. I think there's a fair argument about his judgment, but he seems to have a very detailed understanding of civil liberties topics that an unintelligent man would not be able to grasp.

To be honest, I think there's just a general trend where those on the left of the party like to insult the intelligence of anyone to the right of them, based on scant evidence. It doesn't matter whether it is Tim Montgomery, David Davis, Owen Patterson or any right winger: they will just be attacked on any grounds possible based on flimsy evidence. Some people are just very intolerant of those who disagree with them if they don't inhabit the trendy consensus of 'acceptable' opinions.

To be fair it works both ways, plenty of tories call socialists thick. Its a natural human reaction to accuse somebody of being stupid if they disagree with you, it usually says more about the accuser.

I think Davis is a decent man, in his own eyes he was publicly humiliated, that can't be easy.

dugarbandier

TOPPING said:

I think that's a good way of putting it and my "lacking intelligence" a bad way.

I want a leader to be able to be sympathetic and empathetic. I even want them to walk down the HoC aisle after a vote and be able to chat to their opposite number in a human-to-human way.

and if he is also fond of farmyard animals, so much the better

blackburn63

Changing the subject slightly, Cameron won't be around in 2020 but I believe the tories will win comfortably. I don't think Osborne will win the leadership and think he'll follow Cameron out of the door, giving the party/govt an entirely different dynamic.

I'm curious who will be PM and Chancellor, May will be too old, Boris is a clown, interested to hear the thoughts of the pb tories.

Plato_Says

I liked "square peg in a square hole" was a great way to describe certain politicians.

TOPPING said:

Plato_Says said:

A Party leader with a personal hobby-horse isn't attractive to me. It's a flaw IMO.

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

TOPPING said:

JEO said:

MarqueeMark said:

Plato_Says said:

And David Davis, along with Tim Montie still have the hump about it.

Davis has taken over Ted Heath's mantle as The Great Sulker....

So Davis shouldn't argue for his principles?

he is entitled to argue for his principles but, like IDS, he is not a very intelligent man or doesn't seem to be.

Driven, focused, confident, but not intelligent. Still less emotional intelligence (GO nb). Which is or should be a requirement for a successful party leader not to say PM.

I don't see any evidence that Davis lacks intelligence. I think there's a fair argument about his judgment, but he seems to have a very detailed understanding of civil liberties topics that an unintelligent man would not be able to grasp.

To be honest, I think there's just a general trend where those on the left of the party like to insult the intelligence of anyone to the right of them, based on scant evidence. It doesn't matter whether it is Tim Montgomery, David Davis, Owen Patterson or any right winger: they will just be attacked on any grounds possible based on flimsy evidence. Some people are just very intolerant of those who disagree with them if they don't inhabit the trendy consensus of 'acceptable' opinions.

Call it political intelligence, then. Or the x-factor.

Davis may well have had a grasp of those issues and some of his supporters certainly didn't lack any kind of intelligence, but like it or not we are in a post-Maggie, post-Blair world where such singularity of thought is off-putting. Do you think Owen Paterson will be next Cons leader? He is a great square peg in square hole man but successful politicians, today, require something more.

I think that's a good way of putting it and my "lacking intelligence" a bad way.

I want a leader to be able to be sympathetic and empathetic. I even want them to walk down the HoC aisle after a vote and be able to chat to their opposite number in a human-to-human way.

SquareRoot

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JackW said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

JackW said:

The Screaming Eagles Will Publish His Alternative Vote Magnus Opus On Political Betting.

TSEWNPHAVMOOPB

I promise to publish it as soon as I'm over my writer's block.

I'm nearly over it.

But will PBers be after publication ??

Therapists throughout the land need to be on standby.

After reading it PBers will feel a special kind of euphoria. Like the euphoria The Duke of Cumberland experienced after the Battle of Culloden

You mean a blood lust and vengeful disposition that will ensure PBers demand your permanent exclusion to ConHome.

From his WIKI page , it seems that bar his victory at Culloden and his butchery thereafter, he was a complete failure militarily and in politics and died unmarried and obese at 45, despite having been born with every possible advantage, money, lineage and favour.

TheScreamingEagles

blackburn63 said:

Changing the subject slightly, Cameron won't be around in 2020 but I believe the tories will win comfortably. I don't think Osborne will win the leadership and think he'll follow Cameron out of the door, giving the party/govt an entirely different dynamic.

I'm curious who will be PM and Chancellor, May will be too old, Boris is a clown, interested to hear the thoughts of the pb tories.

Hammond or May. Reassuring boring competence is what they project to the voters. When they are up against John McDonnell is all the Tories need.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Eagles, May's too cold. Won't do anything for the centre, let alone soft-left.

I also question her judgement, and authoritarian instincts.

Casino_Royale

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, May's too cold. Won't do anything for the centre, let alone soft-left.

I also question her judgement, and authoritarian instincts.

So do I. But she also has guts, and may be the only credible choice for eurosceptics and those who want controlled inmigration.

Plato_Says

I've never seen May as particularly authoritarian - I think it's pretty hard to be Home Sec and be anything other than like that as a by-product of the job. David Blunkett was more hard line IMO.

She's never had another job to show if she'd be different.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, May's too cold. Won't do anything for the centre, let alone soft-left.

I also question her judgement, and authoritarian instincts.

Casino_Royale

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

If Davis had won the leadership election, Brown would have called and won an election in autumn 2007, ridden out the credit crisis and called an election in 2012 which Labour would have won again (remember when the electoral maths favoured Labour?)

Thank Allah for the innate good sense of the Tory members in 2005 for not electing the duffer

You mean that Labour could not have been killed?

Indeed. Davis would have made Sion Simon look like a visionary.

That's how bad Davis is.

Don't forget, Sion Simon didn't think much of Cameron either:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yn4IpyVViw4

Morris_Dancer

Miss Plato, the move to store everyone's browsing history for a year and let various state bodies have a look is concerning.

HYUFD

TOPPING said:

HYUFD said:

HYUFD said:

Davis would have been the Steven Harper or Tony Abbott of the Tory Party. Brown would likely have won narrowly in 2007 as Paul Martin beat Harper in 2004 or Gillard beat Abbott in 2010 but post crash and the bailouts by Brown Davis would have likely led a minority government in 2010 though on a lower vote share than Cameron got

Ironically of course Australia has now replaced Abbott with a Cameron like PM and Canada has just replaced Harper with a Liberal

which should I hope give some clue as to who the Cons will replace Cam with, come the time.

I know it won't be Boris but apart from that I don't know who fits into the heir to heir to Blair category.

Not many clues there who replaces Merkel or Key may be relevant if they go before Cameron. Personally I expect Osborne v Hillary Benn with Tories largest party in a hung parliament

blackburn63

TheScreamingEagles said:

blackburn63 said:

Changing the subject slightly, Cameron won't be around in 2020 but I believe the tories will win comfortably. I don't think Osborne will win the leadership and think he'll follow Cameron out of the door, giving the party/govt an entirely different dynamic.

I'm curious who will be PM and Chancellor, May will be too old, Boris is a clown, interested to hear the thoughts of the pb tories.

Hammond or May. Reassuring boring competence is what they project to the voters. When they are up against John McDonnell is all the Tories need.

Hammond looked very statesmanlike on tv this morning, I like him.

I've just checked May is 59, I thought she was ten years older so yes, she's firmly in the frame

Plato_Says

I don't like it at all, but as I posted upthread - a maj of people don't mind and are quite happy for more to protect themselves from threats. If the public are for it - it seems reasonable for a Home Sec to go for it.

I see it as a tool for lazy policing and a curtain-twitchers wet dream, but most don't.

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, the move to store everyone's browsing history for a year and let various state bodies have a look is concerning.

Innocent_Abroad

Plato_Says said:

I don't like it at all, but as I posted upthread - a maj of people don't mind and are quite happy for more to protect themselves from threats. If the public are for it - it seems reasonable for a Home Sec to go for it.

I see it as a tool for lazy policing and a curtain-twitchers wet dream, but most don't.

Morris_Dancer said:

Miss Plato, the move to store everyone's browsing history for a year and let various state bodies have a look is concerning.

I need to lie down. A post of yours - and I agree with every word of it

Pulpstar

Game over.

TGOHF

isam said:

https://twitter.com/awsstats/status/662175922515152896

If Broad is not out he will top the batting averages for the first time in a series.

Pulpstar

blackburn63 said:

I've just checked May is 59, I thought she was ten years older so yes, she's firmly in the frame

Home Sec has aged her alot. Probably the most stressful job in Gov't - Foreign Secretary is a cakewalk even though the jobs are supposed to have similiar status.

TOPPING

HYUFD said:

TOPPING said:

HYUFD said:

HYUFD said:

Davis would have been the Steven Harper or Tony Abbott of the Tory Party. Brown would likely have won narrowly in 2007 as Paul Martin beat Harper in 2004 or Gillard beat Abbott in 2010 but post crash and the bailouts by Brown Davis would have likely led a minority government in 2010 though on a lower vote share than Cameron got

Ironically of course Australia has now replaced Abbott with a Cameron like PM and Canada has just replaced Harper with a Liberal

which should I hope give some clue as to who the Cons will replace Cam with, come the time.

I know it won't be Boris but apart from that I don't know who fits into the heir to heir to Blair category.

Not many clues there who replaces Merkel or Key may be relevant if they go before Cameron. Personally I expect Osborne v Hillary Benn with Tories largest party in a hung parliament

As I've mentioned before, I have no idea of his bonkers-quotient or past shockers but every time I've seen Stephen Kinnock I have been impressed.

But we are assuming resumption of a rational Labour Party.

MalcolmDunn

Cameron and Davis made it exciting to be a Conservative again. It really fired up my interest after what I thought had been a totally lacklustre election campaign that year.
Some of the early thoughts about Cameron have proved to be correct sadly but Davis has spent the years after his defeat proving that those Conservative members who voted against him were entirely correct to do so.

isam

X

TGOHF said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/awsstats/status/662175922515152896

If Broad is not out he will top the batting averages for the first time in a series.

Was he only out once before in the series? Even then I'm surprised he would've averaged more than Cook... Selfish not outers!!!

watford30

10 years have passed, and Davis is still bitter. He seems to oppose anything that the current leadership propose.

History has proved those who voted against him correct, and he should move on.

philiph

Plato_Says said:

I've never seen May as particularly authoritarian - I think it's pretty hard to be Home Sec and be anything other than like that as a by-product of the job. David Blunkett was more hard line IMO.

She's never had another job to show if she'd be different.

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, May's too cold. Won't do anything for the centre, let alone soft-left.

I also question her judgement, and authoritarian instincts.

Shouldn't the question be 'What are the skills and abilities you need to be a successful Party Leader and PM, rather than who is a good minister? The skill set may well be different.

In selecting Cameron over Davis that is exactly what the Conservative Party achieved.

May and Hammond are competent, but a bit cold and lacking charisma that transmits through the media. Boris is the converse to those two. GO is too easy to dislike and is overtly too political, in the same way as Mandleson could never be a leader.

The Conservatives really should be looking for a candidate that has the warmth, communication and presentational skills and can build a team around them. They need to have Conservative views, but by skilled appointments can satisfy right and left of the party - which is what Cameron has done quite effectively, leaving him enough capital all over the party to eject the odd Fox (not of this parish) without scuppering his administration or position.

Selecting on ministerial competence as the first criteria I think would be an error, you may well end up with the wrong talents in the wrong place, the good old promoted beyond the level of competence scenario.

dugarbandier

Plato_Says said:

I don't like it at all, but as I posted upthread - a maj of people don't mind and are quite happy for more to protect themselves from threats. If the public are for it - it seems reasonable for a Home Sec to go for it.

A Home Sec who has "Authoritarian" capital could go for the statesmanlike option, and not pursue the unreasonable action. Either she doesn't understand the internet, or she doesn't have the balls (ahem) to say no to whatever ineffective and illiberal measure is proposed.

(can you tell I'm not really a fan )

Morris_Dancer

My scientific knowledge on anti-matter isn't great (even after watching The Three Doctors), but surely if matter and anti-matter had initially been produced in equal quantities then all the universe would have simply exploded into nothingness at the dawn of time?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34727774

Pulpstar

Anderson the best bowler, and Cook the best batsman of the series !

Malik man of the series must be, though. 292 runs at just under 50, and 11 wickets at just over 20

Innocent_Abroad

TOPPING said:

HYUFD said:

TOPPING said:

HYUFD said:

HYUFD said:

Davis would have been the Steven Harper or Tony Abbott of the Tory Party. Brown would likely have won narrowly in 2007 as Paul Martin beat Harper in 2004 or Gillard beat Abbott in 2010 but post crash and the bailouts by Brown Davis would have likely led a minority government in 2010 though on a lower vote share than Cameron got

Ironically of course Australia has now replaced Abbott with a Cameron like PM and Canada has just replaced Harper with a Liberal

which should I hope give some clue as to who the Cons will replace Cam with, come the time.

I know it won't be Boris but apart from that I don't know who fits into the heir to heir to Blair category.

Not many clues there who replaces Merkel or Key may be relevant if they go before Cameron. Personally I expect Osborne v Hillary Benn with Tories largest party in a hung parliament

As I've mentioned before, I have no idea of his bonkers-quotient or past shockers but every time I've seen Stephen Kinnock I have been impressed.

But we are assuming resumption of a rational Labour Party.

I think there's a difference between "rational" and "aspiring to Government". I doubt you would want to argue that the Speaker is irrational, for instance - yet (s)he stands for election as an Independent with a fixed promise not to go into Government!

TheScreamingEagles

You all really need to put on ITV1 right now.

RobD

Morris_Dancer said:

My scientific knowledge on anti-matter isn't great (even after watching The Three Doctors), but surely if matter and anti-matter had initially been produced in equal quantities then all the universe would have simply exploded into nothingness at the dawn of time?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34727774

I think it was ever so slightly more matter than antimatter.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. D, that was my understanding as well (admittedly, the only book I've read on the subject is Bang! The Complete History of the Universe).

watford30

TheScreamingEagles said:

You all really need to put on ITV1 right now.

Blimey. Words fail me.

'Who's a pretty boy then?'

Morris_Dancer

What's on ITV now?

Plato_Says

He's clearly happy about it - and a round of applause from the audience.

watford30 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

You all really need to put on ITV1 right now.

Blimey. Words fail me.

'Who's a pretty boy then?'

Plato_Says

Parrotman who had his ears removed.

Morris_Dancer said:

What's on ITV now?

TheScreamingEagles

Morris_Dancer said:

What's on ITV now?

Jeremy Kyle

https://twitter.com/joshybish95/status/662201158862299136

logical_song

"Hosted by David Dimbly" said the American voice.

watford30

Morris_Dancer said:

What's on ITV now?

Jeremy Kyle, and a man who wants to look like a parrot.