Is May's language on ECHR code for something else ' it divides people and there is no parliamentary majority for it '. What other current issue could be described like that I wonder ?
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Liam Fox made the point on the Sunday Politics, that the EU budget runs Jan-Dec, so you'd want to invoke article 50 so the clock ran out in or before Dec.
Explain why that is relevant (not saying it isn't but I simply don't follow the logic).
I *think* that if you invoke Article 50 this December (2016), and then take exactly 2 years negotiating, then you have to pay EU Fees in 2016, 2017 and 2018 (when you are still a member), but not in 2019 (As you would have left).
Conversely, if you invoke in January 2017 and take exactly 2 years then you would have to pay in 2019 as well so there is an incentive to invoke at the end of the year.
I don't think we would be paying for a whole year just for one month. I don't think it works that way. Is it not on VAT receipts ?
Is May's language on ECHR code for something else ' it divides people and there is no parliamentary majority for it '. What other current issue could be described like that I wonder ?
ECHR membership was not put to a referendum of the people. Plus she just said "brexit means brexit"
She thinks she's going to win. People who don't think they'll win can say what they like.
What would be a decent interval for Gove to withdraw and endorse May?
Think we are seeing a Michael Howard style coronation being orchestrated. The Tory party can have amazing audacity (why did i doubt that).
Poor Boris career ended the day he accidentally won the referendum he wanted to lose well. There is nothing for him now - even Heseltine has his various regeneration successes and stellar business career to look back on. A full Sebastain Flyte style future beckons for the blond one.
He'll knock Leadsom and Fox out then drop out leaving her to go up against Crabb.
Why wouldn't he go all the way?
He's likely to be very competitive vs. May on the membership ballot.
Why would he drop out?
He doesn't want the leadership, just to keep Boris out.
Why would he not want the leadership?
He's said it. A lot.
You don't seriously think that's an impediment do you ?
Actually in Gove's case I think I do. He didn't say "I have no ambitions in that direction but if one were to be persuaded to stand..." and all that bullshit. He said, on more than one occasion that he did not have the personal qualities and skill set required for the top job.
What of his personal qualities and skills have changed? As I said up thread, all the May team have to do is dig out those old interviews and run them.
Geez, pop out for lunch and yet more developments - Boris not standing, what a humiliation for him. I would consider voting for May in GE depending on what comes out of Brexit (and my constituency is a labour tory marginal so my vote counts!). If it's Gove I would vote Labour. Gone back on his word, so no better or more trustworthy than any other Tory that's been berated for that, including Boris and Cameron. A true brexiteer so fear he really would cut off single market access in order to cut immigration.
James Landale @BBCJLandale 3h3 hours ago Important: Theresa May ditches plan to pull UK out of ECHR - says it divides people & has no parliamentary majority
Good. Sanity has prevailed.
But ECHR is outside the EU? (Council for Europe).
Charter of Fundamental Rights and ECJ are the troublesome ones.
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Ms Rudd wasn’t finished with Mr Johnson yet. “Boris is the life and soul of the party,” she snorted, in her concluding statement. “But he isn’t the man you want driving you home at the end of the evening!”
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
I might have to defect from Team Theresa to Team Gove
Team Gove will take us out of the single market. How will you square that circle?
A compromise will be found. Realpolitik meets RealEconomics.
The 180 waiting days are the compromise I've heard. I don't know if Gove will accept that, May probably would. Gove has said he would take the UK out of the single market on a number od occasions and has said he is not up to being leader/PM. He is not the right person to take us forwards.
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
It's well known that Gove and Osborne have long been friends and allies: ditto that both, but in particular Gove, dislike May, so such rumours must contain a grain of 'instinctive truth' (if such a phrase has any meaning).
But I'm warning soulmate TSE: don't even think about it.
So then... #1 May and Mutti the matriarchal arch pragmatists do a deal on Free Movement. #2 A50 never invoked. #3 Britain Brexit's in nothing but name at the next Treaty change. ? All we need now is terminology to describe our non Brexit Brexit. What do people think ?
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Liam Fox made the point on the Sunday Politics, that the EU budget runs Jan-Dec, so you'd want to invoke article 50 so the clock ran out in or before Dec.
Explain why that is relevant (not saying it isn't but I simply don't follow the logic).
I *think* that if you invoke Article 50 this December (2016), and then take exactly 2 years negotiating, then you have to pay EU Fees in 2016, 2017 and 2018 (when you are still a member), but not in 2019 (As you would have left).
Conversely, if you invoke in January 2017 and take exactly 2 years then you would have to pay in 2019 as well so there is an incentive to invoke at the end of the year.
I don't think we would be paying for a whole year just for one month. I don't think it works that way. Is it not on VAT receipts ?
Probably something else to be sorted. I wonder how much of the discussions will be in the public domain?
Is May's language on ECHR code for something else ' it divides people and there is no parliamentary majority for it '. What other current issue could be described like that I wonder ?
ECHR membership was not put to a referendum of the people. Plus she just said "brexit means brexit"
Ms Rudd wasn’t finished with Mr Johnson yet. “Boris is the life and soul of the party,” she snorted, in her concluding statement. “But he isn’t the man you want driving you home at the end of the evening!”
Is May's language on ECHR code for something else ' it divides people and there is no parliamentary majority for it '. What other current issue could be described like that I wonder ?
ECHR membership was not put to a referendum of the people. Plus she just said "brexit means brexit"
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
It's well known that Gove and Osborne have long been friends and allies: ditto that both, but in particular Gove, dislike May, so such rumours must contain a grain of 'instinctive truth' (if such a phrase has any meaning).
But I'm warning soulmate TSE: don't even think about it.
Is May's language on ECHR code for something else ' it divides people and there is no parliamentary majority for it '. What other current issue could be described like that I wonder ?
ECHR membership was not put to a referendum of the people. Plus she just said "brexit means brexit"
So what happens to Nadine now ? Having Criticised Cameron and Osborne for being posh-boys, then Boris leaves her high and dry.
So, what is this Boris scandal ?
He never goes all the way?
Try to source the accusation that Boris Johnson is a "Putin apologist". It surfaced during the referendum campaign. I mean who actually first called him that. What named person or specific office expressed the opinion? There's no clear answer. That's a hallmark.
There was a reason why Boris wasn't allowed into the proper cabinet, only into the "political" cabinet. He could have got into the cabinet as a minister without portfolio, but he didn't. Why not?
Meanwhile the French National Front is known to be financially supported by the Kremlin.
Keir Giles of Chatham House: "Unlike in Soviet times, Russia is no longer restricted in its choice of foreign friends by considerations of ideology, and one notable result is a surge in links with right-wing and anti-EU parties".
That isn't some loony writing on some silly website somewhere.
The fact that Johnson has difficulty keeping his knob in his trousers - not unusual among politicians - is icing on the cake.
So is the fact that he got himself taped discussing with Darius Guppy having someone beaten up. (The tape is here.)
A third possible route for bringing him down...well, the Tories decided they didn't want Michael Portillo as their leader too. Portillo and Johnson are as English and as British as anyone, but from some Tories' point of view, they aren't. "I am a liberal cosmopolitan and my family is a genetic UN peacekeeping force" didn't play well.
Despite the referendum result, Johnson's future was precarious. So glad I laid him.
I think I will stay out of the Tory leadership market now. Michael Gove was adopted and has no blood family background in the normal sense, and to judge from what his wife says he is indecently ambitious. That may suggest that he will do exactly what he is told, so he may be exactly the sort of person the insiders want.
Theresa May is the darling of the party itself. Is it true that she is a type 1 diabetic, by the way?
It's well known that Gove and Osborne have long been friends and allies: ditto that both, but in particular Gove, dislike May, so such rumours must contain a grain of 'instinctive truth' (if such a phrase has any meaning).
But I'm warning soulmate TSE: don't even think about it.
It's well known that Gove and Osborne have long been friends and allies: ditto that both, but in particular Gove, dislike May, so such rumours must contain a grain of 'instinctive truth' (if such a phrase has any meaning).
But I'm warning soulmate TSE: don't even think about it.
Yes we need someone who can easily backtrack on the leave campaign bullshit. Give won't be able to.
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Liam Fox made the point on the Sunday Politics, that the EU budget runs Jan-Dec, so you'd want to invoke article 50 so the clock ran out in or before Dec.
Explain why that is relevant (not saying it isn't but I simply don't follow the logic).
Article 50 starts a two year clock. You don't want that clock to runout in february, and leave you on the hook for 12 months contribution to the EU budget.
Awful month for decisions, December. Lose around two weeks due to Christmas.
Well that depends on one's standpoint, Mr. Cole. When I was at the Home Office I found it a particularly useful time to get decisions through committees because very few people wanted to pay attention or spend the time to quibble. Circulating a 68 page discussion document 48 hours in advance with a very bland executive summary and all the tricky bits put into Appendix IV was, generally speaking, guaranteed to go through on the nod, especially if the meeting was held before lunch.
It's well known that Gove and Osborne have long been friends and allies: ditto that both, but in particular Gove, dislike May, so such rumours must contain a grain of 'instinctive truth' (if such a phrase has any meaning).
But I'm warning soulmate TSE: don't even think about it.
You're Theresa May's consigliere on PB.
How else is JohnO going to get his peerage?
As my man Hobbes said, "You're nasty, you're brutish, and you're very very short".
Ms Rudd wasn’t finished with Mr Johnson yet. “Boris is the life and soul of the party,” she snorted, in her concluding statement. “But he isn’t the man you want driving you home at the end of the evening!”
What did she mean by that ?
If you've got some dirt, spill it.
I haven't but there is something. I cannot imagine a not unusual event like driving someone home would be brought up, unless heavy hints were being given.
I might have to defect from Team Theresa to Team Gove
TSE - I hope you do not bet on the basis of your wonderful sources.
Is that the same source from CCHQ/REMAIN about the fact that the polls were way ahead for REMAIN and you saw a 12% to 15% win for REMAIN?
or the source a couple of weeks ago (I think) that told you if Cameron went on 24th June that Michael Gove will be George Osborne's campaign manager? ____________________________________________
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Liam Fox made the point on the Sunday Politics, that the EU budget runs Jan-Dec, so you'd want to invoke article 50 so the clock ran out in or before Dec.
Explain why that is relevant (not saying it isn't but I simply don't follow the logic).
Article 50 starts a two year clock. You don't want that clock to runout in february, and leave you on the hook for 12 months contribution to the EU budget.
Awful month for decisions, December. Lose around two weeks due to Christmas.
Well that depends on one's standpoint, Mr. Cole. When I was at the Home Office I found it a particularly useful time to get decisions through committees because very few people wanted to pay attention or spend the time to quibble. Circulating a 68 page discussion document 48 hours in advance with a very bland executive summary and all the tricky bits put into Appendix IV was, generally speaking, guaranteed to go through on the nod, especially if the meeting was held before lunch.
Indeed Mr L. See exactly what you mean! Works in the NHS, too!
I might have to defect from Team Theresa to Team Gove
TSE - I hope you do not bet on the basis of your wonderful sources.
Is that the same source from CCHQ/REMAIN about the fact that the polls were way ahead for REMAIN and you saw a 12% to 15% win for REMAIN?
or the source a couple of weeks ago (I think) that told you if Cameron went on 24th June that Michael Gove will be George Osborne's campaign manager? ____________________________________________
To be fair, his source may have been reporting the results of the poll accurately. That the poll was wrong wasn't the fault of his source.
(((Rob Ford))) @robfordmancs 50m50 minutes ago Boris engineered the largest constitutional crisis in post-war history but won't even put his name forward to clear it up?
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Liam Fox made the point on the Sunday Politics, that the EU budget runs Jan-Dec, so you'd want to invoke article 50 so the clock ran out in or before Dec.
Explain why that is relevant (not saying it isn't but I simply don't follow the logic).
Article 50 starts a two year clock. You don't want that clock to runout in february, and leave you on the hook for 12 months contribution to the EU budget.
Awful month for decisions, December. Lose around two weeks due to Christmas.
Well that depends on one's standpoint, Mr. Cole. When I was at the Home Office I found it a particularly useful time to get decisions through committees because very few people wanted to pay attention or spend the time to quibble. Circulating a 68 page discussion document 48 hours in advance with a very bland executive summary and all the tricky bits put into Appendix IV was, generally speaking, guaranteed to go through on the nod, especially if the meeting was held before lunch.
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
I'd be careful. I think she's bluffing - it's a negotiating stance. It's in everyone's interest to get this done ASAP.
The EU will have to negotiate (via back channels, obviously) before A50 as far as I can see.
It's not even quite that. The EU as such (Juncker and his merry men) won't do any serious negotiation, but they don't ultimately matter much anyway - they are bureaucrats, they don't get to decide what treaty 27+1 states decide to sign. But there's absolutely nothing to stop British ambassadors having chats with their host governments, and British ministers doing the same with their continenatl counterparts.
Ms Rudd wasn’t finished with Mr Johnson yet. “Boris is the life and soul of the party,” she snorted, in her concluding statement. “But he isn’t the man you want driving you home at the end of the evening!”
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Liam Fox made the point on the Sunday Politics, that the EU budget runs Jan-Dec, so you'd want to invoke article 50 so the clock ran out in or before Dec.
Explain why that is relevant (not saying it isn't but I simply don't follow the logic).
Article 50 starts a two year clock. You don't want that clock to runout in february, and leave you on the hook for 12 months contribution to the EU budget.
Awful month for decisions, December. Lose around two weeks due to Christmas.
Well that depends on one's standpoint, Mr. Cole. When I was at the Home Office I found it a particularly useful time to get decisions through committees because very few people wanted to pay attention or spend the time to quibble. Circulating a 68 page discussion document 48 hours in advance with a very bland executive summary and all the tricky bits put into Appendix IV was, generally speaking, guaranteed to go through on the nod, especially if the meeting was held before lunch.
I might have to defect from Team Theresa to Team Gove
TSE - I hope you do not bet on the basis of your wonderful sources.
Is that the same source from CCHQ/REMAIN about the fact that the polls were way ahead for REMAIN and you saw a 12% to 15% win for REMAIN?
or the source a couple of weeks ago (I think) that told you if Cameron went on 24th June that Michael Gove will be George Osborne's campaign manager? ____________________________________________
To be fair, his source may have been reporting the results of the poll accurately. That the poll was wrong wasn't the fault of his source.
Indeed. It was the same source who in April 2015 told me the Tories were at least 50 seats ahead of Labour in England and Wales.
Justed checked news websites and an hour is a long time in politics currently. Trying to make sense of it. May is obviously clear favourite now though I hope Gove wins. He's one of those rare politicians who shows a genuine interest in the person he's talking to and he clearly has the big vision of where he'd like the UK to be in the future. However, I fear his stint at Education will count against him.
Crabb is against gay marriage? I had assumed he was a left-winger. That said I know very little about him.
Crabb's religious beliefs trumped the requirements of others.. for that reason I could not vote for him. Heck Ian Paisley was more tolerant than he is....
So what happens to Nadine now ? Having Criticised Cameron and Osborne for being posh-boys, then Boris leaves her high and dry.
So, what is this Boris scandal ?
He never goes all the way?
Try to source the accusation that Boris Johnson is a "Putin apologist". It surfaced during the referendum campaign. I mean who actually first called him that. What named person or specific office expressed the opinion? There's no clear answer. That's a hallmark.
There was a reason why Boris wasn't allowed into the proper cabinet, only into the "political" cabinet. He could have got into the cabinet as a minister without portfolio, but he didn't. Why not?
Meanwhile the French National Front is known to be financially supported by the Kremlin.
Keir Giles of Chatham House: "Unlike in Soviet times, Russia is no longer restricted in its choice of foreign friends by considerations of ideology, and one notable result is a surge in links with right-wing and anti-EU parties".
That isn't some loony writing on some silly website somewhere.
The fact that Johnson has difficulty keeping his knob in his trousers - not unusual among politicians - is icing on the cake.
So is the fact that he got himself taped discussing with Darius Guppy having someone beaten up. (The tape is here.)
A third possible route for bringing him down...well, the Tories decided they didn't want Michael Portillo as their leader too. Portillo and Johnson are as English and as British as anyone, but from some Tories' point of view, they aren't. "I am a liberal cosmopolitan and my family is a genetic UN peacekeeping force" didn't play well.
Despite the referendum result, Johnson's future was precarious. So glad I laid him.
I think I will stay out of the Tory leadership market now. Michael Gove was adopted and has no blood family background in the normal sense, and to judge from what his wife says he is indecently ambitious. That may suggest that he will do exactly what he is told, so he may be exactly the sort of person the insiders want.
Theresa May is the darling of the party itself. Is it true that she is a type 1 diabetic, by the way?
Either of them could win.
She is indeed a Type 1 diabetic and I believe a teetotaller. Not sure why either matter, or if they are connected, but there it is.
Ms Rudd wasn’t finished with Mr Johnson yet. “Boris is the life and soul of the party,” she snorted, in her concluding statement. “But he isn’t the man you want driving you home at the end of the evening!”
What did she mean by that ?
If you've got some dirt, spill it.
I haven't but there is something. I cannot imagine a not unusual event like driving someone home would be brought up, unless heavy hints were being given.
But then again, why in the Brexit campaign ?
Mr Johnson has a reputation as a womaniser. That's all that was.
Quick question, as I'm thinking of playing the Article 50 market.
We now know it won't be invoked in 2016 (assuming a May victory). So can we assume Q1 2017?
Possible curveball: May is not able to get it through parliament as europhile Tories rebel on a technicality (i.e. assurances from EU not good enough etc). Result: considerable delay.
Liam Fox made the point on the Sunday Politics, that the EU budget runs Jan-Dec, so you'd want to invoke article 50 so the clock ran out in or before Dec.
Explain why that is relevant (not saying it isn't but I simply don't follow the logic).
Article 50 starts a two year clock. You don't want that clock to runout in february, and leave you on the hook for 12 months contribution to the EU budget.
Awful month for decisions, December. Lose around two weeks due to Christmas.
Well that depends on one's standpoint, Mr. Cole. When I was at the Home Office I found it a particularly useful time to get decisions through committees because very few people wanted to pay attention or spend the time to quibble. Circulating a 68 page discussion document 48 hours in advance with a very bland executive summary and all the tricky bits put into Appendix IV was, generally speaking, guaranteed to go through on the nod, especially if the meeting was held before lunch.
Interesting. I tend to find that people look at Appendix IV.
I prefer Appendix B or possibly E if there are more than 8 appendices.
(((Rob Ford))) @robfordmancs 50m50 minutes ago Boris engineered the largest constitutional crisis in post-war history but won't even put his name forward to clear it up?
What. A. Prat.
Boris did not engineer the referendum. UKIP did with the collaboration of Cameron.
Comments
Ruth isn't that way inclined. Miss Sturgeon perhaps????
What of his personal qualities and skills have changed? As I said up thread, all the May team have to do is dig out those old interviews and run them.
No idea what the scandal is though, except Bunnco keeps hinting it involves Scotland.
Charter of Fundamental Rights and ECJ are the troublesome ones.
What did she mean by that ?
BREXITEERS, STAND BY....
3...
2...
1...
NEGOTIATE!
But I'm warning soulmate TSE: don't even think about it.
But I'm still on team TM4PM
There was a reason why Boris wasn't allowed into the proper cabinet, only into the "political" cabinet. He could have got into the cabinet as a minister without portfolio, but he didn't. Why not?
Meanwhile the French National Front is known to be financially supported by the Kremlin.
Keir Giles of Chatham House: "Unlike in Soviet times, Russia is no longer restricted in its choice of foreign friends by considerations of ideology, and one notable result is a surge in links with right-wing and anti-EU parties".
That isn't some loony writing on some silly website somewhere.
The fact that Johnson has difficulty keeping his knob in his trousers - not unusual among politicians - is icing on the cake.
So is the fact that he got himself taped discussing with Darius Guppy having someone beaten up. (The tape is here.)
A third possible route for bringing him down...well, the Tories decided they didn't want Michael Portillo as their leader too. Portillo and Johnson are as English and as British as anyone, but from some Tories' point of view, they aren't. "I am a liberal cosmopolitan and my family is a genetic UN peacekeeping force" didn't play well.
Despite the referendum result, Johnson's future was precarious. So glad I laid him.
I think I will stay out of the Tory leadership market now. Michael Gove was adopted and has no blood family background in the normal sense, and to judge from what his wife says he is indecently ambitious. That may suggest that he will do exactly what he is told, so he may be exactly the sort of person the insiders want.
Theresa May is the darling of the party itself. Is it true that she is a type 1 diabetic, by the way?
Either of them could win.
The Tory party has proved yet again it has PhD in ruthlessness. Labour hasn't even passed GCSE.
But then again, why in the Brexit campaign ?
Is that the same source from CCHQ/REMAIN about the fact that the polls were way ahead for REMAIN and you saw a 12% to 15% win for REMAIN?
or the source a couple of weeks ago (I think) that told you if Cameron went on 24th June that Michael Gove will be George Osborne's campaign manager?
____________________________________________
See exactly what you mean! Works in the NHS, too!
If Gove got to be PM, he and his missus would overshadow the Hamiltons in terms of unlikeability. Like the hamilton, they appear well matched.
Corbyn: "Our Jewish friends are no more responsible for the actions of Israel than our Muslim friends are for the self-styled Islamic State"
Brexit & Gove a runner.
Sun with a score draw.
Boris engineered the largest constitutional crisis in post-war history but won't even put his name forward to clear it up?
What. A. Prat.
Makes it very easy.
Crabb is against gay marriage? I had assumed he was a left-winger. That said I know very little about him.
Very profitable source.
Clinton 44 .. Trump 38
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2016/06/29/fox-news-poll-june-2-2016/
May v Gove - much more difficult to decide.
What a day for lobby hacks.
A Flexit?
I prefer Appendix B or possibly E if there are more than 8 appendices.
Clinton 42 .. Trump 40
https://www.nccivitas.org/2016/hillary-clinton-regains-lead-in-latest-civitas-poll/
Gove is a knob. May looks better option. Liked by both sides. She would eat Corbyn alive
fairly accurate I think!