Will Hunt stand? If he wins I am in for a massive payday!
Hunt is by far the smoothest operator in the Tory ranks, and carries Cameron's sense of reassurance and charm. If I was a Tory, I'd be stuck between him and May who could well be our Angela Merkel with heels (and I mean that in a good way).
I'd know intuitively Boris would be a failure, and Crabb- is he jockeying for position, or does he really think he'll win? I thought Ed Miliband entered the 2010 contest to get a prominent post in his brother's cabinet- that is until McCluskey intervened.
As they say on Thunderbirds, "anything could happen in the next half hour"
Also, one might cite Scipio Aemillianus, who was made twice consul under-age (age limit was pretty high, to be fair) because they desperately needed him to sort out Spain. The likes of Marius was an upstart sponsored by the Metelli, a clan largely forgotten (they had huge success but did so between the Third Punic and Jugurthine Wars which isn't a period that closely followed), but whom he soon eclipsed.
last week the electorate stated it wanted to control immigration,
that's not what it said on the ballot
Stop playing games. There is what the ballot said, what the campaign promoted, and what the voters want, they are not even remotely the same. Even if VoteLeave was full to the eyeballs of positive Gisela Stuart types, a large chunk of the country would have seen it as an opportunity to reduce immigration, either directly, or as a necessarily first step.
not playing games at all. just think that you can't really make the claim that "the electorate" want what you say. Sure, a goodly number of them probably did vote for primarily that reason, but not necessarily a majority of those that voted leave.
... and remember Leave only just won, by 3.8%. Considering the enormity of the lies used (£350m/wk and reduced immigration) and which have since been renounced, you can't claim "the electorate" wanted to do anything in particular.
Donnez moi un break. If we are talking about enormous lies we better not consider World War 3, the economic apocalypse appears to be fizzling after getting just below where we were in February and about triple where we were in 2008, the French have said there borders are not moving so no refugee camps in Kent, the former governor of the Bank Of England told us yesterday the the economic case was bullshit, etc etc. Both sides lied massively, neither has any case to try and take the moral high ground over the other, get over it.
Just factually incorrect. You are clutching at straws, Britain is worse off. I see that you concede that Leave 'lied massively'.
Newsflash: "Remain" and "Leave" don't exist anymore, the public voted, now we have to make what they voted for work. Or I guess you can sit there crying and throwing your toys around.
"We have to make it work" says a guy that doesn't even live here.
If Boris becomes leader, I shall intend to be a bastard, inside the tent, pissing in
Have you done any straw polls of members yet? I've done a quick one, Boris has half of the leave people on his side and none of the remain people, I don't see how he can win on those numbers. This is in London, so it may not be representative.
I've spoke to two last night, my old constituency chairman, hardcore Leaver said he'd back anyone but Boris, even Ken Clarke.
A remainer said being a Brexiteer come mid August might be an awful position to hold if the economic news is poor because of Brexit, so he might go for May, but he thinks only a Brexiteer PM is the only one who can sell an EEA deal to the Leavers in the country.
Yes, if Boris were to unequivocally come out in favour of the EEA and free movement with some EU fig leaf then he may come out on top, if he goes for fully out I don't see how he will get support among the membership, only around half of the leave Tories I know voted leave because of immigration (probably the half that are supporting Boris at the moment).
Jezza tells McDonnell or Lewis that if they got on the ballot he will stand down.
Will Labour MPs be prepared to nominate either?
If not Jezza wins the party vote and deselections results in SDP2
Tory reign for 15 years,
The current idea by the splitters is doomed
Eagle is Kendall level of support
Watson is Cooper level of support
Jezza is over 50% on first ballot
The splitters really hadn't thought this through had they
So then they will have to walk and either defect or set up their own party. What marks this rebellion out so far is the unity of purpose: the resignations and then the VoNC. Would that carry forward to the ultimate rebellion were Corbyn re-elected? It would have its own momentum. Providing that a critical mass went, then those who stayed would be ever more vulnerable to the increasing relative power of the left, so increasing the incentive to jump.
Indeed. It really is quite something how the far left Corbynites are tried to brush off a rebellion of this scale as s wrinkle of history. There is no precedent for a leader staying in such circumstances
There is no precedent for Labour MPs being so out of touch with the membership of their party.
((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges 22s22 seconds ago Understand Corbyn wants to call it a day. Milne and the other ultras telling him he has to cling on.
Apologies earlier for my assessment of Corbyn if this is genuinely true and he is being egged on by his militant clique. It would fit much more with Nick Palmer's assessment of Jeremy who of course knows him very well.
Labour don't need to choose a candidate who they feel would be a good leader for the country, or for their electability, or for anything. They just need someone who will be best able to get rid of Corbyn. Then they can pick a sensible leader at their leisure.
((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges 22s22 seconds ago Understand Corbyn wants to call it a day. Milne and the other ultras telling him he has to cling on.
Jeremy man. The movement is bigger than you. I support the new direction away from continuity Blairism you've valiantly and incompetently tried to take us is. But the show is over.
''We have to choose which we want: London as the EU's financial and tech capital and continued free movement (albeit with much more freedom re benefits), or to lose a chunk of those industries but to fundamentally change our immigration policy.''
No I think you;re wrong. I think we will get both.
Who is Merkel to tell us we can't? who is Juncker?
When half of Europe completely agrees with us and wants us to stay? When every leader in the region is facing calls for referendums exactly along Britain's lines?
I tend to agree that we could negotiate a better deal. But here's the thing:
If we invoke Article 50, without having EFTA/EEA as a proposed destination, we will start losing financial services companies immediately. Why? Because if you're running Morgan Stanley in London, and you know that in two years - if a deal isn't completed - you are without passporting, and there is business you simply can't do in London anymore. So, you'll invoke the precautionary principle: moving functions that require financial passporting to Dublin, Paris, Frankfurt and Warsaw. Not doing so is too great a risk.
The immediate impact of this will be a very serious impact on the Prime London property market. While this is not something that will be of enormous interest to you, it will undoubtedly lead to stresses at UK banks, if tens of billions of mortgages have moved from 65% loan-to-value to 120%. At the very least, this will affect the ability of banks to support the economy. It will also feed through in the "wealth effect".
Bank of America sees UK inflation at 4% in a year or so. Will BoE raise rates to counter?
Brexit will look even more daft when millions of homeowners who've never known a different mortgage rate get hit.
They also, according to a panel discussion I heard on Monday, forecast UK GDP falling from this year's 2.3% to 0.3%. I'm not sure of the assumptions used to reach the latter. In any event, rising interest rates in those circumstances would be unhelpful.
There's been a surprising amount of money backing Stephen Crabb. He was last matched at 10.5, which is around where he's been for most of the last day.
He doesn't exactly have much of a profile yet - I doubt whether most members of the public could pick him out of an identity parade.
last week the electorate stated it wanted to control immigration,
that's not what it said on the ballot
Stop playing games. There is what the ballot said, what the campaign promoted, and what the voters want, they are not even remotely the same. Even if VoteLeave was full to the eyeballs of positive Gisela Stuart types, a large chunk of the country would have seen it as an opportunity to reduce immigration, either directly, or as a necessarily first step.
not playing games at all. just think that you can't really make the claim that "the electorate" want what you say. Sure, a goodly number of them probably did vote for primarily that reason, but not necessarily a majority of those that voted leave.
... and remember Leave only just won, by 3.8%. Considering the enormity of the lies used (£350m/wk and reduced immigration) and which have since been renounced, you can't claim "the electorate" wanted to do anything in particular.
Donnez moi un break. If we are talking about enormous lies we better not consider World War 3, the economic apocalypse appears to be fizzling after getting just below where we were in February and about triple where we were in 2008, the French have said there borders are not moving so no refugee camps in Kent, the former governor of the Bank Of England told us yesterday the the economic case was bullshit, etc etc. Both sides lied massively, neither has any case to try and take the moral high ground over the other, get over it.
Just factually incorrect. You are clutching at straws, Britain is worse off. I see that you concede that Leave 'lied massively'.
Newsflash: "Remain" and "Leave" don't exist anymore, the public voted, now we have to make what they voted for work. Or I guess you can sit there crying and throwing your toys around.
Looking forward to £350million extra per week to the NHS, reduced immigration and British economy soaring then.
Will Hunt stand? If he wins I am in for a massive payday!
Hunt is by far the smoothest operator in the Tory ranks, and carries Cameron's sense of reassurance and charm. If I was a Tory, I'd be stuck between him and May who could well be our Angela Merkel with heels (and I mean that in a good way).
I'd know intuitively Boris would be a failure, and Crabb- is he jockeying for position, or does he really think he'll win? I thought Ed Miliband entered the 2010 contest to get a prominent post in his brother's cabinet- that is until McCluskey intervened.
As they say on Thunderbirds, "anything could happen in the next half hour"
Hunt has a peculiar manner - it's very stiff. Not as odd as Morgan - her doll eyes give me the creeps. She looks like she's had her whole face botoxed. I watched her on Sky this morning and nothing moved bar her mouth.
Oooh Stephen Crabb says he knows how to lay a bet...
ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US
((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges 22s22 seconds ago Understand Corbyn wants to call it a day. Milne and the other ultras telling him he has to cling on.
Jeremy man. The movement is bigger than you. I support the new direction away from continuity Blairism you've valiantly and incompetently tried to take us is. But the show is over.
Go. Please.
Sadly, yes ! But I do not want Blairism back. If he goes, then Labour should ask for a General Election.
@montie: I've been honoured to know @scrabbmp for 20 years and he's well placed to supercharge one nation conservatism
Crabb vs May in the final two? I think Boris is going to do a Portillo here.
Could it be Crabb in the same way as it was IDS? IDS got to the final 2 simply because he was 'Anyone but Portillo' - and then the members chose 'Anyone but Ken Clarke'.
Similarly, the MP's could go 'Anyone but Boris' - which means May + 1 other (either Leadsom or Crabb realistically). The Membership might well then go 'Anyone but May'
''We have to choose which we want: London as the EU's financial and tech capital and continued free movement (albeit with much more freedom re benefits), or to lose a chunk of those industries but to fundamentally change our immigration policy.''
No I think you;re wrong. I think we will get both.
Who is Merkel to tell us we can't? who is Juncker?
When half of Europe completely agrees with us and wants us to stay? When every leader in the region is facing calls for referendums exactly along Britain's lines?
I tend to agree that we could negotiate a better deal. But here's the thing:
If we invoke Article 50, without having EFTA/EEA as a proposed destination, we will start losing financial services companies immediately. Why? Because if you're running Morgan Stanley in London, and you know that in two years - if a deal isn't completed - you are without passporting, and there is business you simply can't do in London anymore. So, you'll invoke the precautionary principle: moving functions that require financial passporting to Dublin, Paris, Frankfurt and Warsaw. Not doing so is too great a risk.
The immediate impact of this will be a very serious impact on the Prime London property market. While this is not something that will be of enormous interest to you, it will undoubtedly lead to stresses at UK banks, if tens of billions of mortgages have moved from 65% loan-to-value to 120%. At the very least, this will affect the ability of banks to support the economy. It will also feed through in the "wealth effect".
Do the deal in London, book the deal in Luxembourg. Simples.
There's been a surprising amount of money backing Stephen Crabb. He was last matched at 10.5, which is around where he's been for most of the last day.
He doesn't exactly have much of a profile yet - I doubt whether most members of the public could pick him out of an identity parade.
Oooh Stephen Crabb says he knows how to lay a bet...
ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US
It was very interesting, he didn't say he knew how to place a bet, but he knew how to lay a bet.
I'll get Robert to do an IP Lookup again and find out who Stephen Crabb posts as on PB
We are all assuming an early election - including me. But how would they go round the 55% hurdle ?
Or, the FTP doesn't mean what it says.
Cameron calls it, invites Labour to be seen as opposing democracy.
If Corbyn opposes, even better. It will probably still pass. Keep tabling it every week if necessary.
Labour can't afford the cash for an election so would not vote for a general election.
The SNP would not increase their numbers with an election so would abstain.
So the five year term is solid for now.
Voting against (or abstaining) an election would be a vote in favour of keeping the new Tory government in favour. PMQs would be impossible for every opposition party, all the new PM would need to reply is "lets take this to the country and let the public decide, why are you so afraid of letting the public vote" to any and every question. The opposition can't even claim to be "getting on with the job" and so would be a collective laughing stock.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges 3m3 minutes ago Members of the shadow cabinet appointed to replace those who resigned are now resigning. Seriously. How much longer.
@RobDotHutton: Call it Clegg's Law Of Politics: even if you didn't actually promise it, if voters think you did, you're stuffed. https://t.co/PkgHxh7G20
Saw a few minutes of Crabb's declaration. Sajid Javid does seem to be an empty suit to me, a backstory and nothing else. If I were a Conservative, I'd be reluctant to back Crabb knowing we'd have a man who seems unimpressive in the Treasury.
There's been a surprising amount of money backing Stephen Crabb. He was last matched at 10.5, which is around where he's been for most of the last day.
He doesn't exactly have much of a profile yet - I doubt whether most members of the public could pick him out of an identity parade.
Bank of America sees UK inflation at 4% in a year or so. Will BoE raise rates to counter?
Brexit will look even more daft when millions of homeowners who've never known a different mortgage rate get hit.
They also, according to a panel discussion I heard on Monday, forecast UK GDP falling from this year's 2.3% to 0.3%. I'm not sure of the assumptions used to reach the latter. In any event, rising interest rates in those circumstances would be unhelpful.
Both are rubbish. Half the year is already gone. World commodity prices, if anything will go dow but there will be dollar-induced increase. I cannot believe it will be 4%.
We are all assuming an early election - including me. But how would they go round the 55% hurdle ?
Or, the FTP doesn't mean what it says.
Cameron calls it, invites Labour to be seen as opposing democracy.
If Corbyn opposes, even better. It will probably still pass. Keep tabling it every week if necessary.
Labour can't afford the cash for an election so would not vote for a general election.
The SNP would not increase their numbers with an election so would abstain.
So the five year term is solid for now.
Voting against (or abstaining) an election would be a vote in favour of keeping the new Tory government in favour. PMQs would be impossible for every opposition party, all the new PM would need to reply is "lets take this to the country and let the public decide, why are you so afraid of letting the public vote" to any and every question. The opposition can't even claim to be "getting on with the job" and so would be a collective laughing stock.
Yeah an opposition has no choice but to support a new election.
((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges 22s22 seconds ago Understand Corbyn wants to call it a day. Milne and the other ultras telling him he has to cling on.
Jeremy man. The movement is bigger than you. I support the new direction away from continuity Blairism you've valiantly and incompetently tried to take us is. But the show is over.
Go. Please.
The show must go on. For the sake of the membership.
"Tosh McDonald, the president of Aslef, went further by claiming that he now found it difficult to decide who he hated the most out of Margaret Thatcher and the Parliamentary Labour Party."
There you have it. Blairites are viruses and vermin. At least the left are consistently nasty, even to their own.
What's Tosh short for? I haven't heard that nickname in years bar that chap in The Bill.
Miss P., It was quite a common nickname in the Northumberland Fusiliers (later 3rd Battalion RRF) for chaps whose first name was Tony or Anthony. I think a bit like someone whose surname was Miller was almost invariably called Dusty.
As an aside are nicknames used as much as they were? When I was young everyone had a nickname and was seldom referred to as anything else. For example, I served for two years with a bloke known as "Frub", it was only at his leaving do when I was chatting with his wife that I found out his real name was Stephen.
Oooh Stephen Crabb says he knows how to lay a bet...
ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US
It was very interesting, he didn't say he knew how to place a bet, but he knew how to lay a bet.
I'll get Robert to do an IP Lookup again and find out who Stephen Crabb posts as on PB
Crabbe, much to my dismay is my MP. Very low profile down this way, unless you are a churchgoer. After leaving school went off the live and work in London (we but was and still is, portrayed as a local boy. Being as objective as i can, you Tories have far better candidates than Crabbe.
The detox project is essential, I don't want it to be undone
Osborne undid it last week. The punishment budget will be used against the Tories for years, especially if there financial fall out from BrExit is relatively mild. It will be a case of at the first sound of gunfire the nature instinct of a Tory Chancellor was to put up taxes on hardworking voters and make deep cuts to the NHS and Schools having promised to ringfence them.
Glass was in shadow education role for 48 hours during which time the only thing she did was draft a letter to her constituency to say she wouldn't be standing at next GE.
Tom Wolfe once said something along the lines of there's no need to make up fiction, just go out into America and look at what happens.
Saw a few minutes of Crabb's declaration. Sajid Javid does seem to be an empty suit to me, a backstory and nothing else. If I were a Conservative, I'd be reluctant to back Crabb knowing we'd have a man who seems unimpressive in the Treasury.
Does Javid actually bring any votes with him ? He comes across as useless.
There's been a surprising amount of money backing Stephen Crabb. He was last matched at 10.5, which is around where he's been for most of the last day.
He doesn't exactly have much of a profile yet - I doubt whether most members of the public could pick him out of an identity parade.
last week the electorate stated it wanted to control immigration,
that's not what it said on the ballot
Stop playing games. There is what the ballot said, what the campaign promoted, and what the voters want, they are not even remotely the same. Even if VoteLeave was full to the eyeballs of positive Gisela Stuart types, a large chunk of the country would have seen it as an opportunity to reduce immigration, either directly, or as a necessarily first step.
not playing games at all. just think that you can't really make the claim that "the electorate" want what you say. Sure, a goodly number of them probably did vote for primarily that reason, but not necessarily a majority of those that voted leave.
... and remember Leave only just won, by 3.8%. Considering the enormity of the lies used (£350m/wk and reduced immigration) and which have since been renounced, you can't claim "the electorate" wanted to do anything in particular.
Donnez moi un break. If we are talking about enormous lies we better not consider World War 3, the economic apocalypse appears to be fizzling after getting just below where we were in February and about triple where we were in 2008, the French have said there borders are not moving so no refugee camps in Kent, the former governor of the Bank Of England told us yesterday the the economic case was bullshit, etc etc. Both sides lied massively, neither has any case to try and take the moral high ground over the other, get over it.
Just factually incorrect. You are clutching at straws, Britain is worse off. I see that you concede that Leave 'lied massively'.
Newsflash: "Remain" and "Leave" don't exist anymore, the public voted, now we have to make what they voted for work. Or I guess you can sit there crying and throwing your toys around.
"We have to make it work" says a guy that doesn't even live here.
Really? I suppose you have detailed knowledge of how my finances work, what UK holdings I have, how much I remit to the UK every year and so forth. Or possibly you are flapping your lips.
Saw a few minutes of Crabb's declaration. Sajid Javid does seem to be an empty suit to me, a backstory and nothing else. If I were a Conservative, I'd be reluctant to back Crabb knowing we'd have a man who seems unimpressive in the Treasury.
Does Javid actually bring any votes with him ? He comes across as useless.
Possibly if he has Osborne's backing. He may get the Osborne toady vote.
The detox project is essential, I don't want it to be undone
Osborne undid it last week. The punishment budget will be used against the Tories for years, especially if there financial fall out from BrExit is relatively mild. It will be a case of at the first sound of gunfire the nature instinct of a Tory Chancellor was to put up taxes on hardworking voters and make deep cuts to the NHS and Schools having promised to ringfence them.
Conservatives who used the phrase "punishment budget" were certainly very unwise. It will be used to describe every Conservative budget between now and 2050 (assuming there are any).
Crabbe, much to my dismay is my MP. Very low profile down this way, unless you are a churchgoer. After leaving school went off the live and work in London (we but was and still is, portrayed as a local boy. Being as objective as i can, you Tories have far better candidates than Crabbe.
''We have to choose which we want: London as the EU's financial and tech capital and continued free movement (albeit with much more freedom re benefits), or to lose a chunk of those industries but to fundamentally change our immigration policy.''
No I think you;re wrong. I think we will get both.
Who is Merkel to tell us we can't? who is Juncker?
When half of Europe completely agrees with us and wants us to stay? When every leader in the region is facing calls for referendums exactly along Britain's lines?
I tend to agree that we could negotiate a better deal. But here's the thing:
If we invoke Article 50, without having EFTA/EEA as a proposed destination, we will start losing financial services companies immediately. Why? Because if you're running Morgan Stanley in London, and you know that in two years - if a deal isn't completed - you are without passporting, and there is business you simply can't do in London anymore. So, you'll invoke the precautionary principle: moving functions that require financial passporting to Dublin, Paris, Frankfurt and Warsaw. Not doing so is too great a risk.
The immediate impact of this will be a very serious impact on the Prime London property market. While this is not something that will be of enormous interest to you, it will undoubtedly lead to stresses at UK banks, if tens of billions of mortgages have moved from 65% loan-to-value to 120%. At the very least, this will affect the ability of banks to support the economy. It will also feed through in the "wealth effect".
Do the deal in London, book the deal in Luxembourg. Simples.
I think placating Ms Sturgeon pushes us to the smallest step away from the EU. It's not just economics, its politics too.
Not a single Tory front runner has pledged to invoke Article 50.
I assume Fox will.......
Fox has already said he wouldn't until the outline of a deal has been agreed with the EU. I think that is the stance of all the runners, though Crabb seems to also have attached saving the Union in there as well, which is a tough sell IMO.
Oooh Stephen Crabb says he knows how to lay a bet...
ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US ONE OF US
It was very interesting, he didn't say he knew how to place a bet, but he knew how to lay a bet.
I'll get Robert to do an IP Lookup again and find out who Stephen Crabb posts as on PB
Reading the quotes from Crabb about " taking back control " of immigration it seems all about saving the modernisation project. They are attempting to sound the most Brexit of the Campaigns to sanitise there Remainian roots. But why ? May with her " Nasty Party " comment was the Mother of Modernisation. That was the psychological metanoia point. It'll be safe in her hands.
The detox project is essential, I don't want it to be undone
Osborne undid it last week. The punishment budget will be used against the Tories for years, especially if there financial fall out from BrExit is relatively mild. It will be a case of at the first sound of gunfire the nature instinct of a Tory Chancellor was to put up taxes on hardworking voters and make deep cuts to the NHS and Schools having promised to ringfence them.
Conservatives who used the phrase "punishment budget" were certainly very unwise. It will be used to describe every Conservative budget between now and 2050 (assuming there are any).
No, the mistake was in even thinking about the idea of such a budget. The chancellor has increased his borrowing by £180bn in the last six years over his original target, the idea that he would choose the hard option this one time when asked to do so is rubbish.
last week the electorate stated it wanted to control immigration,
that's not what it said on the ballot
Stop playing games. There is what the ballot said, what the campaign promoted, and what the voters want, they are not even remotely the same. Even if VoteLeave was full to the eyeballs of positive Gisela Stuart types, a large chunk of the country would have seen it as an opportunity to reduce immigration, either directly, or as a necessarily first step.
not playing games at all. just think that you can't really make the claim that "the electorate" want what you say. Sure, a goodly number of them probably did vote for primarily that reason, but not necessarily a majority of those that voted leave.
... and remember Leave only just won, by 3.8%. Considering the enormity of the lies used (£350m/wk and reduced immigration) and which have since been renounced, you can't claim "the electorate" wanted to do anything in particular.
Donnez moi un break. If we are talking about enormous lies we better not consider World War 3, the economic apocalypse appears to be fizzling after getting just below where we were in February and about triple where we were in 2008, the French have said there borders are not moving so no refugee camps in Kent, the former governor of the Bank Of England told us yesterday the the economic case was bullshit, etc etc. Both sides lied massively, neither has any case to try and take the moral high ground over the other, get over it.
Just factually incorrect. You are clutching at straws, Britain is worse off. I see that you concede that Leave 'lied massively'.
Newsflash: "Remain" and "Leave" don't exist anymore, the public voted, now we have to make what they voted for work. Or I guess you can sit there crying and throwing your toys around.
"We have to make it work" says a guy that doesn't even live here.
Really? I suppose you have detailed knowledge of how my finances work, what UK holdings I have, how much I remit to the UK every year and so forth. Or possibly you are flapping your lips.
Crabbe, much to my dismay is my MP. Very low profile down this way, unless you are a churchgoer. After leaving school went off the live and work in London (we but was and still is, portrayed as a local boy. Being as objective as i can, you Tories have far better candidates than Crabbe.
What's his majority?
t
Started at 300 in 2005, now over 4000. He has been very clever in gathering support via the churches and other local organisations. Of course the influx of 'immigrants' from England, who tend to vote Tory has helped as well! What is the church influence on the Tory party itself? Could Crabbe benefit from that?
The detox project is essential, I don't want it to be undone
Osborne undid it last week. The punishment budget will be used against the Tories for years, especially if there financial fall out from BrExit is relatively mild. It will be a case of at the first sound of gunfire the nature instinct of a Tory Chancellor was to put up taxes on hardworking voters and make deep cuts to the NHS and Schools having promised to ringfence them.
Conservatives who used the phrase "punishment budget" were certainly very unwise. It will be used to describe every Conservative budget between now and 2050 (assuming there are any).
No, the mistake was in even thinking about the idea of such a budget. The chancellor has increased his borrowing by £180bn in the last six years over his original target, the idea that he would choose the hard option this one time when asked to do so is rubbish.
Osborne has borrowed more than all the Labour governments put together.
Comments
Also, one might cite Scipio Aemillianus, who was made twice consul under-age (age limit was pretty high, to be fair) because they desperately needed him to sort out Spain. The likes of Marius was an upstart sponsored by the Metelli, a clan largely forgotten (they had huge success but did so between the Third Punic and Jugurthine Wars which isn't a period that closely followed), but whom he soon eclipsed.
@montie: I've been honoured to know @scrabbmp for 20 years and he's well placed to supercharge one nation conservatism
Go. Please.
A Brexiteer like Boris/Gove can negotiate EEA-membership and then put that forward as the exit they have negotiated after campaigning to exit.
A Remainer pushing EEA would be treated with scorn of trying to ignore the voters of the Referendum.
It's an "only Nixon could go to China" moment.
The SNP would not increase their numbers with an election so would abstain.
So the five year term is solid for now.
I detest identity politics of every kind.
If I had a wife who wouldn't castrate me if I started betting, I'd be in the £££ by now
If we invoke Article 50, without having EFTA/EEA as a proposed destination, we will start losing financial services companies immediately. Why? Because if you're running Morgan Stanley in London, and you know that in two years - if a deal isn't completed - you are without passporting, and there is business you simply can't do in London anymore. So, you'll invoke the precautionary principle: moving functions that require financial passporting to Dublin, Paris, Frankfurt and Warsaw. Not doing so is too great a risk.
The immediate impact of this will be a very serious impact on the Prime London property market. While this is not something that will be of enormous interest to you, it will undoubtedly lead to stresses at UK banks, if tens of billions of mortgages have moved from 65% loan-to-value to 120%. At the very least, this will affect the ability of banks to support the economy. It will also feed through in the "wealth effect".
He doesn't exactly have much of a profile yet - I doubt whether most members of the public could pick him out of an identity parade.
Similarly, the MP's could go 'Anyone but Boris' - which means May + 1 other (either Leadsom or Crabb realistically). The Membership might well then go 'Anyone but May'
https://twitter.com/jessicaelgot/status/748097614143447040
Ooooh Madame. I thought you could have turned that into a Boris quip.
I'm following Crabb's press conference on the Guardian. He sounds very impressive.
I'll get Robert to do an IP Lookup again and find out who Stephen Crabb posts as on PB
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges 3m3 minutes ago
Members of the shadow cabinet appointed to replace those who resigned are now resigning. Seriously. How much longer.
Saw a few minutes of Crabb's declaration. Sajid Javid does seem to be an empty suit to me, a backstory and nothing else. If I were a Conservative, I'd be reluctant to back Crabb knowing we'd have a man who seems unimpressive in the Treasury.
The show must go on. For the sake of the membership.
As Guido observed "we're not posh" isn't a particular selling point in The Shires.
As an aside are nicknames used as much as they were? When I was young everyone had a nickname and was seldom referred to as anything else. For example, I served for two years with a bloke known as "Frub", it was only at his leaving do when I was chatting with his wife that I found out his real name was Stephen.
definitely not me, no sir-ee
Being as objective as i can, you Tories have far better candidates than Crabbe.
Tom Wolfe once said something along the lines of there's no need to make up fiction, just go out into America and look at what happens.
Falconer will be next.
Mr. Valleyboy, who would you like to become leader?
I assume Fox will.......
Chilcot report is bad timing for supporters of Blair and Straw - basically bad for Labour opponents of the anti war Corbynites.
Theyre all the same
... and do try to be less offensive.
Started at 300 in 2005, now over 4000. He has been very clever in gathering support via the churches and other local organisations. Of course the influx of 'immigrants' from England, who tend to vote Tory has helped as well!
What is the church influence on the Tory party itself? Could Crabbe benefit from that?