If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
I'm not a fan of her either. She's in favour of the death penalty and put in a very poor performance trying to defend it.
The only flip side to her I can see is the lefty meltdown it would create if the Tories elected another woman leader, and an ethnic minority one too!
I'll say this with confidence: the Tories will elect a female ethnic minority Prime Minister long before Labour ever do.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
“Never” is a dangerous word to use in politics. As in “we never negotiate with terrorists Mr Adams."
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Different era. Plus Patel's position is laughable.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
" I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her."
That's a bit strong isn't it? Did she take your last Rolo or snitch on you at school?
No, it's just the vibe I get whenever I see her on TV. She's one of a small handful of politician who make my skin crawl (David Davis, Ed Balls and John McDonnell are other examples).
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Don't you think the country may have moved on in the last quarter of a century?
I hope they do, but I can see why they wouldn't: it's not as if anyone's been thanking them for what they have done for the refugees over the last four years. Especially on here.
No just shovelling money to them. They prefer to make money by trading with ISIS and killing the Kurds while they can get away with it.
Eliza, if that level of 'analysis' is the same as you put into Scottish affairs, then no wonder you're so often wrong and ill-tempered ...
e all know you love all things Turkish and beggar all about Scotland, you should stick to just talking your bollox on Turkey.
I was doing my due diligence on predictit (Has anyone here deposited/withdrawn successfully?) anyway, I came across this interesting snippet;
"Jeb Bush’s campaign staff have told her they assuage nervous donors by pointing to Bush’s odds on PredictIt, where he currently ranks as the second likeliest Republican nominee behind Marco Rubio."
Whenever I have seen her in the media she comes over as very cold and lacking in the human touch.
Her politics may fit the Leaver wing of the Tories, but I cannot see her getting enough nominations to go to the final ballot.
100 backbench MPs with BOO sympathy would be plenty to get to the final ballot. They'll rally around the most telegenic leader in opposition to Osborne.
Let's say the final round (with Boris and May eliminated along the way) is something like..
Osborne - 165 MPs Patel - 100 MPs Javid - 66 MPs
She goes through with Osborne to the members vote.
Fantasyland !
No, I don't think so.
There is block of around 100 Tory MPs unbeholden to Osborne who want a eurosceptic and want to stop him.
Even David Davis made it through to the final two in 2005 despite bombing.
They will unite around the most credible eurosceptic candidate. If there's a candidate that has broader appeal to soft-Cameroons and soft-eurosceptics (like Gove) then they will easily do it.
I think May and Boris are probably out now. So it leaves the likes of Paterson, Gove and Patel.
If none of them muster I don't rule out someone like Justine Greening, Liz Truss or even Jesse Norman.
Mr. Foxinsox, I agree entirely. Tokenism leads to morons like Warsi sitting in Cabinet.
I am guided by a higher principle. I backed Patel at 50/1.
I would gain a few quid too.
I have realised over the years that just because a decision is a stupid one that doesn't prevent it being made! I cite electing Corbyn in support of my thesis. I still cannot see Priti having the people skills sufficient to get enough nominations though.
Whenever I have seen her in the media she comes over as very cold and lacking in the human touch.
Her politics may fit the Leaver wing of the Tories, but I cannot see her getting enough nominations to go to the final ballot.
100 backbench MPs with BOO sympathy would be plenty to get to the final ballot. They'll rally around the most telegenic leader in opposition to Osborne.
Let's say the final round (with Boris and May eliminated along the way) is something like..
Osborne - 165 MPs Patel - 100 MPs Javid - 66 MPs
She goes through with Osborne to the members vote.
Fantasyland !
No, I don't think so.
There is block of around 100 Tory MPs unbeholden to Osborne who want a eurosceptic and want to stop him.
Even David Davis made it through to the final two in 2005 despite bombing.
They will unite around the most credible eurosceptic candidate. If there's a candidate that has broader appeal to soft-Cameroons and soft-eurosceptics (like Gove) then they will easily do it.
I think May and Boris are probably out now. So it leaves the likes of Paterson, Gove and Patel.
If none of them muster I don't rule out someone like Justine Greening, Liz Truss or even Jesse Norman.
I'm sorry, the idea that Patel will get 100 MPs backing her is laughable. Perhaps the general point is right; but the choice of candidate is not.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Different era. Plus Patel's position is laughable.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
I'm not in favour of the death penalty but this is the sort of issue that repels right-on liberal minded people (the BBC would go ballistic) but to which will not bother the broader public.
Given her view is so little shared in the parliamentary party it would be of no threat whatsoever.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
" I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her."
That's a bit strong isn't it? Did she take your last Rolo or snitch on you at school?
It's a very nasty post. Not unexpected from a hardline europhile.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Different era. Plus Patel's position is laughable.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
As you say, the problem with her view on the death penalty is that she has been so bad at defending it. She' s not PM material by a long way.
The latest opinion poll from Spain shows a sharp drop in support for PP and a rise in support for both the Socialists and Ciudadanos. The latest corruption scandal involving PP - this one in Valencia - seems to have been a bit of a tipping point. Right now the Socialists and Ciudadanos are in talks about forming a coalition. This poll may make that more likely. It will certainly make PP think twice about opposing and so sparking a new general election.
I'm not a fan of her either. She's in favour of the death penalty and put in a very poor performance trying to defend it.
The only flip side to her I can see is the lefty meltdown it would create if the Tories elected another woman leader, and an ethnic minority one too!
Well the death penalty is, to my mind, obviously indefensible regardless of who is trying to defend it so her poor performance there is no surprise. However, her personal fanaticism on the issue is quite bizarre compared to other politician who also favour it but aren't forever banging on about the fact.
Although I consider myself a floating voter the floating has only really occurred outside of GEs. At every GE that I've been eligible to vote in (1997, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2015) my vote has ended up in the Conservative box in the end. That would change for sure if Patel was leading them. I'd vote for a decaying cowpat before I'd vote for her.
Arguably this helps Trump most, even though he was monstered by Jeb (dead sheep come to mind) - the longer it takes for the mainstream to work out who the anti-Trump is, the better his chance of winning by default. I think Kasich is great, but if he came a strong 2nd in NH he'd probably crash in some of the next states - not enough organisation, and frankly just too liberal.
Entertaining sketch about the perils of voice recognition, perhaps especially for malcolmg (you need to cut and paste the link - but yes, it's safe)::
The latest opinion poll from Spain shows a sharp drop in support for PP and a rise in support for both the Socialists and Ciudadanos. The latest corruption scandal involving PP - this one in Valencia - seems to have been a bit of a tipping point. Right now the Socialists and Ciudadanos are in talks about forming a coalition. This poll may make that more likely. It will certainly make PP think twice about opposing and so sparking a new general election.
That's been the mood music from the Spanish business community over the last week. It's worth remembering that PSOE + C only has about 45% of the seats, so they'll need to rely on wither the PP abstaining on key votes.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Different era. Plus Patel's position is laughable.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
Did she really say that (or something like it)? That's incredible if true.
I hope they do, but I can see why they wouldn't: it's not as if anyone's been thanking them for what they have done for the refugees over the last four years. Especially on here.
No just shovelling money to them. They prefer to make money by trading with ISIS and killing the Kurds while they can get away with it.
Eliza, if that level of 'analysis' is the same as you put into Scottish affairs, then no wonder you're so often wrong and ill-tempered ...
e all know you love all things Turkish and beggar all about Scotland, you should stick to just talking your bollox on Turkey.
I don't love all things Turkish. In fact, my tentative solution to the Syria problem would not be popular in any with Turkey, and I say they should get stuffed. But don't let facts get in the way of your programming.
And I know a great deal about Scotland, and love the place. In fact, I might well have seen more of it than you have ...
Mr Corbyn does not even want our military or armed police to fire at AK47 toting terrorists..so I guess his view on having the death penalty is well known..
The latest opinion poll from Spain shows a sharp drop in support for PP and a rise in support for both the Socialists and Ciudadanos. The latest corruption scandal involving PP - this one in Valencia - seems to have been a bit of a tipping point. Right now the Socialists and Ciudadanos are in talks about forming a coalition. This poll may make that more likely. It will certainly make PP think twice about opposing and so sparking a new general election.
That's been the mood music from the Spanish business community over the last week. It's worth remembering that PSOE + C only has about 45% of the seats, so they'll need to rely on wither the PP abstaining on key votes.
The corruption stuff has really eaten away at PP and Rajoy especially as he has shown such poor leadership over it. They will not want another GE now, but they do still have potential blocking power in the Cortes - if they vote with Podemos and the regional/nationalist parties. What they need is a new leader.
Arguably this helps Trump most, even though he was monstered by Jeb (dead sheep come to mind) - the longer it takes for the mainstream to work out who the anti-Trump is, the better his chance of winning by default. I think Kasich is great, but if he came a strong 2nd in NH he'd probably crash in some of the next states - not enough organisation, and frankly just too liberal.
Entertaining sketch about the perils of voice recognition, perhaps especially for malcolmg (you need to cut and paste the link - but yes, it's safe)::
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Different era. Plus Patel's position is laughable.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
Did she really say that (or something like it)? That's incredible if true.
The latest opinion poll from Spain shows a sharp drop in support for PP and a rise in support for both the Socialists and Ciudadanos. The latest corruption scandal involving PP - this one in Valencia - seems to have been a bit of a tipping point. Right now the Socialists and Ciudadanos are in talks about forming a coalition. This poll may make that more likely. It will certainly make PP think twice about opposing and so sparking a new general election.
That's been the mood music from the Spanish business community over the last week. It's worth remembering that PSOE + C only has about 45% of the seats, so they'll need to rely on wither the PP abstaining on key votes.
The corruption stuff has really eaten away at PP and Rajoy especially as he has shown such poor leadership over it. They will not want another GE now, but they do still have potential blocking power in the Cortes - if they vote with Podemos and the regional/nationalist parties. What they need is a new leader.
They could also do with a couple of years out of power.
I do wonder if Spain has permanently fragmented into four different parties, plus the regionalists/nationalists.
Whenever I have seen her in the media she comes over as very cold and lacking in the human touch.
Her politics may fit the Leaver wing of the Tories, but I cannot see her getting enough nominations to go to the final ballot.
To be honest you could have said the same about Thatcher in the early 70s. She really wasn't a great media performer although thankfully that didn't matter quite as much in those days. I think Patel could certainly grow into that public profile.
That said I agree with TSE. Her support for the death penalty puts her beyond the pale for me.
It seems Priti Patel is going to break cover and campaign to Leave.
I'd argue that's the most significant person that Leave could hope for. As we all know, campaigns are about momentum, it is definitely with the Outers
With certain 'Outers' fearing that by joining the 'Out' campaign they'd be lining up with the ultra right and the fruitcakes I would think someone advocating capital punishment would be the last person they'd want as their poster girl.
Whenever I have seen her in the media she comes over as very cold and lacking in the human touch.
Her politics may fit the Leaver wing of the Tories, but I cannot see her getting enough nominations to go to the final ballot.
100 backbench MPs with BOO sympathy would be plenty to get to the final ballot. They'll rally around the most telegenic leader in opposition to Osborne.
Let's say the final round (with Boris and May eliminated along the way) is something like..
Osborne - 165 MPs Patel - 100 MPs Javid - 66 MPs
She goes through with Osborne to the members vote.
Fantasyland !
No, I don't think so.
There is block of around 100 Tory MPs unbeholden to Osborne who want a eurosceptic and want to stop him.
Even David Davis made it through to the final two in 2005 despite bombing.
They will unite around the most credible eurosceptic candidate. If there's a candidate that has broader appeal to soft-Cameroons and soft-eurosceptics (like Gove) then they will easily do it.
I think May and Boris are probably out now. So it leaves the likes of Paterson, Gove and Patel.
If none of them muster I don't rule out someone like Justine Greening, Liz Truss or even Jesse Norman.
I'm sorry, the idea that Patel will get 100 MPs backing her is laughable. Perhaps the general point is right; but the choice of candidate is not.
A few months ago the idea of Trump winning the nomination was laughable, as was Jeremy Corbyn.
I'm not saying she *will* be in the final two (as my posts below are quite clear about) only that she has a perfectly feasible path to getting there if she performs well and events favour her.
If all politicians were damned for one or two bad performances on QT or Newsnight then we wouldn't have any leaders at all.
It's a very nasty post. Not unexpected from a hardline europhile.
I'm stating my honest opinion. Simple as that. Would you prefer me to lie and say that I can find a redeeming feature to her? Sorry, I can't.
I'm not being nasty. I'm calling it as I see it. There are plenty of eurosceptic politicians that I like and respect (Hoey, Redwood, Dorries even!!! I could go on...) not that I expect you to believe me. To lazily link my negative opinion of Patel to my euro-enthusiasm is so far wide of the mark to be utterly laughable.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Different era. Plus Patel's position is laughable.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
Did she really say that (or something like it)? That's incredible if true.
While I am personally against the death penalty, it is not a "touchstone" issue for me. But anyone who denies that miscarriages of justice happen in the UK is utterly deluded.
Whenever I have seen her in the media she comes over as very cold and lacking in the human touch.
Her politics may fit the Leaver wing of the Tories, but I cannot see her getting enough nominations to go to the final ballot.
100 backbench MPs with BOO sympathy would be plenty to get to the final ballot. They'll rally around the most telegenic leader in opposition to Osborne.
Let's say the final round (with Boris and May eliminated along the way) is something like..
Osborne - 165 MPs Patel - 100 MPs Javid - 66 MPs
She goes through with Osborne to the members vote.
George Osborne is the greatest master strategist the world has ever known.
He would loan Javid 35 MPs to ensure he was in the final two
Those numbers are after he's done the lending.
He wouldn't know exactly how the final votes would stack up. I know he likes to think Tory MPs are mere pawns to be played in his master plan for world domination but they are people in their own right, won't all obediently do as he asks them to in the privacy of a secret ballot, and he's not quite as clever as he thinks he is.
Tory MPs will make sure the MP opposing Osborne isn't the one he wants.
That might be the case if 50% + 1 were not in Osborne's bag.
Caving on Tax Credit cuts this autumn has ensured that he has a majority - probably more like 65% - of the party on side.
The latest opinion poll from Spain shows a sharp drop in support for PP and a rise in support for both the Socialists and Ciudadanos. The latest corruption scandal involving PP - this one in Valencia - seems to have been a bit of a tipping point. Right now the Socialists and Ciudadanos are in talks about forming a coalition. This poll may make that more likely. It will certainly make PP think twice about opposing and so sparking a new general election.
That's been the mood music from the Spanish business community over the last week. It's worth remembering that PSOE + C only has about 45% of the seats, so they'll need to rely on wither the PP abstaining on key votes.
The corruption stuff has really eaten away at PP and Rajoy especially as he has shown such poor leadership over it. They will not want another GE now, but they do still have potential blocking power in the Cortes - if they vote with Podemos and the regional/nationalist parties. What they need is a new leader.
They could also do with a couple of years out of power.
I do wonder if Spain has permanently fragmented into four different parties, plus the regionalists/nationalists.
Nothing is permanent in politics. The fragmentation might be around in the medium term, that does not mean it is permanently embedded.
The latest opinion poll from Spain shows a sharp drop in support for PP and a rise in support for both the Socialists and Ciudadanos. The latest corruption scandal involving PP - this one in Valencia - seems to have been a bit of a tipping point. Right now the Socialists and Ciudadanos are in talks about forming a coalition. This poll may make that more likely. It will certainly make PP think twice about opposing and so sparking a new general election.
That's been the mood music from the Spanish business community over the last week. It's worth remembering that PSOE + C only has about 45% of the seats, so they'll need to rely on wither the PP abstaining on key votes.
The corruption stuff has really eaten away at PP and Rajoy especially as he has shown such poor leadership over it. They will not want another GE now, but they do still have potential blocking power in the Cortes - if they vote with Podemos and the regional/nationalist parties. What they need is a new leader.
They could also do with a couple of years out of power.
I do wonder if Spain has permanently fragmented into four different parties, plus the regionalists/nationalists.
Nothing is permanent in politics. The fragmentation might be around in the medium term, that does not mean it is permanently embedded.
Yes, and very true. As Donald Tusk, the President of the EU Commission said, nothing is irreversible.
Wow, this almost NEVER happens... trafficscotland: A flood warning in place for Tayside and Easter Ross & Great Glen Check: https://t.co/W2eNNz9kkH for more info https://t.co/AjmEkUJj87
It seems Priti Patel is going to break cover and campaign to Leave.
I'd argue that's the most significant person that Leave could hope for. As we all know, campaigns are about momentum, it is definitely with the Outers
With certain 'Outers' fearing that by joining the 'Out' campaign they'd be lining up with the ultra right and the fruitcakes I would think someone advocating capital punishment would be the last person they'd want as their poster girl.
It’s also somewhat ironic having someone as employment minister who believes British workers are inherently lazy.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Different era. Plus Patel's position is laughable.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
Did she really say that (or something like it)? That's incredible if true.
While I am personally against the death penalty, it is not a "touchstone" issue for me. But anyone who denies that miscarriages of justice happen in the UK is utterly deluded.
Dan Hannan Perhaps without intending to, the Economist shows why we should #VoteLeave. Imagine where we'll be in, say, 2050. https://t.co/GGE812nCsZ
The trend over the last few years is likely to reverse, as China and emerging markets are going into a slump while the EU is coming out of one. Trade with the EU is still 45% so not insignificant.
Can anyone name a trading block or country seperating that increased mutual trade after breaking up? Of course finding markets elsewhere is always possible, but not easy and takes time.
Stupid question as you well know. The examples of either countries or trading blocks breaking up is so rare and each individual circumstance so unique as to make any comparison pretty useless. But I strongly suspect that trade between the various Eastern bloc countries has increased dramatically since the Iron Curtain fell.
It's a very nasty post. Not unexpected from a hardline europhile.
I'm stating my honest opinion. Simple as that. Would you prefer me to lie and say that I can find a redeeming feature to her? Sorry, I can't.
I'm not being nasty. I'm calling it as I see it. There are plenty of eurosceptic politicians that I like and respect (Hoey, Redwood, Dorries even!!! I could go on...) not that I expect you to believe me. To lazily link my negative opinion of Patel to my euro-enthusiasm is so far wide of the mark to be utterly laughable.
No, it's utterly nasty. You can't detect a single trace of humanity in her?? Just who the f--k do you think you are?
It's a disgusting phrase. I wouldn't use it about a single politician at Westminster, from any party. The fact it's honest is deserving of no credit. It just goes to show how transparently unpleasant you are in baselessly condemning someone just because you vehemently disagree with them on a single issue.
Your views for her reflect the contempt you have for the ordinary British person as demonstrated in your ultra rabid europhilia, and your utterly ridiculous dribblings that Cameron's deal went "too far", which is shared so widely by your friends on the continent.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
But he was a Tory, right?
So they have not won a majority in England since when, Wilson?
Whenever I have seen her in the media she comes over as very cold and lacking in the human touch.
Her politics may fit the Leaver wing of the Tories, but I cannot see her getting enough nominations to go to the final ballot.
100 backbench MPs with BOO sympathy would be plenty to get to the final ballot. They'll rally around the most telegenic leader in opposition to Osborne.
Let's say the final round (with Boris and May eliminated along the way) is something like..
Osborne - 165 MPs Patel - 100 MPs Javid - 66 MPs
She goes through with Osborne to the members vote.
Fantasyland !
No, I don't think so.
There is block of around 100 Tory MPs unbeholden to Osborne who want a eurosceptic and want to stop him.
Even David Davis made it through to the final two in 2005 despite bombing.
They will unite around the most credible eurosceptic candidate. If there's a candidate that has broader appeal to soft-Cameroons and soft-eurosceptics (like Gove) then they will easily do it.
I think May and Boris are probably out now. So it leaves the likes of Paterson, Gove and Patel.
If none of them muster I don't rule out someone like Justine Greening, Liz Truss or even Jesse Norman.
I'm sorry, the idea that Patel will get 100 MPs backing her is laughable. Perhaps the general point is right; but the choice of candidate is not.
A few months ago the idea of Trump winning the nomination was laughable, as was Jeremy Corbyn.
I'm not saying she *will* be in the final two (as my posts below are quite clear about) only that she has a perfectly feasible path to getting there if she performs well and events favour her.
If all politicians were damned for one or two bad performances on QT or Newsnight then we wouldn't have any leaders at all.
I just don't get it. Patel needs people (specifically MPs) to care about her agenda over continuity Cameron; she needs to form a reaction. And yet she needs people not to care about the other half of everything she says.
Labour went mad electing Corbyn; I wouldn't bet on lightening striking twice.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Crap odds from Billy Knolls: Jeb and Carson look better than that Clinton [MODERATED]/Sanders. Fiorina as VEEP more likely then Carson (due to demographics).
Off-topic:
Priti: NO! The death-penalty is not acceptable: Fallon has blown his crediability so Saj will get my vote.
Mr. Eagles, if the Conservatives chose an ethnic minority female leader some very PC types in Labour would react like the black dalek at the end of Remembrance of the Daleks.
Thanks for that clip of Patel. I'd not seen her before. It would be nice to have a new Tory leader that is so easy to dislike. Cameron never quite cut it.
Wow, this almost NEVER happens... trafficscotland: A flood warning in place for Tayside and Easter Ross & Great Glen Check: https://t.co/W2eNNz9kkH for more info https://t.co/AjmEkUJj87
Nothing nicer than your average unionist ecstatic and slavering at disasters happening in Scotland, and it is by a plastic Scot as well so double points.
Dan Hannan Perhaps without intending to, the Economist shows why we should #VoteLeave. Imagine where we'll be in, say, 2050. https://t.co/GGE812nCsZ
The trend over the last few years is likely to reverse, as China and emerging markets are going into a slump while the EU is coming out of one. Trade with the EU is still 45% so not insignificant.
Can anyone name a trading block or country seperating that increased mutual trade after breaking up? Of course finding markets elsewhere is always possible, but not easy and takes time.
Stupid question as you well know. The examples of either countries or trading blocks breaking up is so rare and each individual circumstance so unique as to make any comparison pretty useless. But I strongly suspect that trade between the various Eastern bloc countries has increased dramatically since the Iron Curtain fell.
So you are saying that mutual trade between the eastern block countries has increased since they joined the EU?
I don't think that their trade with Russia and the CIS has.
Thanks for that clip of Patel. I'd not seen her before. It would be nice to have a new Tory leader that is so easy to dislike. Cameron never quite cut it.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
Dan Hannan Perhaps without intending to, the Economist shows why we should #VoteLeave. Imagine where we'll be in, say, 2050. https://t.co/GGE812nCsZ
The trend over the last few years is likely to reverse, as China and emerging markets are going into a slump while the EU is coming out of one. Trade with the EU is still 45% so not insignificant.
Can anyone name a trading block or country seperating that increased mutual trade after breaking up? Of course finding markets elsewhere is always possible, but not easy and takes time.
Stupid question as you well know. The examples of either countries or trading blocks breaking up is so rare and each individual circumstance so unique as to make any comparison pretty useless. But I strongly suspect that trade between the various Eastern bloc countries has increased dramatically since the Iron Curtain fell.
In absolute terms, massively I'm sure. Exports as a percent of GDP in the mid 1990s for most ex-Communist countries was in the 20-25% range. By 2015 it was close to 50% in Poland, and even higher for the Czech Republic and the Balkans.
But I think going capitalist probably had more to do with it than anything else.
Should Lee Rigbys killers have been executed..I think they should..no miscarriage of justice there..
The problem is that if I'd been on the jury for the Birmingham Six case, I would have been absolutely convinced there was no chance of a miscarriage of justice.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
But he was a Tory, right?
So they have not won a majority in England since when, Wilson?
Yes but Heath was a socialist which gives Labour several in a row.
Thanks for that clip of Patel. I'd not seen her before. It would be nice to have a new Tory leader that is so easy to dislike. Cameron never quite cut it.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
She didn't bang on about it all the time though. To the extent that, though I was a huge Thatcher fan, I never actually knew she was in favour.
Dan Hannan Perhaps without intending to, the Economist shows why we should #VoteLeave. Imagine where we'll be in, say, 2050. https://t.co/GGE812nCsZ
The trend over the last few years is likely to reverse, as China and emerging markets are going into a slump while the EU is coming out of one. Trade with the EU is still 45% so not insignificant.
Can anyone name a trading block or country seperating that increased mutual trade after breaking up? Of course finding markets elsewhere is always possible, but not easy and takes time.
Stupid question as you well know. The examples of either countries or trading blocks breaking up is so rare and each individual circumstance so unique as to make any comparison pretty useless. But I strongly suspect that trade between the various Eastern bloc countries has increased dramatically since the Iron Curtain fell.
In absolute terms, massively I'm sure. Exports as a percent of GDP in the mid 1990s for most ex-Communist countries was in the 20-25% range. By 2015 it was close to 50% in Poland, and even higher for the Czech Republic and the Balkans.
But I think going capitalist probably had more to do with it than anything else.
Compared to the other former CIS states in the 'stans, Caucuses, Ukraine or Moldova and of course Russia, how have the ones that joined the EU done in terms of trade and GDP?
One of the Conservatives most positive actions in the 1990's was to encourage and support the eastward expansion of the EU. Millions of people are free and prosperous as a result.
It's a very nasty post. Not unexpected from a hardline europhile.
I'm stating my honest opinion. Simple as that. Would you prefer me to lie and say that I can find a redeeming feature to her? Sorry, I can't.
I'm not being nasty. I'm calling it as I see it. There are plenty of eurosceptic politicians that I like and respect (Hoey, Redwood, Dorries even!!! I could go on...) not that I expect you to believe me. To lazily link my negative opinion of Patel to my euro-enthusiasm is so far wide of the mark to be utterly laughable.
No, it's utterly nasty. You can't detect a single trace of humanity in her?? Just who the f--k do you think you are?
It's a disgusting phrase. I wouldn't use it about a single politician at Westminster, from any party. The fact it's honest is deserving of no credit. It just goes to show how transparently unpleasant you are in baselessly condemning someone just because you vehemently disagree with them on a single issue.
Your views for her reflect the contempt you have for the ordinary British person as demonstrated in your ultra rabid europhilia, and your utterly ridiculous dribblings that Cameron's deal went "too far", which is shared so widely by your friends on the continent.
I have to agree that describing her as someone without a "single trace of humanity" is particularly nasty. Does she torture puppies or murder small children? She is a politician who can come across as perhaps a bit wooden or even cold - the phrase you use is more apt for a mass-murdering dictator or perhaps one of the more brutal guards in a concentration camp. You do yourself and your arguments no favours with such phrases.
Dan Hannan Perhaps without intending to, the Economist shows why we should #VoteLeave. Imagine where we'll be in, say, 2050. https://t.co/GGE812nCsZ
The trend over the last few years is likely to reverse, as China and emerging markets are going into a slump while the EU is coming out of one. Trade with the EU is still 45% so not insignificant.
Can anyone name a trading block or country seperating that increased mutual trade after breaking up? Of course finding markets elsewhere is always possible, but not easy and takes time.
Stupid question as you well know. The examples of either countries or trading blocks breaking up is so rare and each individual circumstance so unique as to make any comparison pretty useless. But I strongly suspect that trade between the various Eastern bloc countries has increased dramatically since the Iron Curtain fell.
In absolute terms, massively I'm sure. Exports as a percent of GDP in the mid 1990s for most ex-Communist countries was in the 20-25% range. By 2015 it was close to 50% in Poland, and even higher for the Czech Republic and the Balkans.
But I think going capitalist probably had more to do with it than anything else.
Compared to the other former CIS states in the 'stans, Caucuses, Ukraine or Moldova and of course Russia, how have the ones that joined the EU done in terms of trade and GDP?
One of the Conservatives most positive actions in the 1990's was to encourage and support the eastward expansion of the EU. Millions of people are free and prosperous as a result.
I’m not entirely sure it was to the benefit of the EU, though!
Lee Rigby's killers wanted to be shot dead....I guess so they could meet their 72 virgins...I personally would put them in solitary and let them rot. Another 50+ years before they get to meet them is a hell of a punishment.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
I don't know whether or not she is leadership material, but support for capital punishment is hardly going to be negative among the general public.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
She didn't bang on about it all the time though. To the extent that, though I was a huge Thatcher fan, I never actually knew she was in favour.
Perhaps surprisingly to those who know only the Private Eye caricature, Denis was against.
Should Lee Rigbys killers have been executed..I think they should..no miscarriage of justice there..
What would it have achieved other than an enormous legal bill for HMG? The death penalty is not a deterrent for suicide terrorists.
Actually, keeping terrorists alive and in prison is probably worse, in their book, than executing them.
One problem in our prisons is that they are hotbeds of Islamic radicalism. It is important that we keep jihadi terrorists away from the other prisoners, and preferably in solitary.
In prison there is a need for protection and joining the Islamic "gang" has protective benefits, as well as special privileges such as Fridays off.
No, it's utterly nasty. You can't detect a single trace of humanity in her?? Just who the f--k do you think you are?
It's a disgusting phrase. I wouldn't use it about a single politician at Westminster, from any party. The fact it's honest is deserving of no credit. It just goes to show how transparently unpleasant you are in baselessly condemning someone just because you vehemently disagree with them on a single issue.
Your views for her reflect the contempt you have for the ordinary British person as demonstrated in your ultra rabid europhilia, and your utterly ridiculous dribblings that Cameron's deal went "too far", which is shared so widely by your friends on the continent.
I couldn't care less that you don't like me. Call me all the names that you want to. That's water off a ducks back. I don't appreciate you misrepresenting me though.
How on earth do you make the leap that my holding a minority position on the EU is "contempt for the ordinary British person". I am an ordinary British person. Do all we ordinary British people have hold the same views now just because it's the will of the majority? I've stated numerous times on here that I have a great deal of respect for those who hold the opposite view to me on this issue. I fully accept that I am in the minority on the EU (and, in my own terms, that people of my viewpoint on the EU have already lost) and that if the UK votes to leave then so be it. You'll not find me taking that result in bad grace.
It's a very nasty post. Not unexpected from a hardline europhile.
I'm stating my honest opinion. Simple as that. Would you prefer me to lie and say that I can find a redeeming feature to her? Sorry, I can't.
I'm not being nasty. I'm calling it as I see it. There are plenty of eurosceptic politicians that I like and respect (Hoey, Redwood, Dorries even!!! I could go on...) not that I expect you to believe me. To lazily link my negative opinion of Patel to my euro-enthusiasm is so far wide of the mark to be utterly laughable.
No, it's utterly nasty. You can't detect a single trace of humanity in her?? Just who the f--k do you think you are?
It's a disgusting phrase. I wouldn't use it about a single politician at Westminster, from any party. The fact it's honest is deserving of no credit. It just goes to show how transparently unpleasant you are in baselessly condemning someone just because you vehemently disagree with them on a single issue.
Your views for her reflect the contempt you have for the ordinary British person as demonstrated in your ultra rabid europhilia, and your utterly ridiculous dribblings that Cameron's deal went "too far", which is shared so widely by your friends on the continent.
I have to agree that describing her as someone without a "single trace of humanity" is particularly nasty. Does she torture puppies or murder small children? She is a politician who can come across as perhaps a bit wooden or even cold - the phrase you use is more apt for a mass-murdering dictator or perhaps one of the more brutal guards in a concentration camp. You do yourself and your arguments no favours with such phrases.
I don’t like her politics but, as I posted, I’ve met her, and she’s helped me and mine, and I know, others, locally. I certainly wouldn’t describe her as "without a "single trace of humanity” “. She doesn’t come across as warm and sympathetic, though.
Dan Hannan Perhaps without intending to, the Economist shows why we should #VoteLeave. Imagine where we'll be in, say, 2050. https://t.co/GGE812nCsZ
The trend over the last few years is likely to reverse, as China and emerging markets are going into a slump while the EU is coming out of one. Trade with the EU is still 45% so not insignificant.
Can anyone name a trading block or country seperating that increased mutual trade after breaking up? Of course finding markets elsewhere is always possible, but not easy and takes time.
Stupid question as you well know. The examples of either countries or trading blocks breaking up is so rare and each individual circumstance so unique as to make any comparison pretty useless. But I strongly suspect that trade between the various Eastern bloc countries has increased dramatically since the Iron Curtain fell.
In absolute terms, massively I'm sure. Exports as a percent of GDP in the mid 1990s for most ex-Communist countries was in the 20-25% range. By 2015 it was close to 50% in Poland, and even higher for the Czech Republic and the Balkans.
But I think going capitalist probably had more to do with it than anything else.
Compared to the other former CIS states in the 'stans, Caucuses, Ukraine or Moldova and of course Russia, how have the ones that joined the EU done in terms of trade and GDP?
One of the Conservatives most positive actions in the 1990's was to encourage and support the eastward expansion of the EU. Millions of people are free and prosperous as a result.
They've done much, much better.
GDP per head of Poland, the Baltics, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia - the first wave of EU joiners, is 3-5x the level of the countries that "turned East" - like Belorussia, Ukraine and the like. There are a few exceptions: Azerbaijan has done very well on the back of the oil boom, for example.
But I'd be wary of simple causations too. Eastern Europe was richer than most of the ex USSR Republics, and the workforce better educated. Transport links to the West were also much better. VW was always more likely to build a plant in Poland than in the Donbass, for example.
Being a client state of Russia also f*cked you up. Russia was very happy to prop up undemocratic, corrupt regimes, so long as they were friendly to the Kremlin.
It seems Priti Patel is going to break cover and campaign to Leave.
I'd argue that's the most significant person that Leave could hope for. As we all know, campaigns are about momentum, it is definitely with the Outers
With certain 'Outers' fearing that by joining the 'Out' campaign they'd be lining up with the ultra right and the fruitcakes I would think someone advocating capital punishment would be the last person they'd want as their poster girl.
It’s also somewhat ironic having someone as employment minister who believes British workers are inherently lazy.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
Only a dyed-in-the-wool Tory could even have a thought like that while dreaming!
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
I don't know whether or not she is leadership material, but support for capital punishment is hardly going to be negative among the general public.
Yes but it would nullify the myth that Corbyn is the only leader at odds with party policy. (If only Seamus Milne would pull his finger out.)
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
And he was just a Red Tory. Who is the last Labour leader that Corbynitas are prepared to accept was Proppa Labour - Attlee?
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
I don't know whether or not she is leadership material, but support for capital punishment is hardly going to be negative among the general public.
There are two types of support for the death penalty:
1. The "I'm in theory in favour of it, but I probably wouldn't vote for it, because in the real world you'd probably end up killing the wrong people from time to time" group
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
But he was a Tory, right?
So they have not won a majority in England since when, Wilson?
Yes but Heath was a socialist which gives Labour several in a row.
Lord Harris of High Cross used to say "Ted Heath is a Conservative. He wants to conserve socialism."
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
And he was just a Red Tory. Who is the last Labour leader that Corbynitas are prepared to accept was Proppa Labour - Attlee?
We've done this sketch. And by the end of the EU referendum we might have pb Tories disowning Cameron.
Should Lee Rigbys killers have been executed..I think they should..no miscarriage of justice there..
What would it have achieved other than an enormous legal bill for HMG? The death penalty is not a deterrent for suicide terrorists.
Actually, keeping terrorists alive and in prison is probably worse, in their book, than executing them.
One of the big problems with that back in the 60's and 70's was the other members of the terrorist group would "hostage take" to attempt governments to release those tried and convicted. Of course the hostages were then summarily executed or given a death penalty without a trial if the governments did not negotiate. To be fair if you executed them you probably would have got a revenge attack anyway but there was not quite the number of suicide type bombers back then , certainly in the west anyway.
It shaped my original thinking anyway in favour but then the situation changed dramatically in recent years and it would now achieve little I think. Incarceration probably hurts them more rather than martyrdom as they would like.
I have always thought though that killers of children and police officers should not have quite the easy ride in prison they actually seem to have. They are segregated mostly if child killers etc. Yet if a police office discharges their weapon when under threat or believes the public are in danger resulting in a fatality they themselves could end up in jail or the family of the victim who was known to be for example " a gun toting bad 'un " ends of suing those involved.
I think we have to now err towards no death penalty compared to may years ago but in doing so we must then stand by and fully protect those that protect us.
Blimey, I mention Patel as a positive for Leave and she's being talked of as PM.
Nigel Farage is against the death penalty, I'm for it. There was recently a case where two young men stomped on a heavily pregnant young lady with the intention of killing the baby, which they achieved. I would have little concern about how we executed them.
No, it's utterly nasty. You can't detect a single trace of humanity in her?? Just who the f--k do you think you are?
It's a disgusting phrase. I wouldn't use it about a single politician at Westminster, from any party. The fact it's honest is deserving of no credit. It just goes to show how transparently unpleasant you are in baselessly condemning someone just because you vehemently disagree with them on a single issue.
Your views for her reflect the contempt you have for the ordinary British person as demonstrated in your ultra rabid europhilia, and your utterly ridiculous dribblings that Cameron's deal went "too far", which is shared so widely by your friends on the continent.
I couldn't care less that you don't like me. Call me all the names that you want to. That's water off a ducks back. I don't appreciate you misrepresenting me though.
How on earth do you make the leap that my holding a minority position on the EU is "contempt for the ordinary British person". I am an ordinary British person. Do all we ordinary British people have hold the same views now just because it's the will of the majority? I've stated numerous times on here that I have a great deal of respect for those who hold the opposite view to me on this issue. I fully accept that I am in the minority on the EU (and, in my own terms, that people of my viewpoint on the EU have already lost) and that if the UK votes to leave then so be it. You'll not find me taking that result in bad grace.
The accusation that the Remainers are anti-British or unpatriotic is quite insulting. It was a mistake by the Yes campaign in Scotland too, to depict Unionists as anti-Scottish.
There are plenty of British patriots like me that see our role in the EU as a positive promotion of British values, and I would cite our influence on the Eastern Block countries within the EU as part of that.
It's a very nasty post. Not unexpected from a hardline europhile.
I'm stating my honest opinion. Simple as that. Would you prefer me to lie and say that I can find a redeeming feature to her? Sorry, I can't.
I'm not being nasty. I'm calling it as I see it. There are plenty of eurosceptic politicians that I like and respect (Hoey, Redwood, Dorries even!!! I could go on...) not that I expect you to believe me. To lazily link my negative opinion of Patel to my euro-enthusiasm is so far wide of the mark to be utterly laughable.
No, it's utterly nasty. You can't detect a single trace of humanity in her?? Just who the f--k do you think you are?
It's a disgusting phrase. I wouldn't use it about a single politician at Westminster, from any party. The fact it's honest is deserving of no credit. It just goes to show how transparently unpleasant you are in baselessly condemning someone just because you vehemently disagree with them on a single issue.
Your views for her reflect the contempt you have for the ordinary British person as demonstrated in your ultra rabid europhilia, and your utterly ridiculous dribblings that Cameron's deal went "too far", which is shared so widely by your friends on the continent.
I have to say Casino I think that is one of the most over the top reactions I have seen on here (yours I mean not Steven's). His comment wasn't complimentary by any means but neither was it anywhere near as bad as you are trying to portray it. Both you and I have said far worse things about politicians on here in the past.
I would say that Steven has been one of the uniformly least unpleasant posters on here for a very long time.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
And he was just a Red Tory. Who is the last Labour leader that Corbynitas are prepared to accept was Proppa Labour - Attlee?
We've done this sketch. And by the end of the EU referendum we might have pb Tories disowning Cameron.
Each time we "do this sketch", we never get an answer, because people like you feel a desperate need to deflect.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
I don't know whether or not she is leadership material, but support for capital punishment is hardly going to be negative among the general public.
There are two types of support for the death penalty:
1. The "I'm in theory in favour of it, but I probably wouldn't vote for it, because in the real world you'd probably end up killing the wrong people from time to time" group
and the
2. Bring it back! lot
I think 1 is probably quite a lot bigger than 2.
I think the biggest problem is that while, without doubt, there are people who deserve to executed, there will never be agreement as to who should be executed.
Since capital punishment isn't coming back (unless we find ourselves in another World War) a politician's views about it don't seem very important to me.
Mr. Foxinsox, not sure how much this has changed, but certainly a few years ago there was a defined state stake in large financial institutions and limited scope for foreign investment/ownership. It is capitalism, but not, if you like, full capitalism.
Mr. Observer, if the Conservatives think Corbyn's a dud, they're likelier to indulge their own preference rather than that of the electorate when it comes to picking Cameron's replacement.
The next Tory leader is unlikely to be facing Corbyn for a significant period of time, if at all. Should the Tory membership become as self-indulgent as the Labour membership, they may well end up paying the price. Not to the degree that Labour will under Corbyn, of course, but perhaps to the extent that they lose power. And the Tories really cannot afford to lose power. Their actions of issues such as party funding have made it open season on them once they are back in opposition.
The Tories will never lose power, at least in England.
Well, it is true that Labour hasn't won a majority in England since Tony Blair was Prime Minister.
And he was just a Red Tory. Who is the last Labour leader that Corbynitas are prepared to accept was Proppa Labour - Attlee?
We've done this sketch. And by the end of the EU referendum we might have pb Tories disowning Cameron.
Each time we "do this sketch", we never get an answer, because people like you feel a desperate need to deflect.
Dan Hannan Perhaps without intending to, the Economist shows why we should #VoteLeave. Imagine where we'll be in, say, 2050. https://t.co/GGE812nCsZ
The trend over the last few years is likely to reverse, as China and emerging markets are going into a slump while the EU is coming out of one. Trade with the EU is still 45% so not insignificant.
Can anyone name a trading block or country seperating that increased mutual trade after breaking up? Of course finding markets elsewhere is always possible, but not easy and takes time.
Stupid question as you well know. The examples of either countries or trading blocks breaking up is so rare and each individual circumstance so unique as to make any comparison pretty useless. But I strongly suspect that trade between the various Eastern bloc countries has increased dramatically since the Iron Curtain fell.
In absolute terms, massively I'm sure. Exports as a percent of GDP in the mid 1990s for most ex-Communist countries was in the 20-25% range. By 2015 it was close to 50% in Poland, and even higher for the Czech Republic and the Balkans.
But I think going capitalist probably had more to do with it than anything else.
I think you are right but it just goes to show what an idiotic and desperate question it was for Foxinsoxuk to ask.The follow up 'yehbbut' just confirms this.
If Foxinsoxuk and SO don't like Priti then it would seem she is a good choice for PM..
I don't like her either. I can't detect the slightest trace of humanity or goodness in her. She's probably the only senior Conservative I can think of who would push me into even considering voting for a Corbyn lead Labour Party.
Thatcher was in favour of the death penalty.
This isn't an issue.
I don't know whether or not she is leadership material, but support for capital punishment is hardly going to be negative among the general public.
There are two types of support for the death penalty:
1. The "I'm in theory in favour of it, but I probably wouldn't vote for it, because in the real world you'd probably end up killing the wrong people from time to time" group
and the
2. Bring it back! lot
I think 1 is probably quite a lot bigger than 2.
I think the biggest problem is that while, without doubt, there are people who deserve to executed, there will never be agreement as to who should be executed.
Since capital punishment isn't coming back (unless we find ourselves in another World War) a politician's views about it don't seem very important to me.
I always loved the Willie Whitelaw quote on the death penalty:
"I do not support the indiscriminate use of capital punishment."
Should Lee Rigbys killers have been executed..I think they should..no miscarriage of justice there..
What would it have achieved other than an enormous legal bill for HMG? The death penalty is not a deterrent for suicide terrorists.
Actually, keeping terrorists alive and in prison is probably worse, in their book, than executing them.
One of the big problems with that back in the 60's and 70's was the other members of the terrorist group would "hostage take" to attempt governments to release those tried and convicted. Of course the hostages were then summarily executed or given a death penalty without a trial if the governments did not negotiate. To be fair if you executed them you probably would have got a revenge attack anyway but there was not quite the number of suicide type bombers back then , certainly in the west anyway.
It shaped my original thinking anyway in favour but then the situation changed dramatically in recent years and it would now achieve little I think. Incarceration probably hurts them more rather than martyrdom as they would like.
I have always thought though that killers of children and police officers should not have quite the easy ride in prison they actually seem to have. They are segregated mostly if child killers etc. Yet if a police office discharges their weapon when under threat or believes the public are in danger resulting in a fatality they themselves could end up in jail or the family of the victim who was known to be for example " a gun toting bad 'un " ends of suing those involved.
I think we have to now err towards no death penalty compared to may years ago but in doing so we must then stand by and fully protect those that protect us.
I was especially unimpressed by the way some people tried to portray Mark Duggan as a martyr. If you choose to be a gangster, you run the risk of being shot down.
Comments
PS - You're going to love the afternoon thread. A very subtle Star Trek reference in it.
If they ever do.
She, I paraphrase, said 'We don't find innocent people guilty, so there will be no miscarriage of justice'
Some of the odds are astounding.
Also, consider this:
Bush team buys him on predictit, big Betfair players get in touch with their US counterparty and take the arbitrage cash created.
There is block of around 100 Tory MPs unbeholden to Osborne who want a eurosceptic and want to stop him.
Even David Davis made it through to the final two in 2005 despite bombing.
They will unite around the most credible eurosceptic candidate. If there's a candidate that has broader appeal to soft-Cameroons and soft-eurosceptics (like Gove) then they will easily do it.
I think May and Boris are probably out now. So it leaves the likes of Paterson, Gove and Patel.
If none of them muster I don't rule out someone like Justine Greening, Liz Truss or even Jesse Norman.
I have realised over the years that just because a decision is a stupid one that doesn't prevent it being made! I cite electing Corbyn in support of my thesis. I still cannot see Priti having the people skills sufficient to get enough nominations though.
They have Bloomberg to run at an 18% chance. If you can somehow register (It is US only I think) perhaps a great way to cash your goldmine ?
Given her view is so little shared in the parliamentary party it would be of no threat whatsoever.
Although I consider myself a floating voter the floating has only really occurred outside of GEs. At every GE that I've been eligible to vote in (1997, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2015) my vote has ended up in the Conservative box in the end. That would change for sure if Patel was leading them. I'd vote for a decaying cowpat before I'd vote for her.
Entertaining sketch about the perils of voice recognition, perhaps especially for malcolmg (you need to cut and paste the link - but yes, it's safe)::
dotsub.com/view/6c5d7514-5656-476a-9504-07dd4e2f6509
And really, how come these leftists are still hankering after the Russians, huh?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3435451/MPs-clash-War-Peace-Labour-ministers-accuse-Tory-colleagues-gushing-support-Putin.html
And I know a great deal about Scotland, and love the place. In fact, I might well have seen more of it than you have ...
My mind is boggling.
I do wonder if Spain has permanently fragmented into four different parties, plus the regionalists/nationalists.
That said I agree with TSE. Her support for the death penalty puts her beyond the pale for me.
I'm not saying she *will* be in the final two (as my posts below are quite clear about) only that she has a perfectly feasible path to getting there if she performs well and events favour her.
If all politicians were damned for one or two bad performances on QT or Newsnight then we wouldn't have any leaders at all.
I'm not being nasty. I'm calling it as I see it. There are plenty of eurosceptic politicians that I like and respect (Hoey, Redwood, Dorries even!!! I could go on...) not that I expect you to believe me. To lazily link my negative opinion of Patel to my euro-enthusiasm is so far wide of the mark to be utterly laughable.
Caving on Tax Credit cuts this autumn has ensured that he has a majority - probably more like 65% - of the party on side.
trafficscotland: A flood warning in place for Tayside and Easter Ross & Great Glen
Check: https://t.co/W2eNNz9kkH for more info https://t.co/AjmEkUJj87
Here's the full segment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5aodBfdFTA
It's a disgusting phrase. I wouldn't use it about a single politician at Westminster, from any party. The fact it's honest is deserving of no credit. It just goes to show how transparently unpleasant you are in baselessly condemning someone just because you vehemently disagree with them on a single issue.
Your views for her reflect the contempt you have for the ordinary British person as demonstrated in your ultra rabid europhilia, and your utterly ridiculous dribblings that Cameron's deal went "too far", which is shared so widely by your friends on the continent.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3435361/Need-bigger-emergency-brake-Prime-Minister-Astonishing-aerial-image-shows-huge-expansion-Calais-Jungle-home-7-000-migrants-waiting-chance-cross-Channel.html
So they have not won a majority in England since when, Wilson?
Labour went mad electing Corbyn; I wouldn't bet on lightening striking twice.
Crap odds from Billy Knolls: Jeb and Carson look better than that Clinton [MODERATED]/Sanders. Fiorina as VEEP more likely then Carson (due to demographics).
Off-topic:
Priti: NO! The death-penalty is not acceptable: Fallon has blown his crediability so Saj will get my vote.
I think that's eminently possible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qObzgUfCl28
20 minutes in....
I don't think that their trade with Russia and the CIS has.
Can you imagine the Nat outrage if David Cameron directly tried to poach doctors from Scotland to England? https://t.co/rmFUstSMMa
But I think going capitalist probably had more to do with it than anything else.
1. Kasich 22%
2. Trump 20%
3. Cruz 15%
4. Rubio 14%
5. Bush 12%
6. Christie 10%
Does Trump look better or worse?
Rubio needs a strong showing in NH. Not first, but he has to be second at least.
One of the Conservatives most positive actions in the 1990's was to encourage and support the eastward expansion of the EU. Millions of people are free and prosperous as a result.
Dave's deal is a dud. An indefensible dud at that.
In prison there is a need for protection and joining the Islamic "gang" has protective benefits, as well as special privileges such as Fridays off.
How on earth do you make the leap that my holding a minority position on the EU is "contempt for the ordinary British person". I am an ordinary British person. Do all we ordinary British people have hold the same views now just because it's the will of the majority? I've stated numerous times on here that I have a great deal of respect for those who hold the opposite view to me on this issue. I fully accept that I am in the minority on the EU (and, in my own terms, that people of my viewpoint on the EU have already lost) and that if the UK votes to leave then so be it. You'll not find me taking that result in bad grace.
GDP per head of Poland, the Baltics, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia - the first wave of EU joiners, is 3-5x the level of the countries that "turned East" - like Belorussia, Ukraine and the like. There are a few exceptions: Azerbaijan has done very well on the back of the oil boom, for example.
But I'd be wary of simple causations too. Eastern Europe was richer than most of the ex USSR Republics, and the workforce better educated. Transport links to the West were also much better. VW was always more likely to build a plant in Poland than in the Donbass, for example.
Being a client state of Russia also f*cked you up. Russia was very happy to prop up undemocratic, corrupt regimes, so long as they were friendly to the Kremlin.
Who is fav to be next Tory leader?
1. The "I'm in theory in favour of it, but I probably wouldn't vote for it, because in the real world you'd probably end up killing the wrong people from time to time" group
and the
2. Bring it back! lot
I think 1 is probably quite a lot bigger than 2.
It shaped my original thinking anyway in favour but then the situation changed dramatically in recent years and it would now achieve little I think. Incarceration probably hurts them more rather than martyrdom as they would like.
I have always thought though that killers of children and police officers should not have quite the easy ride in prison they actually seem to have. They are segregated mostly if child killers etc. Yet if a police office discharges their weapon when under threat or believes the public are in danger resulting in a fatality they themselves could end up in jail or the family of the victim who was known to be for example " a gun toting bad 'un " ends of suing those involved.
I think we have to now err towards no death penalty compared to may years ago but in doing so we must then stand by and fully protect those that protect us.
Nigel Farage is against the death penalty, I'm for it. There was recently a case where two young men stomped on a heavily pregnant young lady with the intention of killing the baby, which they achieved. I would have little concern about how we executed them.
There are plenty of British patriots like me that see our role in the EU as a positive promotion of British values, and I would cite our influence on the Eastern Block countries within the EU as part of that.
I would say that Steven has been one of the uniformly least unpleasant posters on here for a very long time.
Since capital punishment isn't coming back (unless we find ourselves in another World War) a politician's views about it don't seem very important to me.
"I do not support the indiscriminate use of capital punishment."